Who is this programme for?
Experienced Black Belts, operational excellence leaders, improvement programme and methods specialists, and professionals who support other Belts and shape organisation-wide standards.
Curriculum & Assessment Programme
Develop improvement work from individual projects into a credible programme. The focus is on portfolio decisions, methodological quality and the development of other Belts. Assessment therefore includes coaching and a reasoned approach to programme governance.

Academy-owned programmes are offered in German and English. Hungarian instruction is available for PECB courses only.
Experienced Black Belts, operational excellence leaders, improvement programme and methods specialists, and professionals who support other Belts and shape organisation-wide standards.
Black Belt knowledge or equivalent demonstrated competence, plus experience of methodical improvement-project work. Evidence may include certificates, anonymised project reports and a structured technical discussion. No particular certificate issuer or fixed number of years in employment is required. Before booking, the Academy checks whether the candidate’s experience supports programme-level work; any additional requirements are communicated in advance.
A modular course with an individually agreed schedule. Teaching hours, coaching exercises, portfolio work, in-person days and assessment dates are specified before booking. Percentages describe subject emphasis, not a promised number of days. Live teaching is available online or in person; independent assessment work is identified separately.
Translate business objectives into improvement goals; programme mandate, sponsor roles, maturity, competing objectives, governance and decision rights. Distinguish project outputs from programme effects.
Scope / allocation
15% of subject content
Evidence and output
A programme mandate with objectives, responsibilities and measurable decision criteria.
Project selection and prioritisation, resources, dependencies, risks and capacity constraints; benefit logic, credible baselines and prevention of double-counted savings.
Scope / allocation
20% of subject content
Evidence and output
A prioritised project portfolio with documented assumptions, uncertainty and benefit review.
Critically review measurement systems, models and experimental plans; sampling fitness, model validation, robustness, multiple comparisons and transferability. Detect flawed analysis and identify suitable specialist support.
Scope / allocation
25% of subject content
Evidence and output
A review of a demanding analysis, diagnosing defects and proposing improvements.
Learning objectives, observation and feedback, questioning, coaching boundaries, case-based learning and clear explanation. Assess technical capability without equating attendance with competence.
Scope / allocation
20% of subject content
Evidence and output
A coaching plan, observed coaching segment and short assessment of a selected competence.
Method standards, stage gates, review rules, data ethics, knowledge transfer, escalation and work with process owners; practical deployment and adaptation.
Scope / allocation
10% of subject content
Evidence and output
A methodology and governance rule defining ownership, review criteria and treatment of deviations.
Decision-ready reporting, limits of metrics and benefit claims, assessment of programme effectiveness, lessons learned and reprioritisation under changed conditions.
Scope / allocation
10% of subject content
Evidence and output
A management paper and oral defence of a justified programme decision.
Weighting: 25%
Three complex case tasks: assess a flawed statistical analysis, justify a portfolio decision and challenge a benefit claim.
120 minutes, supervised
Weighting: 35%
An individual assignment of 20–30 pages excluding appendices, containing a programme mandate, prioritised portfolio, benefit logic, method standard and Belt development approach. Based on an authorised, anonymised organisation or an equivalent Academy case.
Submission within eight weeks of approval of the assignment; workload and supervision are specified separately in the course schedule.
Weighting: 20%
Twenty minutes of coaching in a supplied Belt case situation, followed by ten minutes of reflection. The case is provided with reasonable preparation time and the counterpart’s role is consistently briefed.
30 minutes of assessment; 30 minutes of preparation
Weighting: 20%
Ten-minute management presentation followed by twenty minutes of questions, including a change in the scenario’s conditions.
30 minutes
A pass requires at least 70% overall after weighting and at least 60% in every mandatory assessment component. Rubric-based work uses a 0–4 scale: 0 = missing or technically unusable; 1 = major errors without a defensible rationale; 2 = substantially sound, with limited gaps; 3 = technically sound, traceable and applied appropriately; 4 = also critically evaluated, with justified alternatives and limitations. Every criterion expressly designated critical must score at least 2 out of 4. These pass thresholds are Academy programme rules; ISO/IEC 17024 does not prescribe them.
Written review: approved references, formula sheet and analysis tools named in advance; no third-party communication or generative AI. Programme assignment: literature, software and generative AI may support the work if documented; personal responsibility and source verification remain mandatory. Coaching and professional discussion: the candidate’s plan or report and agreed presentation; no undisclosed assistance.
Identity is checked before each supervised assessment component. Submitted work includes a declaration of authorship, a record of sources and tools, and identification of contributions by others. The professional discussion checks the candidate’s personal understanding of the submission. Personal and business data must be anonymised or submitted only with documented authorisation.
The common assessment rules also cover retakes, reasonable adjustments, appeals, confidentiality and certificate authorisation.
Assessment and Certificate RulesSix Sigma Master Black Belt – Assessed Academy Certificate
This programme applies to deliveries whose agreed course and assessment plan explicitly references this revision. Existing bookings retain their agreed terms.
No. Methodological depth remains important, but programme and portfolio management, review of analyses and development of other Belts are also central. Assessment therefore includes observed coaching and a programme design.
No. Equivalent competence from other providers or documented practice can be considered. What matters is whether the demonstrated knowledge supports the demanding programme and coaching tasks.
No. A suitable anonymised organisational case may be used; alternatively, the Academy supplies an equivalent case. A case-based assessment is not presented as an improvement programme actually deployed in a company.
Published criteria cover identifying needs, providing technically sound support, communicating clearly and agreeing a verifiable next step. A consistently briefed case situation and documented assessment rationale support comparability.
No. It records the competencies individually assessed. It does not establish accreditation, recognition as a certification body or automatic approval as an examiner by another organisation.
After successful completion of all mandatory components and a documented certification decision under the Academy assessment rules. Attendance alone or submission of a programme design is not sufficient.
Solo self-employed in Germany? Discuss potential KOMPASS support with an official advisory centre before booking. We can help you select a suitable programme in a consultation.
An Academy-owned assessed competence credential. The assessment programme refers to selected principles of ISO/IEC 17024:2026. This is not a claim of accreditation or fully demonstrated conformity.