Int. J. Emerg. Sci.

, 2(2), 222-237, June 2012

ISSN: 2222-4254 IJES

Application of Six Sigma Methodology in an Engineering Educational Institution

K.G. Durga Prasad, K.Venkata Subbaiah, G.Padmavathi
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Wellfare Institute of Science, Technology &Management, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India. Department of Mechanical Engineering , Andhra University, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India. Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering, Govt. Polytechnic, Amudalavalasa, Andhra Pradesh, India.
kattagdp@yahoo.com, drkvsau@yahoo.co.inl, padma_kvs@yahoo.in

Abstract. In this paper, six sigma five phase methodology i.e., DMAIC (Define - Measure - Analyze - Improve - Control) is adopted to establish a novel approach with a view to improve quality in an engineering educational institution. Critical to Quality (CTQ) flow down is established and SIPOC (Supplier - Input- Process- Output - Customer) chart is constructed in the Define phase of the methodology. Process capability indices are calculated in the Measure phase. In the Analyze phase, Fish bone diagram is established to identify various causes and Pareto diagram is constructed to arrange the problems in the order of importance. Failure mode effect analysis is carried out in the in the Improvement phase to anticipate the possible types of failures. In the Control phase, Control charts help to monitor the people involved in the processes of engineering education system. A case study is presented in the paper to demonstrate the methodology. Keywords: Six sigma, Process capability indices, Fish bone diagram, Pareto diagram, Failure mode effect analysis.

1.

INTRODUCTION

Engineering education has an ability to turn the earth in to a paradise. It plays a vital role in the social and economic development and well-being of the nation [1]. Presently in India, private engineering educational institutions are mushrooming without sustaining required level of quality. In the early years of 20th century, India had just six engineering colleges. The total number of institutions imparting engineering education at the degree level was only 44 in the year 1947 [2]. But in the last two decades of the 20th century, there has been a dramatic increase in the establishment of number of engineering colleges in the country. Currently in India, there are more than 2,300 engineering educational institutions and the intake of students has gone above 8 lakhs. Comparatively more number of colleges established in the southern India. The growth rate of engineering institutions in the recent past in India has been phenomenal and the problems associated with this growth are also very high [3]. This phenomenal growth in engineering education

222

K.G.Durga Prasad, K.Venkata Subbaiah and G.Padmavathi

was mainly due to policy changes to allow participation of private and voluntary organizations in setting up of engineering educational institutions on self financing basis. Generally private institutions in India are viewed with skepticism and contempt. Only few institutions like the Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, have been maintaining standards in engineering on par with the IITs [4]. Since last two decades, rapid expansion of engineering educational institutions in India has resulted in deterioration in quality of technical manpower coming out from these institutions on account of poor infrastructure, admission policy and above all the examination system adopted by these institutions. Unfortunately, higher percentage of student failures in the university examinations, fewer amounts of placement opportunities [5] and very less number of students motivated as entrepreneurs are the major defects in the engineering educational institutions. Engineering graduates are expected to be employable and ready for the work place when they complete their studies. It is generally expected that graduates should be equipped with a balance of technical knowledge in addition to the relevant soft skills include communication skills, creative thinking skills, the ability to cope with changing situations, inter-personal skills, problem solving skills and so on [6]. In fact, most of the new engineering colleges are not providing quality education to satisfy the customers of the engineering education. Recently Purple Leap, an organization specializing in entry level talent management conducted a survey on the employability skills in engineering students in India, which reveals that only 7% of students were found employable while the rest lacked in technical skills. The survey further stated that 80% of the students do not meet the requirements on the problem solving skills. Particularly the biggest skill gap in engineering students of Andhra Pradesh is in the area of problem solving, with the average score of students being less than 25% against the national average of 35%. This is one of the biggest gaps leading to students not getting enough technical jobs in the industry. The growing problem of unemployment and under employment leads to a variety of socio-economic problems and hampers individual development and national development. A poor and objectless education may turn counterproductive at times. To bail out the citizens from this evil and build a strong and prosperous India, it is high time policy makers and implementers planned towards total quality education [7]. Most of the technical man power in industries will be drawn from various engineering educational institutions in the country. The engineers coming out of the colleges have to be of very high quality. The process of enhancement and sustaining quality in engineering education requires continuous review and sustained efforts in that direction. Therefore, there is a greater need to impart high quality engineering education to produce technically skilled and creative man power in India. It may be difficult to define quality engineering education, but one can describe its results in terms of ability to satisfy the current and future needs of industry, mobility, and lifelong commitment to learning. A balance has to exist between ignoring the demands of industry and society and catering to these demands indiscriminately without considering the consequences [8]. According to U.S.National Science Foundation (NSF) task force, quality engineering education is the development of intellectual skills and knowledge that will equip graduates to contribute to society through productive and satisfying engineering careers as 223

International Journal of Emerging Sciences, 2(2), 210-221, June 2012

innovators, decision-makers and leaders in the global economy of the twenty-first century [9]. Service sectors, particularly in the case of educational institutions, the nature of the product, definition of customers, measurements of quality and employee reward systems are significantly different from those of manufacturing. While addressing quality issues in the service sector like education, the customer focus should be emphasized. Quality begins with understanding the customer needs and ends when those needs are satisfied. The needs and expectations of the customer become the focal point when the engineering education being transferred in to a customer service industry. Engineering education has a number of complementary and contradictory customers. However, students serve a vital role as one of the many customers of higher education. Student can be treated as customer, product and raw material under different perspective. The customer is the person or group who receives the work output. That work output may be a product or service. The students in the classroom serve as the immediate internal customer of the lectures and discussions. In turn, the student then gains from a number of different experiences and becomes a product of the system. It is very difficult, if not impossible to identify the point at which the student transforms from the raw material to the customer and then to the product, and back to the raw material, and so on [10]. The student-centered view allows treating the students as customers when they are recipients of services provided by the educational institutions [11]. Ahmad Ibrahim [12] described that when the engineering education is modeled as manufacturing process, students (graduates) are viewed as products. According to Efthimia Staiou [13] in the context of an analogy with a manufacturing organization, higher education institutions produce graduates. Students move through the various courses required for a degree, as raw material flows through the successive stages of a manufacturing process. When they graduate, graduates compete for jobs just as products compete for a market share. Thus, graduates may be interpreted as the finished product and that industry future employers are the customers of higher educational institutions. In this paper the students who are entered in to an engineering educational institution are considered as raw materials which may be converted in to final products called engineering graduates to meet the customer (industry) expectations. In order to produce quality graduates, it is required to identify key processes involved in the education system and then a quality approach is needed to improve the capability of the processes so as to obtain total customer satisfaction. To ensure quality in engineering education, the major processes involved in the education system such as teaching, learning and evaluation need to be completely overhauled. To make these processes capable to satisfy the end users, a quality approach is needed. Six - sigma is a quality management strategy, which can be used to achieve the goal of engineering education. It provides a scientific and statistical basis for quality assessment for all processes through measurement of quality level. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the application of six sigma methodology in engineering educational institution with a view to enhance quality in education.

224

K.G.Durga Prasad, K.Venkata Subbaiah and G.Padmavathi

2.

CONCEPT OF SIX SIGMA

Six sigma can be viewed as a metric, a mindset, and a methodology [14]. It is a new, emerging, approach to quality assurance and quality management with emphasis on continuous quality improvements. The main goal of this approach is reaching level of quality and reliability that will satisfy and even exceed demands and expectations of todays demanding customer [15]. The Six sigma concept was originated in the 1980s at Motorola and its philosophy has found widespread application in many manufacturing industries [16]. Six sigma is a well structured, data driven methodology for eliminating defects, waste or quality control problems of all kinds in manufacturing, service delivery, management and other business activities. It is a systematic methodology for continuous process of quality improvement and continuous process of achieving operational excellence [17]. Masoud Hekmatpanah et al. [18] concluded that six sigma is an approach to upgrade the organizations performance, improving quality and productivity. The basic goal of six sigma approach is to reduce variation within the tolerance or specification limits of a service performance characteristic [19]. The proper implementation of six sigma will improve customer satisfaction. Six sigma offering a means for measuring improvement [20]. The name Six Sigma refers to the capability of the process to deliver units within the set limits. The Greek letter or sigma, corresponding to ours, is a notation of variation in the sense of standard deviation. Standard deviation measures the variation or amount of spread about the process average. According to the Six Sigma approach, for a stable process the distance from the process mean to the nearest tolerance limit should be at least six times the standard deviation of the process output [21]. To achieve six sigma quality, a process must produce not more than 3.4 defects per million opportunities if the output is normally distributed. A defect can be any type of product or service that does not conform to a standard inspection unit or satisfy the customer. In addition a defect can be an error in a product or service. The term opportunity is defined as a chance for nonconformance, or not meeting the required specifications. Six sigma was focused initially in the manufacturing industry. Particularly from the year 1995, an exponentially growing number of prestigious global firms have launched a Six Sigma program. It has been noted that many globally leading companies run Six Sigma programs , and it has been well known that Motorola, GE, Allied Signal, IBM, DEC, Texas Instruments, Sony, Kodak, Nokia, and Philips Electronics among others have been quite successful in six sigma. In Korea, the Samsung, LG, Hyundai groups and Korea Heavy Industries & Construction Company have been quite successful [22]. Due to the overwhelming success of six sigma application, many customer-oriented service industries are now beginning to implement six sigma to improve service quality. The degree of goodness or badness of a service is called service quality. Service quality is now gaining strategic importance in winning businesses and running organizations. To maintain and raise service standards is now an on-going activity in every organization. Jiju Antony [23] addressed various issues on the part of implementation of six sigma in service

225

International Journal of Emerging Sciences, 2(2), 210-221, June 2012

industries. He mentioned that in the manufacturing industries, the measurement system analysis (repeatability and reproducibility study) is explicitly defined, whereas in service industries, the measurement system analysis is often a more general problem of data quality and integrity. He also stated that service processes are subjected to more noise or uncontrollable factors compared to manufacturing processes. Human behavioral characteristics, such as friendliness, eagerness to help, honesty, etc. are thought to have major influence on service processes which determine the quality of service provided to customers.

3.

SIX SIGMA METHODOLOGY

Six sigma is a process improvement methodology which includes different phases logically linked with one another. Six sigma methodology is generally described by the acronym DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control) is used for continuous improvement of already existing products or processes [24]. One of the important aspects of six sigma is the involvement, training and reward of employees at all levels of the organization. Champions at the executive levels guide the selection of projects, securing of resources and goal setting for improvement efforts. Employees are given martial arts titles such as Master black belt, Black belt , Green belt, etc., reflecting their training and status in project improvement efforts [25]. Prior to implement six sigma methodology in any organization, it is necessary to establish six sigma team structure to accomplish all the phases of the methodology. The each phase of the methodology is discussed in the following paragraphs.
3.1 Define phase

In the define phase, the goals of the improvement activity are clearly defined. The parameters which greatly influence the goals of the enterprise in respect to quality are called critical to quality (CTQ) parameters. In the process of defining, the goals CTQ are identified through Voice of Customer (VOC). VOC is collected by conducting brain storming sessions among the customers. Project Charter, CTQ flow down and Process mapping are the important tools used in this phase. Project charter is a document stating the purposes of the project. It contains the elements such as business case, problem statement and goal statement. Business case indicates the purpose of the project in which the goals and objectives are established. The next element is the problem statement which clearly expresses the problem to execute. After establishing the problem statement the six sigma team has to decide the target values by thoroughly observing the past data. These values are mentioned in a statement called Goal statement. Process mapping is the key step in understanding the processes involved in an enterprise. The process map (SIPOC chart) starts with supplying raw materials and ends with the benefits received by the customer.

226

K.G.Durga Prasad, K.Venkata Subbaiah and G.Padmavathi

3.2 Measure phase

In this phase past data pertaining to CTQ s is collected. The baseline statistics such as sample mean (), standard deviation () and process capability indices Cp and the Cpk for each CTQ are calculated. The mean is the simple average of the observations in a data set. The Sample mean is determined by adding all observations in a sample and dividing the number of observations in that sample. Standard deviation measures the variability of the observations around the mean. It is equal to the positive square root of variance. The variance also measures the fluctuations of the observation around the mean. The larger is the value, the greater is the fluctuation. The process capability index is an easily understood aggregate measure of the goodness of process performance.
3.3 Analyze phase

In this phase critical analysis is carried out with the help of certain tools such as Fishbone diagram (Cause and Effect diagram) and Pareto diagram. Fishbone diagrams are used to identify and systematically list the different root causes that can be attributed to a problem. Thus, these diagrams help to determine which of several causes has the greatest effect. The main application of these diagrams is the dispersion analysis. In dispersion analysis, each major cause is thoroughly analyzed by investigating the sub causes and their impact on quality characteristics. The Fishbone diagram helps to analyze the reasons for any variability or dispersion. Pareto diagram is useful to reduce the many causes to vital few. The Pareto diagram helps the management to quickly identify the critical areas (those causing most of the problems) that deserve immediate attention.
3.4 Improvement phase

Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) is carried out in this phase to identify the possible types of failures. The objective of conducting FMEA is to anticipate all possible types of failures that could occur. The FMEA tabular form includes parameters such as mode of failure, effects of failure and its severity rating (S), possible causes of failure and their intensity of occurrence (O), current prevention methods, detection column (D), Risk Priority Number (R), recommended actions and Responsible persons. The severity column has an entry designating the severity of the effect for the failure mode, that is, the seriousness of the impact of the particular failure. The occurrence column has an entry designating the likelihood that is the failure will occur. The detection column has an entry designating the likelihood that the detection method is accurately detect the failure. Based on the data observations the team has to decide the entries in the above mentioned columns in the FMEA tabular form by adopting a suitable scale. The Risk Priority Number aids in prioritizing the failure mode with the higher number designating highest

227

International Journal of Emerging Sciences, 2(2), 210-221, June 2012

priority. The Risk Priority Number is calculated by multiplying the values in the columns of severity rating, intensity of occurrence and detection.
3.5 Control phase

The control phase aims to institutionalize the improvement results from six sigma through documentation and standardization of the new procedures. It includes the setting up of monitoring and process control systems [26]. Control charts are used to monitor the system performance. In the control phase control charts are prepared in respect of CTQs to sustain the quality improvement.

4.

CASE STUDY

A case study has been under taken in a reputed engineering educational institution of Southern India. The institution offers B.E. degree course in six core engineering branches. It is functioning under appropriate administrative structure. In order to enhance the academic standards and credibility of the institution, the authorities of the institution came forward to adopt six sigma approach. The methodology discussed in the section 3 is carried out in this study. The six sigma team shown in table 1 has decided the target values by thoroughly observing the past data. The team has prepared the project charter shown in table 2.
Table 1. Six sigma team structure in engineering educational institution

Champion Master black belt Black belt Green belt Team members
Table 2. Project Charter

Principal Dean / Director HOD Faculty members Students

Voice of customer Good education

Customer requirement Excellent faculty, good infrastructure facilities, good result

CTQ % SSHS, % SSCR and % SME

The SIPOC chart pertaining to the present study shown in figure 1 is prepared by critically observing the suppliers, input, various processes, output and customer for attaining quality engineering education. The SIPOC chart for this study is shown in Figure 1.

228

K.G.Durga Prasad, K.Venkata Subbaiah and G.Padmavathi

Intermediate colleges Diploma colleges CBSE, ICSE colleges

Students admitted in Engineering colleges

Teaching Learning Counseling Evaluation

Graduate Engineers

Society, Industry, Higher Educational Institutions

Figure.1. SIPOC Chart

The baseline statistics such as sample mean ( ), standard deviation ( ) and process capability indices C p and the C pk for each CTQ are calculated for the data pertaining to past 20 years shown in table 4 and the values of the statistics are tabulated in the table 5.
Table 4. Data pertaining to CTQs

Year % SSHS % SSCR % SME Year % SSHS % SSCR % SME

1 37.63 36.50 0.857 11 29.19 42.37 0.991

2 38.11 25.58 0.885 12 32.23 43.48 1.098

3 32.82 26.06 0.982 13 32.97 30.48 1.203

4 31.89 32.96 0.889 14 36.44 40.17 0.724

5 26.60 27.56 1.083 15 34.10 26.53 1.215

6 32.74 35.12 0.513 16 35.99 30.87 0.739

7 35.30 42.54 0.800 17 30.42 41.85 0.951

8 27.97 38.93 1.257 18 36.78 25.45 0.899

9 23.12 48.76 0.859 19 41.11 28.49 1.573

10 35.36 37.69 0.713 20 38.58 38.80 1.773

With reference to the present study in view of attaining quality engineering education, the CTQs are identified and are tabulated in the Table 3.
Table 3. CTQ Flow down

S.No. 1 2 3

CTQ % of SSHS % of SSCR % of SME

Mean ( ) 33.46 35.01 1.004

STD ( ) 4.49 7.18 0.30

CP 0.53 0.31 1.27

Cpk 0.48 0.24 1.20

The Fishbone diagram shown in Figure 2 is constructed by considering men, material, machines, methods, measurement and environment with reference to engineering educational institution.

229

International Journal of Emerging Sciences, 2(2), 210-221, June 2012

Figure.2. Fishbone diagram Table 5. Baseline statistics

BUISINESS CASE

Quality Engineering Education is very useful to student community and institution. Maintaining the standards in the educational institutions will be beneficial to student as well as institution. Higher percentage of students qualified for higher education, higher percentage of students got selected in campus selections and higher percentage of students motivated as entrepreneurs will improve reputation of the organization. S. No. CTQ Type Percentage of Students Selected for Higher 1 Benefit Studies ( SSHS ) 2 3 Percentage of Students Selected in Campus Recruitment ( SSCR ) Percentage of Students Motivated as Entrepreneurs (SME) Benefit Benefit

PROBLEM STATEMENT GOAL STATEMENT

In the present study, % of SSHS, % of SSCR, % of SME are 33.46, 35.01 and 1.00 respectively. These values are to be enhanced. To improve the percentage of SSHS by 10% To improve the percentage of SSCR by 10% To improve the percentage of SME by 5%

The causes shown in Figure 2 are grouped as quality characteristics which are shown in Table 6.
Table 6. Quality characteristics

S. No. 1

Quality Characteristics Motivated Faculty (MF)

230

K.G.Durga Prasad, K.Venkata Subbaiah and G.Padmavathi

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Modern Communication Facilities (MCF) Industry Institution Interaction (I I I) Campus Recruitment Training (CRT) Better Course Plan and Curriculum (BCPC) Library Modernization (LM) Well discipline (WD) Opportunity for Knowledge Upgradation (OKU)

Pareto diagram is constructed by considering quality characteristics and their priority ratings. Pair-wise comparison matrix shown in table 7 is prepared and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) methodology [27] is employed to obtain the priority structure of quality characteristics. The table 8 shows the priority ratings of the quality characteristics.
Table 7. Pair-wise comparison matrix of quality characteristics

MF MF MCF III CRT BCPC LM WD OKU 1 0.25 0.50 0.125 0.50 0.25 0.111 0.167

MCF 4 1 2 0.25 2 1 0.167 0.50

III 2 0.50 1 0.167 1 0.50 0.125 0.25

CRT 8 4 6 1 6 4 0.50 2

BCPC 2 0.50 1 0.167 1 0.50 0.125 0.25

LM 4 1 2 0.25 2 1 0.167 0.50

WD 9 6 8 2 8 6 1 4

OKU 6 2 4 0.50 4 2 0.25 1

Table 8. Priority structure of quality characteristics

Quality Characteristic Priority

MF 0.3183

III 0.1865

OKU 0.1565

LM 0.1017

MCF 0.1017

BCPC

WD

CRT

0.0396 0.0365 0.0309

Pareto diagram is constructed to identify the critical areas (those causing most of the problems) that deserve immediate attention. The quality characteristics and their priority values are taken on horizontal axis and percentage of occurrence is taken on vertical axis. The Pareto diagram is shown in figure 3.

231

International Journal of Emerging Sciences, 2(2), 210-221, June 2012

Pareto Chart of causes

1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 causes Count Percent Cum % 100 80 60 40 20 0

MF III OKU LM MCF BCPC PF VTA Other 0.3183 0.1865 0.1565 0.1017 0.1017 0.0396 0.0365 0.0309 0.0397 31.5 18.4 15.5 10.1 10.1 3.9 3.6 3.1 3.9 31.5 49.9 65.4 75.4 85.5 89.4 93.0 96.1 100.0

Figure. 3. Pareto diagram

In the present study 1 to 10 scale is considered to establish FMEA tabular form. The FMEA for Teaching and Learning processes are depicted in the tables 9 and 10.
Table 9. Failure Mode Effect Analysis for teaching process

Mode Effect of of failure failure

More failures in exams and Lack of concept in the student

Causes of failure

Controls

D R

Recommend Responsibili ed action ty

Reduction in 6 pass % of students and Mismatchin g between the needs of industry and student skills

salaries 4 received not as per norms Unqualified 3 faculty No proper teaching methodology

Periodical 3 inspection by the bodies like AICTE Periodical 2 5 monitoring by the Head of the institution

72 Issuing Management salaries as per and norms Curriculum designers 54 Providing proper methodology 60 Periodical supervision of the head of the institution

Lack of interest

Constant feedback Data on the % of employed 4 engineers

1 24 Implement motivating 3 measures 18 Providing necessary facilities for faculty 72 Preparing curriculum by interaction

No time 3 management Lack of upgradation of Curriculum

232

Percent

Count

K.G.Durga Prasad, K.Venkata Subbaiah and G.Padmavathi

with industrialists and socialists Appointing qualified faculty

For the severity column 1 to 10 scale represents nil effect to most severe effect. For the occurrence column, 1 represents very remote and 10 represents very high (10) and for the detection column, 1 represents almost certain (1) to detection will not occur (10) is considered. The Risk Priority Number aids in prioritizing the failure mode with the higher number designating highest priority. The Risk Priority Number (R) is calculated for each cause.
Table 10. Failure Mode Effect Analysis for learning process

Mode of failure
More failures in exams and Lack of concept in student

Effect of Causes of S O failure failure

Reduction in pass % of students and mismatch between society & industry needs and student skills 6 Lack of interest Ineffective teaching Lack of up gradation of Curriculum Absenteeism

Controls

D
2 2

Recommen Responsibilit ded action y

4 Internal assessment 3 Feedback from students 3 Data on the % of employed engineers 7 Attendance particulars

48 Counseling for students 36 Faculty development programmes Creating an opportunity 54 for Knowledge Teaching upgradation Fraternity, Authorities of 84 Periodical the meetings institutions with parents and committee Curriculum 60 designers Conducting 36 personality development classes 72 Examination system 42 should be sound

Environment 5 Health and hygiene Language barrier Evaluation procedure 3 Health camps 4 Feedback from 1 teacher Revaluation and recounting Infrastructur 3 e facilities Inspection by the committees like AICTE 4 2

72 Providing facilities as per norms

233

International Journal of Emerging Sciences, 2(2), 210-221, June 2012

The FMEA prioritizes the possible failure modes and recommended action for continuous improvement. The tables 9 and 10 indicate the possible potential causes of failures such as salaries received not as per norms, lack of up gradation of curriculum, absenteeism, language barrier and infrastructure facilities. These causes of failure require more attention by the teaching fraternity, management and curriculum designers. From the Pareto diagram, five quality characteristics are identified, which are responsible for 80% of the effect (% of failure of students). It is essentially required to improve the quality characteristics such as Motivated Faculty, Modern Communicational Facilities, Industrial- Institution Interaction, and Opportunity for Knowledge Upgradation and Library Modernization for achieving six-sigma quality in the engineering educational institution. Control charts help to monitor the processes in the system to attain the goal of implementing six sigma methodology. To improve the quality characteristics pertaining to engineering education, it is required to concentrate the following factors towards the achievement of quality education in the observed institution.
4.1 Motivated Faculty

The important attributes that motivate the faculty may be work time flexibility, transparency in administration, mutual trust and belief, giving salaries as per norms, providing the facilities such as individual computer, access to internet, telephone and fax facilities, health-care facilities, staff quarters, recreational facilities etc., and encouraging the faculty by giving awards and rewards for their efforts. These factors may motivate the faculty to strive for excellence.
4.2 Modern Communication Facilities

Engineering educational institution requires the modern facilities in the field of communication, such as LAN, access to internet, connection of regional libraries by WAN, language labs, E-mail and Fax facilities. These facilities help the students and faculty for solving complex mathematical models and for obtaining latest information on advanced technology.
4.3 Industry- Institution Interaction

The level of interaction of the institution with industry has to be enhanced. In order to provide practical orientation in teaching, the institution is required to interact with the industries on regular basis and carry out consultancy works, project works and seminars. It may be advised to involve the industrialists in the curriculum

234

K.G.Durga Prasad, K.Venkata Subbaiah and G.Padmavathi

design to incorporate the abilities in the students to meet the expectations of the industry.
4.4 Opportunity for Knowledge Upgradation

It is necessary to improve the opportunities for upgrading the knowledge of the students and faculty. Implementation of Quality Improvement Programs (QIP), Mutual exchange (industry- institution) programs, conducting science exhibitions, arranging guest lectures by eminent personalities, sending the students and faculty to various technical conferences and workshops are necessary to create the environment of knowledge up gradation.
4.5 Library Modernization

In the present technological environment, library has to be modernized. The modernized library called Digital Library which increases the satisfaction of the users i.e., students and faculty for obtaining the quick, correct and abundant current information on the relevant fields of engineering.

5.

CONCLUSION

Six sigma is a powerful tool to achieve customer satisfaction by improving the processes in any system, which may be production or service sector. The present study demonstrates the novel application of six sigma approach for improving the quality in an Engineering Educational institution by eliminating the failure causes. The six sigma approach proposed in the paper assures quality in education, desired placements in reputed companies, opportunity of higher studies, developing prospective entrepreneurs and higher percentage of pass outs. To implement six sigma methodology in engineering education, the first and the foremost requirement is the quality consciousness mind in the management of the institutions and the unconditional commitment and constant effort by every participant in the education system are essentially required.

REFERENCES
1. Raj Kumar, R.V, Engineering Education in India - Quality concerns and Remedial Measures, The Indian Journal of Technical Education 2007; 30(3):73-90.

235

International Journal of Emerging Sciences, 2(2), 210-221, June 2012

2. Ramachandran, H and Anil Kumar, Engineering education in India, Productivity 2003; 44(2): 187-194. 3. Viswanadhan, K.G, Quality problems of engineering education programmes in India, International Journal of Management in Education 2009; 3(1):40-55. 4. Naresh Kumar, G, Role for private universities in developing higher education in India, Current Science 2008; 95(8):1003. 5. Pal Pandi, A and Surya Rao. U, Quality Assurance in a Technical Education in India, International Journal of Quality and Productivity Management 2006; 6(10):40-48. 6. Rosetta Ziegler, Student perceptions of soft skills in Mechanical engineering , Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Education, Coimbra, Portugal. 7. Mariappan. V, Total Quality Education: A Model for India, Productivity 2002; 42(4): 597-604. 8. Somenath Chakraborty, Quality Assurance in Engineering Education, Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India) 2007; 88: 3-6. 9. Natarajan.R , The Role of Accreditation in Promoting Quality Assurance of Technical Education, International Journal of Engineering Education 2000;16(2):85-96 10. Robert F. Cox, Addressing the Paradox of Implementing Total Quality Management in Construction Education, Proceedings of the CIB W89 Beijing International Conference, Beijing, 1996. 11.Mahapatra S.S, Quality Function Deployment in an Educational Institution, Productivity 2002; 43(3):418- 425 12.Ahmad Ibrahim, Current Issues in Engineering Education Quality, Global Journal of Engineering Education 1999; 3(3):301-305 13. Efthimia Staiou , Total Quality Management in Engineering Education, Proceedings of the 3rd WSEAS/IASME International Conference on Engineering Education, Vouliagmeni, Greece, 2006. 14. Goffnett, S.P. (2004), Understanding Six Sigma: Implications for Industry and Education, Journal of Industrial Technology 2004; 20(4):1 -10 15. Sokovic. M, Pavletic. D and Krulcic.E (2006), Six Sigma process improvements in automotive parts production, Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering 2006; 19(1): 96-102 16. Maha Mohammed Yusr, Abdul Rahim Othman, Sany Sanuri M. Mokhtar. (2011). "Six Sigma and
Innovation Performance: A Conceptual Framework Based on the Absorptive Capacity Theory Perspective", Int. j. emerg. sci. 1(3):307-323

17.Prima Ditahardiyani , Ratnayani , M. Angwar, The Quality Improvement of Primer Packing process using Six sigma methodology, Jurnal Teknik Industri 2008; 10(2): 177184. 18.Masoud Hekmatpanah, Mohammad Sadroddin, Saeid Shahbaz, Farhad Mokhtari, Farahnaz Fadavinia , Six Sigma Process and its Impact on the Organizational Productivity, Proceedings of World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 2008; 33, : 375-379 19. Jiju Antony, Six Sigma for service processes, Business Process Management Journal 2006; 12(2): 234-248

236

K.G.Durga Prasad, K.Venkata Subbaiah and G.Padmavathi

20.Mohammad Aazadnia and Mehdi Fasanghari , Improving the Information Technology Service Management with Six Sigma, International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security 2008; 8(3):144-150 21. Bengt Klefsjo. B, Bergquist, B and Edgeman, R.L, Six sigma and Total Quality Management: different day, same soup? , International Journal of Six sigma and Competitive Advantage 2006; 2(2): 162-178. 22. Sung H. Park, Six Sigma for Quality and Productivity Promotion 2003 , Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo, Japan 23. Jiju Antony, Six Sigma in the UK service organizations: results from pilot survey, Managerial Auditing Journal 2004; 19(8):1006-1013 24.Yousef Amer, Lee Luong, Sang - Heon Lee and M.Azeem Ashraf , Optimizing order fulfillment using design for six sigma and fuzzy logic, International Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management 2008; 3(2): 83-99 25.Monica C. Holmes, Anil Kumar and Lawrence O. Jenicke , Improving the Effectiveness of the Academic Delivery Process Utilizing Six Sigma , Issues in Information Systems 2005; 6(1):353-359 26.Nonthaleerak, P and Hendry.L, Exploring the six sigma phenomenon using multiple case study evidence, International Journal of Operations &Production Management 2008; 28(3):279-303 27. Venkata Subbaiah, K., Durga Prasad, K.G., Uma Bharathi, M and Somasekhara Rao, K, Integrating Factor analysis Analytic Hierarchy Process for Library service quality , International Journal for Quality Research 2011; 5(3):205-212.

237