Does having part time black belts work?

Does it make sense to have part time Black Belts or should we be deploying full time belts for best results - the case examined

Whether you are a Financial professional looking at it from a cost/benefit perspective or an HR professional looking at it from an organisational development perspective, the question of whether to deploy full time or part time Black Belts is a big one. This article examines this question from both perspectives.

The classic Six Sigma deployment model as propounded by Motorola and General Electric calls for full time Black Belts at about one percent of the overall head count, but there are major organisational and financial implications of deploying in this fashion. Many organisations reject the full time model and instead opt for a part time Black Belt role. But are they making the right decision, and for the right reasons?

To examine this question properly we need to look at it from both the Financial and Organisational perspective.

The Financial Perspective:

Below is a cost/benefit analysis showing the difference between full and part time Black Belts. Under the cost side is included the cost of recruiting the back-filled replacement at 20% of the salary but spread over two years (the standard deployment cycle of the full time Black Belt). Also included is an assumed return for the 'otherwise employed' Black Belt at what might be a typical ROI of 15% under the benefit side. The project benefit is worked out on the assumption of 4 projects a year at an average saving of £100k for the full time BB which is based on research into 3,000 projects carried out by Mikel Harry. For the part time this is worked out pro-rata.

As you would expect, the case comes down fairly strongly on the side of the full time Black Belt.

Deployment Option	Full time	Part time (50%)

Costs:
Cost of employment	£50,000	£25,000
Cost of back-filling BB *	£5,000
Training/coaching cost	£10,000	£10,000
Total Cost	£65,000	£35,000

Benefits:
Assumed VA contribution of regular Day Job rated at, say, 15% **		£3,750
Total Project Benefit ***	£400,000	£200,000
Total employee contribution	£400,000	£203,750

Benefit per Annum	£335,000	£168,750

* Assume 20% recruitment costs spread over two years
** If an organisation generates say 15% ROI then it is fair to assume that the average employee adds value to an organisation at this rate
*** # BB project completed per year	4	2
Average financial benefit per project	£100,000	£100,000
Total benefit per annum	£400,000	£200,000

Now you could tweak the numbers if you want to, but the difference at £166,250 is most materially impacted by the number of projects completed a year (as the £100k benefit per project is generally agreed to be a good average).

So can a full time Black Belt really complete four good projects a year? The answer to this revolves around many factors, but includes the level of support given to the Belts, and from my experience support is more likely to be given to full time than part time Black Belts. Increased organisational support usually manifests itself in shorter project cycle times, and shorter cycle times means more project per year. It is a matter of psychology as much as anything else. If as an organisation you have taken the decision to invest in full time Black Belts then are you more or less likely to support them than if you have only invested in some training?

Then ask the question the other way round. Is it likely that a part time Black Belt will be able to complete half the number of projects that a full time Belt can? From my experience it is far less likely, because most part time Black Belts have to struggle along with their day job largely undiminished, and this makes the completion of projects a monumental effort. Thus in reality the number of projects is likely to be less than predicted with the part time model more than the full time model!

The Organisational Perspective:

The most obvious organisational issues with full time Black Belts are the need to firstly release them from their day job, and then to back-fill to replace them. You need the best of the best to become your Black Belts, how do you convince them to give up their current jobs? Even harder, how are you going to get their bosses to release them? Once they are released you will then need to find the time and cash to recruit and train their replacements. This all needs careful management and needs the skills of HR specialists if it is to be done effectively. These factors could all be aligned as arguments against full time Black Belts.

But what is there on the other side to balance the scale? Having a two to three year stint as a full time Black Belt, learning new skills and experiencing all aspects of the business as projects are delivered is a great way of developing high-potential people and grooming them for executive positions. The constant emergence of certified and experienced Black Belts looking for leadership positions is also a great way of re-invigorating the leadership of an organisation, so long as you are prepared to allow them into these leadership positions once they have completed their stint as a black belt.

From a personnel (career development) perspective identifying high potentials who are prepared to take the risk and go full time for a couple of years is also a way of identifying these who have got what it takes to develop into future leaders, and this is another benefit of the full time Black Belt model.

Picking up on the financial discussion above, part time Black Belt issues include the difficulty for these Belts to free themselves up to carry out their projects, and in getting the necessary support from stakeholders to ensure these projects are successful. These problems can create HR issues of their own, because over stressing and frustrating your best people is not the best way of developing individual high fliers or the organisation overall. In fact the risk is that the best Black Belts take their training, enhance their CV's and leave if you frustrate their desire to complete good projects!

So if the case for full time Black Belts is so clear cut why would so many organisations reject this model for a part time one? To some extent it depends on the size of the organisation and the opportunities within it. For small and medium sized organisations there may not be enough benefit potential to justify full timers, but for larger organisations there is sometimes just not enough faith or commitment to take the plunge and go for full timers. In these cases the temptation is to hedge your bets, invest in a little training and see what happens. Whether this is sound leadership, or a failure to 'put your money where your mouth is' with organisational improvement I will leave you to determine.

We have examined the case for deploying full and part time Black Belts in a Six Sigma deployment and found that on balance full timers make more sense, so long as the benefit potential is there, and for those choosing a part time model the question has to be raised regarding why they should take this option.

There may be sound reasons for this choice as we have discussed, but if it stems from a lack of belief that the belts will really deliver enough benefit to justify full time status you might want to ask yourself why this might be. Because if it is because you think they won't deliver then this may reflect on a lack of commitment to the programme - and a half hearted programme is likely to disappoint all those involved in it.

To enable you to find out more about the options for full and part time belts, SigmaPro offers a 2-day Champion programme where all options are examined, and you will be challenged to come up with the business case for your own organisation. Speak to one of our training advisers should you require further details.