Process capability indices: The allure and the perils of summarizing process performance in a single index

For many data analytics studies, summarizing the “bottom line” with only a few statistics is very tempting. This is often done to simplify communication and maximize the impact of the outcome. On the other hand, failing to consider the efforts behind the calculations of these statistics, or to fully understand the specifics in data collection and the assumptions used to make the inferences can lead to erroneous conclusions and missed improvement opportunities. The prevalent use of capability indices offers a prime example. These unitless measures of the ratio of the range of the engineering specifications to the natural variation in the process offer a very valuable summary of the capability of the processes yet they are all calculated based on a sample of observations and a set of assumptions. Ignoring all these and just focusing on the point estimates can be misleading. In this Quality Quandaries, we discuss some of the conditions and assumptions in the calculation of these indices, and for the violation of the normality assumption, we present two case studies highlighting potentially problematic issues.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Quality Engineering
Published
2025-03-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/08982112.2025.2482203
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Advanced Statistical Process Monitoring
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.59
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Process capability indices: The allure and the perils of summarizing process performance in a single index

Murat Külahçı, Mahmut Onur Karaman
4 citations
Quality Engineering
Advanced Statistical Process Monitoring
5.59
article

Process capability indices: The allure and the perils of summarizing process performance in a single index

Murat Külahçı, Mahmut Onur Karaman
article en
4 citations

Abstract

For many data analytics studies, summarizing the “bottom line” with only a few statistics is very tempting. This is often done to simplify communication and maximize the impact of the outcome. On the other hand, failing to consider the efforts behind the calculations of these statistics, or to fully understand the specifics in data collection and the assumptions used to make the inferences can lead to erroneous conclusions and missed improvement opportunities. The prevalent use of capability indices offers a prime example. These unitless measures of the ratio of the range of the engineering specifications to the natural variation in the process offer a very valuable summary of the capability of the processes yet they are all calculated based on a sample of observations and a set of assumptions. Ignoring all these and just focusing on the point estimates can be misleading. In this Quality Quandaries, we discuss some of the conditions and assumptions in the calculation of these indices, and for the violation of the normality assumption, we present two case studies highlighting potentially problematic issues.

Quality EngineeringVol. 37(4)
Luleå University of Technology (SE), Hacettepe University (TR), Technical University of Denmark (DK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Advanced Statistical Process Monitoring
5.59
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.