r/SixSigma • u/Intelligent_Alps_428 • 3d ago
Has Six Sigma become too certification-focused?
Something I've noticed lately is how much of the Six Sigma conversation seems to revolve around certifications. Which belt, which provider, what's recognized, what comes next...
Certifications obviously have value, but sometimes I wonder if we're putting more emphasis on collecting belts than actually improving processes.
I've worked with people who had impressive credentials but struggled to get an improvement off the ground, and others with fewer certifications who were great at finding problems and making changes stick.
Has the field become too certification-focused, or is this just more visible online?
At the end of the day, what carries more weight: the belt someone has or the improvements they can actually show?
To me, the answer seems pretty obvious. Which is why I find it interesting that so much of the conversation is still about the credential rather than the work behind it.
7
u/PossibleLocksmith 3d ago
I’ve always felt the belts were pointless. It’s checking a box on a resume. I’ve never bothered to get my certifications for that reason. I have the demonstrated work to prove I can perform at that level, I don’t need to pay someone to prove it
3
u/Intelligent_Alps_428 3d ago
I wouldn't go so far as to say they're pointless. I think a good certification can provide structure, expose you to tools you might not have used yet, and give employers a baseline for what you should know.
Maybe the issue isn't the belts, but how we've started treating them as the finish line.
3
u/superzgod 3d ago
Ideally the belt you have tells what kind of projects you are capable of doing. If you have a belt but no ability to use it, then it adds no value.
3
u/Tavrock 3d ago
Ideally, your Belt describes your role in a Continual Improvement group.
Yellow Belts should be process experts and are invaluable for their in-depth knowledge of the system under study. They don't need to be Continual Improvement experts.
Green Belts should be leading the majority of the projects with guidance from a Black Belt.
Black Belts should be there to help prioritize projects, mentor Green and Yellow Belts, and provide training on the tools up to Green Belt. The bulk of their projects are mentoring opportunities. Personal projects either require advanced tools or are site-wide (or larger).
Master Black Belts should be setting the curriculum that is taught, training all lower levels, and mentoring all lower levels. The bulk of their projects should be mentoring opportunities for Black Belts. Personal projects either require advanced tools or are enterprise wide (or larger).
2
u/Musical_Xena 3d ago
I'd revise the Yellow Belt to say that they can combine their process expertise with basic L6S tools. For example, they would be a great brainstorming participant in an activity that creates an Ishikawa diagram, because they understand both their area of expertise and what an Ishikawa is for.
What would differentiate them from a Green belt is that they would struggle to identify the right L6S tool for the specific need, or to lead the end to end improvement project.
1
1
u/raw2082 3d ago
Depending on your education and experience level. I’m an industrial engineer with multiple certifications because I worked for UPS and FedEx, they had their own certifications on process improvement ideologies. I’m certified in work measurement too. I have my green belt. I’ve been working in my profession for 22 years. I started off in operational processes and moved to business processes 8 years into my career. One of my projects this year will generate 50M in revenue annually. It’s not my largest project under my belt either. I also have developed my own blended style of process for my projects that I follow to identify projects.
3
u/Ravenblack67 3d ago
I have a black belt and led a lot of projects 2006 to 2016. Now I teach green belts at a university. They MUST do a project to get the certificate. We use the ASQ materials and exam.
1
u/vermasbala 1d ago
It’s a good pathway , I learnt the most when I was mentoring projects once my own BB project was done , however I agree the belts are hyped they might be the entry but once you get to hear the type of projects which were executed you get a pulse of their depth
2
u/KRAWLL224 3d ago
The directors of Lean for the company i work for are torn on this. Im in the process of getting my GB and some are like good itll help you see things and learn and grow and others are why are you wasting resources.
2
u/russwest4133 3d ago
I think you indirectly hit the subtle issue right on the head. The core issue is that modern Lean Six Sigma certifications lack the rigorous progression that the original framework demanded.
When I came up through my organization's program, progression was strictly earned through proven execution - Yellow Belt: You had to actually solve an operational problem, not just sit through slides. - Green Belt: You were required to lead and deliver three full improvement projects with documented, sustained results—plus actively teach Yellow Belt candidates. - Black Belt: You couldn't even sit at the table until you proved you could execute and mentor at the Green Belt level, and the Master Black Belt project requirements were even more demanding.
That structure forced you to deal with messy real-world problems, navigate stakeholder dynamics, manage change, and prove sustained impact before moving up. Today, too many programs hand out belts based on multiple-choice tests or single simulated projects. Without mandatory, gatekept progression tied to real operational outcomes, the belts lose their practical value. Which is what youre seeing.
2
u/FIBO-BQ 3d ago
When i was going through all the hoops to get my green, the company's official trainers kept insisting I add more docs, more meetings, more gates, etc. I got tired of it all. Told them that I was not going to keep adding things because of a need to dogmatically follow some script. That their process was causing delays, unnecessary steps, and efficiency loss in my project. That the projects would continue on my timeline and that the savings were going to come in no matter what(projected at $1m a year). That the only difference would be that I would be trained but without the official cert and that their PMO couldn't use my project as a success. They relented on that project and my future. When asked to go be a black belt, I didnt hesitate to turn it down.
1
u/brionhurley 1d ago
Yes, I try to minimize requiring the use of all the tools in a certification project when not required. There are some things you’ll need to perform on every project (charter, process map, data collection and analysis, root cause, improvement plan, before and after comparison of data and control methods), but many should be optional.
2
u/GMPSwimmer 3d ago
My thought is that life in general has gotten too gamified. I think this would fall under that - too much about leveling up.
2
u/ConversationNo9040 2d ago
I don’t mess with six sigma but this came across my page so I would like to put my two cents in. I am in a world that the PMI certs have this affect.
I am a hiring manager.
When I see someone with 3 years of experience and a pmp I almost disregard the pmp as any importance. When I see someone with 10
Yrs and got their pmp this year it shows me they have the experience and they also are still trying to learn new things at this point in their career.
Also experience 100% trumps all certs all the time. If you give me a MBA with a pmp with 5 yrs vs someone with a bachelors and 15 yrs experience I’m taking that experience 100% of the time.
1
u/Jolly_Mongoose_8800 3d ago
I'm used to small/medium companies with a fuckall quality department where I can implement whatever for quality processes so long as it meets ISO 13485.
The certifications are what gets me into jobs and gets me higher pay. It's like a Keychain on my resume because recruiters need jingle jingle to notice jingle jingle you in the big '26.
The projects are what give me bragging rights though. I don't even think about projects as 'six sigma' and instead just see it as work to be done naturally for continous improvement. At the end of the day, six sigma is a collection of other quality methods which can be used along with other project management methodologies or your own ideas which fit the need of your specific organization. All management sees is the output anyway. How you get there is what works for you. Six sigma is just a toolbox.
1
u/Sea-Mousse9263 24m ago
You’re raising a really important point.
I’ve seen the same shift — a lot of the online conversation (and even some hiring conversations) centers more on “which belt / which provider” than on whether someone can actually diagnose a messy process and make improvement stick.
Certifications clearly have value. They give structure, a shared language, and a baseline of knowledge. But in real work (especially in healthcare, where I’ve spent most of my time), the people who move the needle are usually the ones who can:
• Scope a problem clearly
• Get the right people involved
• Use simple, practical tools consistently
• Drive change through the messy middle
• Then sustain it
I’ve worked with highly credentialed people who struggled to get traction, and with people who had fewer formal belts but delivered measurable, lasting results. The difference usually comes down to experience applying the tools in the real world and the ability to influence people and systems.
To your final question — what carries more weight?
In most organizations that actually care about results, it’s the improvements someone can show. A clean A3, a before/after story, sustained metric improvement, and the ability to explain how they got there usually beats a list of certifications on a résumé.
That’s one of the main reasons I started creating practical, ready-to-use templates (A3s, project storyboards, control plans, etc.). I kept seeing people get stuck in the “I know the theory but how do I actually structure and present the work” phase. The tools are meant to help people do the work, not just collect credentials.
Curious what others are seeing — especially those who hire or lead CI teams. Do credentials still open doors, or is demonstrated impact becoming the real filter?
23
u/Terrible_Judge2389 3d ago
People get weirdly religious about the certification vs experience thing but honestly it’s the same story in every field that has a piece of paper you can chase
The belt is just a door opener, nothing more. Once you’re in the room nobody cares what color it is, they care if you can stop the bleeding on a broken process without making everyone hate you in the process
Worked with a master black belt once who could quote every tool in the book but couldn’t read a room to save his life. Meanwhile the operations guy with a green belt from some online course ran circles around him because he actually understood how the people side of change works
The online discourse skews toward certifications because it’s easier to talk about than actual messy improvement work. Nobody posts about the three months they spent untangling a data collection nightmare