qu=ct12

Lean-six-sigma-and-lean-six-sigma-Overview.pdf

Home >English homework help >Article writing homework help >qu=ct12

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1137 ISSN 2229-5518

Lean, six sigma and lean six sigma Overview

Ahmed Mousa

Abstract— Lean is an approach that seeks to improve flow in the value stream and eliminate waste. It’s about doing things quickly. Six Sigma uses a powerful framework (DMAIC) and statistical tools to uncover root causes to understand and reduce variation. It’s about doing things right (defect free).A combination of both provides an over-arching improvement philosophy that incorporates powerful data-driven tools to solve problems and create rapid transformational improvement at lower cost.

Index Terms— lean, six sigma, lean six sigma, TQM, JIT, DMAIC, PDCA, PDSA, VVFPP ,VSM,7 wastes,5S,SMED ,SPC

——————————  ——————————

1 LEAN AND SIX SIGMA OVERVIEW wo of the most popular continuous improvement pro-

grams are Six Sigma and lean management. Six Sigma was founded by Motorola Corporation and subsequently

adopted by many US companies, including General Electrical GE and Allied Signal. Lean management originated at Toyota in Japan and has been implemented by many major US firms, including Danaher Corporation and Harley-Davidson. Six Sigma and lean management have diverse roots, (Arnheiter and Maleyeff, 2005).

Six sigma and lean are new methods, or if they are repack- aged versions of previously popular methods – total quality management (TQM) and just-in-time (JIT), (Naslund, 2008).

Both Six Sigma and lean management have evolved into

comprehensive management systems which clarify in lean six sigma methodology. In each case, their effective implementa- tion involves cultural changes in organizations, new ap- proaches to production and to servicing customers, and a high degree of training and education of employees, from upper management to the shop floor. As such, both systems have come to encompass common features, such as an emphasis on customer satisfaction, high quality, and comprehensive em- ployee training and empowerment, (Arnheiter and Maleyeff, 2005).

Some elements to eliminate many misconceptions regard-

ing Six Sigma and lean management by describing each sys- tem and the key concepts and techniques that underlie their implementation, (Arnheiter and Maleyeff, 2005). 2 LEAN MANUFACTURING 2.1 Lean Defination

Lean defined as systematic approach to identifying and eliminating non value add (wastes) through continuous im- provement, flowing the product at the pull of the customer in pursuit of perfection.(Andersson, et al 2006)

“Lean production” term is a result of the benchmarking re- sults from the IMVP. The word “lean” was suggested because the best assembly plants (the Japanese plants) (Womack et al., 1990, p. 13).(Dahlgaard, Park 2006),

2.2 Lean Overview

The concept of lean management can be traced to the Toyo- ta production system (TPS), a manufacturing philosophy pio- neered by the Japanese engineers TaiichiOhno andShigeo Shingo,(Arnheiter and Maleyeff,2005).

Toyota Production System (TPS) is recognized with being

the birthplace of just-in-time (JIT)production methods, a key element of lean production, and for this reason the TPS re- mains a model of excellence for supportive of lean manage- ment,(Arnheiter and Maleyeff,2005).

TPS was the developed of manufacturing began shortly af-

ter the Second World War, pioneered by Taiichi Ohno and associates, while employed by the Toyota motor company. Forced by shortages in both capital and resources, Eiji Toyoda trained his workers to eliminate all types waste (seven wastes). Eiji defined the waste as “anything other than the minimum amount of equipment, materials, parts, space and time which are absolutely essential to add value to the prod- uct” (Russell and Taylor, 2000, p. 737),(Pepper,Spedding ,2010).

The Toyota Production System (TPS) became the dominant

production model to emerge froma number of concepts around at the time (Katayama and Bennett, 1996; Bartezzaghi, 1999). As a result of the International Motor Vehicle Program (IMVP) benchmarking study, and the work of Womack et al. (1990), US and European companies began adapting the TPS under the title of just-in-time (JIT) to remain competitive with Japanese industry.(Pepper,Spedding ,2010).

Lean manufacturing is about controlling the resources in accord-

ance with the customers’ needs and to reduce unnecessary waste or non-value add (including the waste of time). The concept was intro- duced at a larger scale by Toyota in the 1950s, but not labeled lean manufacturing until the now famous book about the automobile ap- peared in 1990.(Andersson, Eriksson and Torstensson, 2006).

Lean manufacturing started in the form of the Toyota Production

System has been around for decades, it did not get integrated with Six Sigma until the late 1990sand early 2000s (George, 2002, 2003). the approach in the areas where improvements could be identified and implemented quickly (one to four weeks), many of which in-

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1138 ISSN 2229-5518

volved the flow of information and materials through a process. To- day Lean Six Sigma is the improvement approach of choice. (Snee, 2010).

The “birth” of the term “lean production” The IMVP Re-

searcher John Krafcik originally coined the term “lean produc- tion”. IMPV is an abbreviation of the International Motor Ve- hicle Program established at Massachusetts Institute of Tech- nology in 1985. During the following 5 years, the IMVP staff carried out the world’s most comprehensive benchmarking study ever seen. The study collected data from automobile assembly plans all over the world in order to understand the differences in quality and productivity. The results of this benchmarking study were published in the well-known book The Machine that Changed the World (Womack et al., 1990), in which there is an exciting historical analysis of the machine called “the automobile(Dahlgaard ,Park 2006).

2.3 Lean manufacturing Objectives

The lean production goal of eliminating waste (muda in Japanese), so that all activities along the value stream create value, is known as perfection efforts focused on the reduction of waste are pursued through continuous improvement or kaizen events, as well as radical improvement activities, or kaikaku. Both kaizen and kaikaku reduce muda, although the term kaikaku is generally reserved for the initial rethinking of a process. Hence, perfection is the goal and the journey to per- fection is never ending,(Arnheiter and Maleyeff,2005).

Quality management practices in lean production empha-

size the concept of zero quality control (ZQC). A ZQC system includes mistake proofing (poka-yoke), source inspection (op- erators checking their own work), automated 100 percent in- spection, stopping operations instantly when a mistake is made, and ensuring setup quality,(Arnheiter and Maleyeff,2005).

The main objectives of lean is reduce the lead time of a pro-

cess, one first analyses the customer’s demands of the process to identify the value (first V in roadmap). Hence, the objectives of the improvement, besides reducing the lead time, are also to increase customer satisfaction. In addition, increased produc- tivity and an inventory reduction are common effects of suc- cessful lean projects.(Andersson, et al2006).

Quality practices in batch-and-queue generally assure ac-

ceptance sampling performed by dedicated Quality inspectors, product quality audits, and statistical process control (SPC). Thus, for equivalent process levels of quality, poor quality in batch-and-queue system would result in high external failure costs, whereas poor quality in a lean production system would cause high internal failure costs and this is explained through the next Figure, (Arnheiter and Maleyeff,2005).

Fig.1Batch-and-queue versus lean quality systems

2.4 lean benefits There are many reasons to launch lean techniques in an or-

ganization; asit may contribute substantially to eliminating costs and providing competitive advantages. Lean benefits include reduced work-in-process (WIP), increased inventory turns, increased capacity, cycle-time reduction and improved customer satisfaction.(Andersson, et al 2006).

Survey of 40 companies that had adopted lean manufactur-

ing; typical improvements are visible in three areas. These improvement areas include: operational improvements (re- duction of lead time, increase in productivity, reduction in work-in-process inventory, etc.), administrative improvements (reduction in order processing errors, streamlining of custom- er service functions so that customers are no longer placed on hold, etc.) and strategic improvements (reduced costs, etc.).(Andersson, et al 2006). 2.5 Toyota Production System TPS and Seven Wastes

The beginning of TPS and JIT as shows next, The Toyota Production System (TPS) provided the basis for what is now known as lean thinking, as popularized by Womack and Jones (1996). And the main target of lean thinking seven forms of waste have been identified

(1) Over-production; (2) Defects; (3) Unnecessary inventory; (4) Inappropriate processing; (5) Excessive transportation; (6) Waiting; and (7) Unnecessary motion: (Pepper, Spedding, 2010)

2.6 Lean and Value of the customer

The first step in a lean transition is to identify value-added and non-value adding processes. The second step is Value stream mapping (VSM) and the benefits of VSM are many, including the provision of a common language when consid- ering manufacturing processes. It also brings together all of the lean techniques, which helps practitioners avoid the temp- tation to cherry-pick one or two of the “easier "to implement.

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1139 ISSN 2229-5518

In fact, no other tool illustrates the linkages between infor- mation and material flow like VSM (Rother and Shook, 1999). (Pepper, Spedding, 2010).

VSM has its critics. suggested that the practical nature of

VSM (i.e. the paper and pencil approach) limits the amount of detail collected and also detracts from the actual system work- ings (the action of using pencil and paper to draw the map may remove focus from the actual system being analyzed). This dynamic view looks beyond VSM as giving a quick, suc- cinct overview of where “muda” is present, and develops the idea of the mapping process itself becoming a continuous tool, constantly being updated via software such as I grafix, when we are using software can increase the data that can be repre- sented compared to paper and pencil. (Pepper, Spedding, 2010).

VSM needs to be methodically applied before other tools

such as single minute exchange of die (SMED) and 5S. Perhaps the most widely used of the lean tools is 5S (concerned with a cultural change in the organization, making systematic and standardized processes normal routine, i.e. good housekeep- ing and not an exception).5S is seen as fundamental to achiev- ing a lean business and is deemed equally also we can use VSM as powerful tool in lean six sigma methodology. (Pepper, Spedding, 2010)

2.7 Lean Manufacturing Roadmap

The lean principles are fundamentally customer value driv- en, which makes them appropriate for many manufacturing and distribution situations. Five basic principles of lean manu- facturing are generally acknowledged and the lean roadmap called VVFPP as per clarify next:

(1) Understanding customer value (V). Only what the cus- tomers perceive as value is important and value meaning the needs and requirements.

(2) Value stream analysis (V). Having understood the value for the customers, the next step is to analyze the business pro- cesses to determine which ones actually add value. If an action does not add value, it should be modified or eliminated from the process. The VSM phase is important phase to determine the value adds and non value add and business value add in each process.

(3) Flow (F). Focus on organizing a continuous flow through the production or supplychain rather than moving commodities in large batches, in this phase we change the pro- cess to one piece flow to eliminate the wastes and work in process (WIP).

(4) Pull. (P) Demand chain management prevents from producing commodities to stock, i.e. customer demand pulls finished products through the system. No work is carried out unless the result of it is required downstream.

(5) Perfection. (P) The elimination of non-value-adding el- ements (waste) is a process of continuous improvement (CIP). “There is no end to reducing time, cost, space, mistakes, and effort”. (Andersson, et al 2006).

2.8 Lean Misconceptions The misconceptions regarding lean management and six

sigma, the Lean productions was derived from the need to increase product flow or decrease the production lead time through the elimination of all non-value-added activities and essential non value added activities . Six Sigma developed from the need to ensure final product quality by focusing on obtaining very high conformance at the OFD level. In order for proponents of one program to learn from the other program, some common misconceptions should be dispelled. The key misconceptions are described below, (Arnheiter and Maleyeff, 2005).

The Key misconceptions regarding lean management in

four points as below. 1- Lean means layoffs Arnheiter and Maleyeff (2005) replay

it is a misinterpretation of the term. In lean management, if workers were performing non-value-added activities within their job, management and the employee would work together to find a better way to perform the job to eliminate then on- value-added activities. Laying-off the employee would be counterproductive since knowledgeable person would no longer be available and the remaining employees would be disinclined to take part in future waste elimination projects. Arnheiter and Maleyeff (2005)cited(Emiliani, 2001).to replay on the wrong lean meaning, layoffs cannot take place in the context of lean management, unless it becomes an absolute necessity and every effort to re-assign or re-train the employee fails

2-Lean only works in Japan, because of their unique culture In fact, lean management is not a universalsystem in Japan and some of the most successful lean management implemen- tations have been within non-Japanese companies Arnheiter and Maleyeff (2005) cited(Emiliani, 2003). The source of the misconception may be the belief that Japanese workers are by nature more frugal than their international counterparts. Even if this statement were true, eliminating waste and being frugal often conflict, such as when an engineer designs an inferior part to save money.

3- Lean for manufacturing only Arnheiter and Maleyeff (2005) replay lean management views each step in the process as a service step, where customer value is added with minimal waste. Within this framework, processing claims in the insur- ance industry, evaluating loan applications at a bank, and treating patients in a hospital all involve performing activities synonymous with the lean management viewpoint. In any business where customers Batch-and-queue versus lean quali- ty systems exist and activities take place to satisfy those cus- tomers, lean management can be practiced successfully.

4- Lean only works within certain environments Arnheiter

and Maleyeff (2005) replay this view is heard from managers in operations that are traditionally large batch operations as well as from managers of diverse job-shop operations. While these types of operations may never conform to the “lot size of one” principle, lean management encompasses much more

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1140 ISSN 2229-5518

than manufacturing process design. If attempts were made to identify and eliminate all non-value-added activities through- out the organization, these companies would be practicing important aspects of lean management. These companies could also pursue other elements of lean management, by con- tinuously attempting to follow lean principles when adopting new manufacturing technologies (Arnheiter and Maleyeff, 2005). 2.9 Criticism of lean

The main criticism against lean is the lack of flexibility the con- cept offers, see Dove (1999), and that the concept actually can lead to delays for the customers, see Cushman (1994). There is also a discussion going on whether lean, which was developed for manufacturing and distribution situations, is applicable in all industries. Mast (2004).(Andersson, et al 2006).

There are two points which was considered as weak points in lean methodology (criticism) the two points shows below:

1- The lean organization may become very susceptible to the impact of changes. The leanness in itself leads to reduced flexibility and less ability to react to new conditions and cir- cumstances (Dove, 1999).

2- JIT deliveries cause congestion in the supply chain, leading to delays, pollution, shortage of workers, etc. (Cush- man, 1994).(Andersson, et al 2006).

To overcome this, thelean approach must integrate the use of targeted data to make decisions and also adopt a more sci- entific approach to quality within the system. (Pepper, Spedding, 2010)

3 SIX SIGMA METHODOLOGY 3.1 Six sigma Definition

The six sigma define as business process that allows com- panies to drastically improve their bottom line by designing and monitoring everyday business activities in ways that min- imize waste and resources while increasing customer satisfac- tion by some of its proponents.(Andersson, et al 2006).

The term “Six Sigma” refers to a statistical measure of de-

fect rate within a system. supported by statistical techniques, it presents a structured and systematic approach to process im- provement, aiming for a reduced defect rate of 3.4 defects for- ever million opportunities, or Six Sig- ma.(Pepper,Spedding,2010)

3.2 Six sigma History and Overview The six-sigma methodology was developed at Motorola in

1987 in response to sub-standard product quality traced in many cases to decisions made by engineers when designing component parts. Traditionally, design engineers used the “three-sigma” rule when evaluating whether or not an ac- ceptable proportion of manufactured components would be supposed to meet tolerances. When a component’s tolerances were consistent with a spread of six standard deviation units

of process variation, about 99.7 percent of the components for a centered process would be expected to conform to toleranc- es. That is, only 0.3 percent of parts would be nonconforming to tolerances, which means that to3,000 defected parts per mil- lion (DPPM),(Arnheiter and Maleyeff,2005).

The six sigma started by Motorola was the first company to

launch a six sigma approach in the mid-1980sIn 1988, where the Motorola specialized in electronic products, Bill Smith1986 is engineer and statistician at Motorola, introduce the six sig- ma concept aiming to attack the existing quality problems in the company.

Motorola received the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality

Award, which led to an increased interest of six sigma in other organizations, see Pyzdek (2001). Today, a number of global organizations have developed six sigma approach of their own and six sigma is now established in almost every indus- try. (Andersson, et al 2006).

At Motorola, when studying the relationship between the

quality of component and the quality of finalproduct it was discovered that, from lot-to-lot, a process tended to shift amaximum of 1.5 sigma units (McFadden, 1993). This concept is shown graphically in next Figure, which shows a centered process and processes, shifted 1.5 sigma units in bothdirec- tions. Table provides the relationship between component quality and finalproduct quality, assuming that the full 1.5 sigma shift takes place. In next Table, Sigmalevel is the stand- ardized process variation (see Figure), OFD quality is the NCPPM ifthe process shifts a full 1.5 sigma units, and the probabilities in the table provide theproportion of final prod- ucts that will be free of defects. For example, if the company sets a goal for final product quality of 99.7 percent and prod- ucts include about 1,000 OFDs, then the 3.4 DPPM corre- sponding to the Six-Sigma methodology would became the standard against which all decisions were made,(Arnheiter and Maleyeff,2005).

Fig.2 Process average shifting+/-1.5 Sigma units

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1141 ISSN 2229-5518

Tab.1Final product quality level (percentage conforming)

Six Sigma was started and developed at Motorola by an en- gineer Bill Smith in the mid-1980s.Six Sigma is credited with playing a major role in the turnaround Motorola accomplished in their quality at the time culminating in Motorola winning the 1988 Balding NationalQuality Award.(Snee, 2010)

Six sigma established the power implementation and Sig-

nificant deployments lead by the chief executive officers (CEOs) atAllied-Signal and general electric (GE) was the next major step for the approach. Welchpromoted Six Sigma ag- gressively inside and outside GE. The initiative establishedma- jor usage across business and industry; first in the USA and then globally.Most would agree that the state of “process ex- cellence” is the ultimate goal of Six Sigma improvement.(Snee, 2010)

3.3 Six sigma successful companies

There are two successful companies in implementing six sigma programs.

The first case is Volvo Cars in Sweden claims that the six sigma program hasdonated with over 55 million euro to the bottom line during 2000 and 2002. And, another company is the Business Unit of Transmission & Transportation Networks at Ericsson located in Bora°s, Sweden. Ericsson in Bora°s has about 1,100 employees. According to Peter Ha¨yha¨nen, a promoter and educator at Ericsson, they established their six sigma programme in 1997. At Ericsson, in the first six sigma was used as methodology for solving problems. Today, they rather see six sigma as a business excellence model for con- crete areas and as a methodology in order to reach business goals. At Ericsson in Bora°s, around 50 Black Belt projects and 200 Yellow Belt projects have been executed between 1997and 2004, with total savings of approximately 200-300 million euro between 1997 and 2003.(Andersson, et al 2006)

3.4 Six sigma objectives

The six sigma consider as continuous improvement tool and as continuous improvement process for reducing varia- tion in process which meaning the defected products or de- fected service, which focuses on continuous and breakthrough

improvements. Improvement projects are driven in a wide range of areas and at different levels of complexity, in order to reduce variation. The main purpose of reducing variation on a product or a service is to satisfy customers. The goal of six sigma is that only 3.4 of a million customers should be unsatis- fied and this is the six sigma target.(Andersson, et al 2006)

3.5 Six sigma Roadmap

There are two major improvement methodologies in six sigma, one for already existing processes and one for new pro- cesses. The first methodology used to improve an existing process can be divided into five phases and also we can callsix sigma roadmap. Which clarified in next points? (Andersson, et al 2006)

1. Define phase. In this phase we clarify the process or product that needs improvement. Define the most suitable team members to work with the improvement. Define the cus- tomers of the process which are the internal or external cus- tomers, their needs and requirements, and create a map of the process that should be improved.

2. Measure phase. Identify the key factors that have the most influence on the process, and decide upon how to meas- ure them and in this phase we can collect fresh data to clarify the sources of process variation.

3. Analyze phase. Analyse the factors that need im- provements and we can reduce the factors of process varia- tion.

4. Improve phase. Design and implement the most effec- tive solution. Cost-benefit analyses should be used to identify the best solution and hypothesis test to assure the improve- ment.

5. Control phase. Verify if the implementation was suc- cessful and ensure that the improvement sustains over time. So we can use control tools such as control plan. (Andersson, et al 2006)

Six Sigma brings structure to process improvement by

providing the user with amore detailed outline of Deming’s plan-do-check-act cycle by guiding the initiative through a five stage cycle of define-measure-analyze-improve-control (DMAIC); Each stage has a number of corresponding tools and techniques such as statistical process control, design of exper- iments and response surface methodology, providing the user with an extensive tool box of techniques, inorder to measure, analyze and improve critical processes in order to bring the systemunder control.(Pepper,Spedding ,2010)

By comparing these four simple but rigorous steps with Motorola’s six steps tosix sigma quality it seems on the surface as if GE (or Jack Welch) in beginning oftheir six sigma journey focused only on Step 6 in Motorola’s roadmap. Later on we- know that the sigma improvement process usually followed the so-called DMAICprocess, which is defined as follows

• Define. Identification of the process or product that needs improvement and identify the voice of the customers.

• Measure. Identify those characteristics of the product or process that are critical to the customer’s requirements for

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1142 ISSN 2229-5518

quality performance and which contribute to customer satis- faction, in this phase we can collect the fresh data.

• Analyze. Evaluate the current operation of the pro- cess to determine the potential sources of variation for critical performance parameters.

• Improve. Select those product or process characteris- tics which must be improved to achieve the goal. Implement improvements.

• Control. Ensure that the new process conditions are documented and monitored via statistical process control methods (SPC). Depending on the outcome it may become necessary to revisit one or more of the preceding phas- es(Dahlgaard, Park 2006),

The six sigma road map and applying a step-by-step pro-

cess based road map is a key success factor (KSF) inimple- menting any six sigma project regardless of the size or type of the business.Also this clarifying in the next ta- ble.(Nabhani,Shokri2009)

Tab.2 Key steps of six sigma

3.6 Another six sigma roadmap (DMADV) DMADV roadmapis often used when the existing process-

es do not satisfy the external customers or isn't able to achieve strategic business objectives so we focused on design and veri- fication phases, this methodology can also be divided into five phases; define measure, analyze, design, verify. (Andersson, et al 2006)

3.7 Six sigma Misconceptions

The Key misconceptions regarding six sigma in three points as below:

1- Six Sigma is that it is the new flavor, pushed by quali- ty consultants in a way similar to the way Deming Manage- ment, TQM, business process reengineering (BPR), and ISO 9000 were pushed in the recent past. Unfortunately, there will

always be consultants who jump onto any bandwagon, take a seminar and proclaim themselves experts in a program Six Sigma is no exception to this phenomenon.

2- Six Sigma is that the goal of 3.4 NCPPM is absolute andshould be applied to every opportunity tolerance and specification, regardless of its ultimate importance in the cus- tomer’s value expression. While the 3.4 NCPPM wasderived at Motorola based on the characteristics of its products.

3- Six Sigma is that it is a quality only program. As de- scribed earlier, the concept of Six Sigma “quality” relates to the entire customer value equation.

Fig.3High-level DMAIC improvement methodologies.

3.8Criticism of six sigma

The six sigma has the same common features as TQM and that six sigma does not, in principle, contain anything new. In more detail, they state that six sigma is a highly disciplined, data-oriented, top-down approach, which typically includes four stages (measure, analyze, improve and control) and the use of statistical decision tools. The new thing concerning six sigma is the clear linking of the tactical and the strategic, For example, statistical techniques are used in a systematic way to reduce variation and improve processes, and there is a strong- er focus on results, including customer needs.(Andersson, et al 2006)

There is a complexity in six sigmaapproach to exceed and achieved the customer’s needs and hence increase the custom- er satisfaction. So to avoid this problem some companies use voice of the customer tools (VOC) in their define phase claim that six sigma approach fail to create conditions in order to involve everyone, which is more emphasized in the TQM.

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1143 ISSN 2229-5518

Furthermore, in six sigma training programmes one can on- ly start a project which gives a certain amount of savings. This project is often executed in the department of the project members. The project normally leads to an improvement in the department of the project members, but due to the per- formed change another department can experience deteriora- tion. As a result, six sigma is sometimes accused for not hav- ing a system view.(Andersson, et al 2006).

Six Sigma needs to adopt a wider systems approach, con- sidering the effects of muda on the system as a whole; and therefore quality and variation levels. Figure (2.4) shows how each approach can gain from being seen as a single frame- work, andalso the balance that may be reached if effectively brought together. (Pepper, Spedding, 2010)

3.9 Similarities between Six Sigma and Lean Manu-

facturing The Similarities between Six Sigma and Lean Manufactur-

ing as below: 1. Both require a high level of management commit-

ment. 2. Both implemented as part of a strategic plan. 3. 3-Both represent a culture change for the organiza-

tion. 4. Both require input from all levels of the organization

(especially shop floor). 5. Both have systematic structures. 6. 6-Both concerned with elimination of waste.

(Breyfogle, 2003) 3.10 Dissimilarities between Lean and Six Sigma The dissimilaritiesbetween lean manufacturing and six

sigma approach as noted below 1. Lean focuses on improving manufacturing operations

in variation, quality and productivity. However, Six Sigma focuses not only on manufacturing operations, but also on all possible processes including R&D or design process which is cover in DMADV roadmap and service areas.

2. Lean approach attacks variation differently than a Six Sigma system does. Lean tackles the most common form of process noise by aligning the organization in such a way that it can begin working as a coherent whole instead of as sepa- rate units. Lean seeks to co-locate, in sequential order, all the processes required to produce a product. Instead of focusing on the part number, Lean focuses on product flow and on the operator. Setup time, machine maintenance, TAKT time, OEE and routing of processes are important measures in Lean. However, Six Sigma focuses on defective rates, defects prod- ucts or service and costs of poor quality due to part variation and process variation based on measured data.

3. The data-driven nature of Six Sigma problem-solving lends itself well to lean standardization and the physical rear- rangement of the factory. Lean provides a solid foundation for Six Sigma problem-solving where the system is measured by deviation from and improvements to the standard.

4. While Lean emphasizes standardization and produc- tivity, Six Sigma can be more effective at tackling process noise and cost of poor quality. (Breyfogle, 2003)

The next table clarifies the comparison between lean manu- facturing and six sigma (Nave, 2002)

Tab.3 comparisons between six sigma and lean thinking

Six sigma Lean

Benefits- primary ef-

fects

Uniform process out- put

Reduced flow time

Benefits- secondary

effects

Less waste , Fast throughput, Less inventory,

Fluctuation- Performance

measures for manag- ers ,

Improved quality

Less variation Uniform output Less inventory

New accounting system Flow-

performance measure for managers

Improved quali- ty

Theory and objective

Reduce variation Remove waste

Focus Problem focused Flow focused Assumptions A problem exists fig-

ures and numbers are valued system out-

puts improves if vari- ation in all processes

reduced

Waste removal will improve business per-

formance. many small improve- ments are better

than system analysis

Application Guideline

Define Measure Analysis Improve Control

Identify value Identify value

stream Flow Pull

Perfection Tools Flow chart, control

chart, graphical chart , 5S,VSM,Kanban,

Criticisms System interaction not considered processes

improved inde- pendently

Statistical or sys- tem analysis not

valued

4 TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT (TQM) 4.1 TQM Definition

The TQM define as a continuously evolving management system consisting of values, methodologies andtools, the aim of which is to increase external and internal customer satisfac- tion with a reduced amount of resources.

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1144 ISSN 2229-5518

4.2 The main objectives of TQM, six sigma and lean

The effect and main objectives of TQM, six sigma and lean, the main objective with TQM is to increase the customer satis- faction, see Hellsten and Klefsjo¨ (2000). Eklo¨f et al. (1999) have also shown that there is a positive correlation between customer satisfaction and the financial results of companies. Moreover, it has been shown that organizations that have suc- cessfully implemented TQM outperform similar organizations regarding a number of financial indicators.(Andersson, et al 2006).

Six sigma, the projects are selected in such a way that they

are closely tied to the business goals or objectives. The compa- ny’s business goals are normally set in such a way that cus- tomers’ needs will be satisfied. Before starting a six sigma pro- ject, one must prove that the improvement will result in eco- nomical savings for the company and we can study the busi- ness case, the six sigma does not necessarily improve customer satisfaction to the same extent as a successful TQM. The rea- son is that a six sigma primarily emphasizes the economical savings and secondly the customer satisfaction where the six sigma focused on the variation in the internal processes or internal failure which led to external failure (customers com- plaint). This view was supported by Ericsson in Bora°s. (An- dersson, et al2006).

4.3 Criticism of TQM

TQM is, a number of failures of organizations trying to im- plement TQMhave been documented. In more detail, a num- ber of organizations have put a large amount of resources on implementing TQM, but with no tangible improvements achieved

4.4 Comparison between six sigma and TQM

Six Sigma is a broad long-term decision-making business strategy rather thana narrowly focused quality management program,(Arnheiter and Maleyeff,2005)

Six Sigma is a combination of the Six-Sigma statistical met-

ric and TQM, with additional innovations that improve the program’s effectiveness while expanding its focus. The main components of Six Sigma maintained from TQM include a focus on the customer, recognition that quality is the responsi- bility of all employees, and the emphasis on employee train- ing,(Arnheiter and Maleyeff,2005).

Six-Sigma methodology is also used, but in an expanded

fashion. With Six Sigma, the value of an organization’s output includes not just quality, but availability, reliability, delivery performance, and after-market service. Performance within each of the components of the customer’s value equation should be superior. Hence, the Six-Sigma methodology is im- plemented in a broad fashion, striving for near perfectperfor- mance at the lowest level of activity. In addition, Six Sigma programs generally create a structure under which training of

employees is formalized and sustained to ensure its effective- ness. All employees involved in activities that impact custom- er satisfaction would be trained in basic problem solving skills. Other employee's are provided advanced training and required to act as mentors to others in support of quality im- provement projects,(Arnheiter and Maleyeff,2005).

4.5 The comparison between six sigma and TQM The process view and approach for the TQM, Six sigma and

Lean the improvement projects in a six sigma methodology are conducted in a wide range of areas and at different levels of complexity in order to reduce variation, When the project members have reduced the variation in a process, and hence achieved the business goals, increased the profit or lowered the cost, this improvement is visualized to the top managers at the company. (Andersson, et al 2006).

Some of the top managers are also involved in the per-

formed improvement projects. As a result, the six sigma ap- proach receives necessary support from the top managers at the company, as the managers recognize the economical im- pact of it. This could be one explanation for the documented successes of six sigma compared with TQM, i.e. six sigma ap- proach talk the top managers’ language (the economical gains of the improvement). (Andersson, et al 2006).

4.6 Dissimilarities between six sigma, lean and TQM

Lean is a discipline that focuses on process speedand effi-

ciency to decrease the process shift, or the flow, in order to increase the customer value; in lean manufacturing, project groups are usually the approach to perform thenecessary im- provements. While six sigma and lean focus on performing improvementsmainly through projects to reduce the process variation, TQM has sometimes a different approach. TQM emphasizes the commitment and involvement of all employ- ees.(Andersson, et al2006).

4.7 Dissimilarities between six sigma, lean and TQM (Roadmap)

The improvement cycle for TQM, six sigma and Lean, The improvement cycle in TQM is composed of four stages: PDCA (plan-Do-Check-Act). In six sigma there are two major im- provement methodologies (DMAIC, DMADV). The lean prin- ciples could in this context be regarded as a methodology (VVFPP). The principles of lean are: understanding customer value, value stream, flow, pull and perfection. (Andersson, et al 2006).

4.8 Similarities between TQM, six sigma and lean

The similar between the TQM, six sigma and lean manufac- turing are a strong focus on processes and the main objectives of the process work withinTQM are to alternatively improve and uniform the processes.(Andersson, et al 2006).

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1145 ISSN 2229-5518

4.9 Similarities between TQM, six sigma (improvement cycle)

There are many similarities between the improvement cycle in TQM and the methodologies of six sigma; i.e. the method- ologies are cyclical and consist of similar phases. One could argue that the methodologies in six sigma are a further devel- opment of the improvement cycle, which first was developed by Shewhart and Deming. The lean principles are different compared to the methodologies in TQM and six sigma, as they are not cyclical in nature and are not focused on how to per- form improvements where lean cycle focused on the shift in process and how we eliminate it.(Andersson, et al2006).

4.10 Similarities between tools of six sigma, lean and

TQM

The comparison between tools of six sigma, lean and TQM; there aremany different tools that could be used in order to find out. And the three below paragraph clarify the tool man- agement.

TQM normally consists of tools that have either a statistical

or an analytical base. Among others, the seven quality control tools and the seven management tools are frequently applied in TQM.

Six sigma methodology have been successful at integrating

advanced improvement tools with the methodologies. The tools range from design tools to management tools and from very simple tools to more advanced statistical tools.

Lean manufacturing have a variety of tools are available for reducing or eliminating waste. In summary, the tools in the lean concept are more analytical in naturecompared to the more statistical tools used in TQM and six sigma.(Andersson, et al2006).

Tab.4shows the authors’ view concerning the similarities and

differences between TQM, Six sigma and lean

. TQM Six sigma Lean Origin The quality

evolution in Japan

The quality evolution in Japan and Motorola

The quality evolution in Japan and Toyota

Theory Focus on cus- tomers

No defects Remove waste

Process view Improve and uniform pro- cesses

Reduce var- iation and improve processes

Improve flow in processes

Approach Let every- body be committed

Project manage- ment

Project man- agement

Methodolo- gies

Plan, do, study, act

Define, measure, analyze, improve (or design), control (or verify)

Understand- ing customer value, value stream, anal- ysis, flow, pull, perfec- tion

Tools Analytical and statistical tools

Advanced statistical and analyt- ical tools

Analytical tools

Primary ef- fects

Increase cus- tomer satis- faction

Save money Reduce lead time

Secondary effects

Achieves cus- tomer loyalty and improves performances

Achieves business goals and improves financial perfor- mance

Reduces in- ventory, in- creases productivity and customer satisfaction

Criticism No tangible improve- ments, resource- demanding, unclear no- tion

Does not involve everybody, does not improve customer satisfaction, does not have a sys- tem view

Reduces flex- ibility, causes congestion in the supply chain, not applicable in all industries

5 LEAN AND SIX SIGMA LITERATURE REVIEW CONCLU- SION

After we finalized the literature review, which we used more than 80 articles, journals and books from year 2005 to 2012 , we conclude some points as we will noted below :-

The Lean and Six Sigma methodologies are used for im- provement the organizational performance and operational performance

Lean help the industrial companies to reduce the source of process shift such as seven wastes, WIP, TAKT time and on time delivery …. etc

Six sigma help the industrial companies to reduce the of source of process variation such as product defects, scrap rate , rework, cost of poor quality …..etc

Lean six sigma is more power in the results where the re- sults focused in two directions the direction of lean manufac- turing and the direction of the six sigma but there are some problems facing this studies , the researcher will noted in the next

• No certain tools we can using during the lean phase in DMAIC (no lean tools box)

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1146 ISSN 2229-5518

• The role of value stream mapping doesn't implement very well and the hot spots in the three levels (physical, mate- rial, administration flow) don't appear.

• The error proofing technique doesn’t used in DAMIC roadmap.

• Design layout by using Spaghetti diagram to reduce the motions doesn’t used in DAMIC roadmap.

• Time study of the process using only in lean manufac- turing doesn’t use in lean six sigma DAMIC roadmap..

• Seven wastes matrix and role of 5 s to overcome these wastes also doesn’t use in lean six sigmaDAMIC roadmap.

• Line balancing technique doesn’t use in lean six sigma to balance the all processes.DAMIC roadmap.

6 LEAN SIX SIGMA

6.1 Lean six sigma definitions The integration between six sigma and lean manufacturing,

Hoerl, (2004) said that there is an ongoing trend of integrating Lean and Six Sigma by adding Six Sigma projects to a Lean initiative. Antony et al.(2003) highlight the strengths of the two initiatives and discuss theoretical synergies of using both. The synergies can be summarized as if a combination would be beneficial in providing focus on flow, value streams and waste reduction, as well as focus on variation reduction through structured problem solving and application of statis- tical tools and techniques.(Assarlindet al 2012)

The integration of lean and Six Sigma, The phrase “lean Six

Sigma” is used to describe the integration of lean and Six Sig- ma philosophies.(Pepper,Spedding ,2010)

The concept of lean Six Sigma as an approach to process

improvement has yet tofully mature into a specific area of ac- ademic research (Bendell, 2006). (Pepper,Spedding ,2010)

Lean Six Sigma is a business strategy and methodology that

increases processperformance resulting in enhanced customer satisfaction and improved bottomline results ($). It is also be- ing widely recognized that Lean Six Sigma is an effective lead- ershipdevelopment tool. Welch and Welch (2005) points out that “Perhaps the biggest but mostunheralded benefit of Six Sigma is its capacity to develop a cadre of great leaders.”(Snee, 2010)

Lean six sigma methodology that, there have been attempts

to combine the two methodologies under titles such as “Lean Six Sigma” or “Lean Sigma”. Often, this alleged combination is no more than a “philosophical” or near-religious argument about professed compatibility of approaches. In reality these are practical examples of incompatibility and even conflicts between the approaches that have lead to bad processes and process improvement approach. (Bendell, 2006)

The Lean Six Sigma helps companies flourish in a new

world where customers expect no defects and fast delivery at

the minimal cost. Magnusson et al. (2003) also state that many companies have merged six sigma andlean manufacturing practices. The merger can be traced back to early develop- ments atGeneral Electric's where they realized that the two concepts complemented each other very well, i.e. lean manu- facturing addresses process flow and waste whereas six sigma addresses variation and design (Andersson, et al2006).

6.2 Integration between lean and six sigma The key lean implementation steps, along with the Six Sig-

matools that can be used as an aid to achieve each task. It can be seen here, that lean andSix Sigma are ideally suited to be used in a comprehensive methodology incorporat- ing.(Pepper,Spedding ,2010)

Tab.3Synergies between lean and Six Sigma (Source: Adapted

from Pyzdek (2000)) Lean Six Sigma Establish methodology for improvement

Policy deployment method- ology

Focus on customer value stream

Customer requirements measurement, cross func- tional management

Use a project-based imple- mentation

Project management skills

Understand current condi- tions

Knowledge discovery

Collect product and produc- tion data

Data collection and analysis tools

Document current layout and flow

Process mapping and flowcharting

Time the process Data collection tools and techniques, SPC

Calculate process capacity and Takt time

Data collection tools and techniques, SPC

Create standard work combi- nation sheets

Process control planning

Evaluate the options Cause-and-effect, FMEA Plan new layouts Team skills, project man-

agement Test to confirm improvement Statistical methods for valid

comparison, SPC Reduce cycle times, product defects, changeover time, equipment failures, etc.

Seven management tools, seven quality control tools, design of experiments

Theaims of integration of lean and Six Sigma are the oppor-

tunity for improvement within an organization. Whereas Six Sigma is only implemented by a few specific individuals with- in a company, lean levels the empowerment and education of everyone in the organization to identify and eliminate non- value adding activities (Higgins, 2005). (Pepper,Spedding ,2010)

The integration of the two methodologies attempts to pro-

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1147 ISSN 2229-5518

vide empowerment even at the higher-level process analysis stages, so that employees have true ownership of the process. If the two are actually implemented in isolation, the outcome can result in neither being done effectively; constrained by one another's needs in the organization (Harrison, 2006). Again, it could even create two subcultures within the organization, competing for the same resources, etc. (Smith, 2003).(Pepper,Spedding2010)

Lean and six sigma approaches have the same main objec-

tive, i.e. to achieve quality throughout, whether it is customer service, the product, the process or training and education of the work force. (Pepper,Spedding 2010) 6.3 The Competitive advantage of lean, Six Sigma and lean Six Sigma

The key concept for the integration of the two continuous improvement approaches (lean manufacturing and six sigma methodology), as a state of equilibrium needs to be achieved between the two, moving away from a inflexible approach in any one direction, risking becoming too lean and therefore rigid in responses to the market and subsequently impacting on value creation. The other extreme is to concentrate too much on reducing variation beyond the requirements of the customer, and therefore wasting unnecessary resources in the pursuit of zero variation. The balance lies in creating sufficient value from the customer’s viewpoint, so that market share is maintained, while at the same time reducing variation to ac- ceptable levels so as to lower costs incurred, without over- engineering the processes.(Pepper,Spedding2010).

Fig.4 Competitive advantage of lean, Six Sigma and lean

Six Sigma There are two currently “hot” process improvement ap-

proaches are six sigma and lean manufacturing. The two are related, but dissimilar.

The six sigma focuses on the reduction and removal of var-

iation by the application of an extensive set of statistical tools and supporting software, whilst lean thinking focuses on the reduction and removal of waste by process and value analysis.

1- Both methods have origins in aspects of Japanese im- provement practice, but have been to a large extend molded in North America .An area of overlap in Poka Yoke/mistake proofing since human errors cause both unwanted variation and waste.(Bendell,2006)

2- Lean manufacturing now extended to lean service originated in Japan in Toyota. In contrast, six sigma is an America packaging of statistical approach widely used in Jap- anese industry. (Bendell,2006)

6.4 Lean Six Sigma history and overview

Lean Six Sigma is the latest generation of improvement ap- proaches. I argue that improvement approaches are not fads but steps along the way in evolution of business improvement methodology. Each approach builds on previous approaches adopting the effective aspects of previous approaches and adding new concepts, methods and tools to remove limitations that have been identified.(Snee, 2010)

Some articles and journal to clarifying a brief overview of some of the central components of Lean Six Sigma’s twound- erlying concepts is provided as a background to discussions. The components havebeen derived theoretically, which is one of the several possible ways to deconstructSix Sigma and Lean.Six Sigma can be broken down into seven parts: DMAIC (Hoerl, 2004), Six Sigmatoolbox (Magnusson et al., 2003), Six Sigma organisation (Hoerl, 2004; Bergman andKlefsjo¨, 2003; Magnusson et al., 2003), reduction of variation (Nave, 2002; Na¨slund, 2008;Bertels, 2008), customer focus (Bergman and Klefsjo¨, 2003), decisions based on facts(Goh and Xie, 2004) and bottom line focus (Goh, 2002). Similarly, Lean can be said to bebased on the four following concepts: Lean tools and techniques – notably value streammapping (Womack, 2006; Alukal, 2003), the involvement of people (Holbeche, 1997), continuous improvement (Ricondo and Viles, 2005) and re- moval of waste (Spector, 2006;Alukal, 2003; Na¨slund, 2008). (Assarlind et al., 2012),

The concepts of lean Six Sigma have mainly swapped the

concepts of JIT and TQM. He added that Lean and Six Sigma (LSS) are basically newer versions of JIT and TQM. The sys- tematic approach to organizational change and improvement as a critical success factor seem to be the difference between lean six sigma and both JIT and TQM, (Naslund, 2008). 6.5 The Difference between LSS and other continuous improvement tools

Lean Six Sigmaworks better thanprevious approaches such as lean , TQM and six sigma …etc because it integrates the humanand process aspects of process improvement as clari- fied in next Table (2.5).(Snee, 2010)

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1148 ISSN 2229-5518

Tab.4 Human and process aspects of improvement

Human issues Process issues Bottom line focus ($ Process improvement Management leadership Analysis of variation Sense of urgency Disciplined approach Customer focus Quantitative measures Project teams Statistical thinking and meth-

ods Culture change Process management

6.6 Lean Six Sigma benefits The Lean Six Sigma projects category is conspicuously ab-

sent from this frame work. That is because in a holistic im- provement methodology, in which the overarching goal is improvement – no matter how it is achieved – all projects are, in effect, Lean Six Sigma projects. They draw on a common toolbox that contains tools that have in the past been kept apart. Also the lean six sigma cover all type of continuous im- provement projects (Byrne et al, 2007)

Lean Six Sigma approach draws on the philosophies, prin-

ciples and tools of both. However, lean Six Sigma’s goal is growth, not just cost-cutting. Its aim is effectiveness, not just efficiency.(Byrne et al, 2007)

Fig.4 Lean six sigma builds on the practical lessons learned from previous eras of operational improvement

The joint implementation of the programs will result in a

lean, Six Sigma (LSS) organization, overcoming the boundaries of each program when implemented in isolation. A thorough analysis of the two programs provides some likely reasons why the programs alone may fail to achieve absolute perfec- tion,(Arnheiter and Maleyeff,2005).

Lean six Sigma (LSS) organization would take advantage of on the strengths oflean management and Six Sigma methodology, (Arn-

heiter and Maleyeff,2005).

6.7 The sources of Lean six sigma projects

The importance of placing organizational change and im- provement methods in general under a systemic (process management) umbrella.Hence, organizational readiness for change will be increased and thus, increase probability of im- plementation success so the organizational change is first fac- tor to success the LSS implementation, (Naslund, 2008).

The next figure all the different types of projects are gener-

ated directly or indirectlyfrom business goals or performance gaps. A top-down approach employs business goalsto gener- ate projects, while the bottom-up approach addresses perfor- mance gaps that arisefrom within the operations of the organ- ization.(Snee, 2010)

Fig.5 Improvement project selections Source Snee and Hoerl, 2007

In the previous schematically figure a novel and powerful approach to selecting the rightprojects that includes elements both of Six Sigma and lean, all with the vital goal ofachieving maximum sustainable process improvements Although there are many types of improvement projects, process improve- mentstypically result from three major types of projects, re- quiring varying amounts of time for completion:

(1) Quick-hit projects can be accomplished almost immedi- ately and, should theyfail, cost little in lost time and resources.

(2) Kaizen projects, sometimes called rapid improvement projects, are typicallycompleted in 30 days or less.

(3) Six Sigma projects are typically completed in three to six months but are oftencompleted more quickly.(Snee, 2010)

The explanation of previous figure where business goals

and performance gaps can directly generate Six Sigma pro- jects, goals and gaps can also provide inputs for value stream mapping (VSM), a technique often employed in lean that can also be used to generate Six Sigma projects, A Six Sigma pro- ject might uncover quick hits or generate Kaizen projects in the course of its execution. If VSM uncovers non-value-added activity for which lean tools might be appropriate, then a Kai- zen event might be convened to brainstorm solutions.(Snee,

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1149 ISSN 2229-5518

2010) 6.8 Criticism of LSS Projects

Lean Six Sigma projects category is clearly absent from this framework.That is because in a holistic improvement method- ology, in which the main goalis improvement – no matter how it is achieved – all projects are, in effect, Lean SixSigma pro- jects. They draw on a common toolbox that contains tools that have in thepast been kept apart.Improvement objectives and needs of an organization are clarified in next Figure. Depend- ing on the nature of the problem, of course, tools traditionally regarded aslean or tools associated with Six Sigma may domi- nate. For example, the typesof commonly encountered im- provement needs, including the need to:

1. Streamline process flow to reduce complication, de- crease downtime, shorten cycle

2. Time and reduce waste; 3. Improve product quality; 4. Achieve consistency in product delivery; 5. Reduce process and product costs; 6. Reduce process variation to reduce waste (such as the

waste of defective products); 7. Improve process control to maintain stable and pre-

dictable processes; 8. Find the sweet spot in the process operating window;

and 9. Achieve process and product robustness (Snee, 2010)

Fig.6.Improvement objectives (Snee, 2010)

6.9 Lean and six sigma as business process

Both six sigma and lean have at heart the business process and the process improvement approaches. A holistic model and methodology should thus retain this at its heart next Fig- ure. The route through their approaches should depend pri- marily upon the issues that the organization is facing and its nature, as well as being influenced by the organization's and individual’s aspirations and perceptions(Bendell, 2006)

Fig.7 a holistic model for business process improvement

6.10 Lean organization and six sigma organization

In the next figure the business process improvement for many organizations, a natural starting point for business pro- cess improvement as been simple process thinking and map- ping as a bonus for improvement. Customeror market pres- sure may require ISO9001:2000 certification. Concern as to adequate qualified human resource to support process deliv- ery may simply pursuit of a standard such as Investors in People; whilst six sigma and lean are natural solutions to key questions as to whether chronic waste or variation problems are dominate. The directions shown in next Figure aren’t of course, mutually exclusive. However, the diagnostic questions are useful to help identify the likely primary direction. The- route chosen should reflect primary needs.(Bendell, 2006)

Fig.8 Typical “Six Sigma – Lean” organizational route map

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1150 ISSN 2229-5518

6.11 Roles the Leadership in lean six sigma implemen-

tation

Define the leaders; enable an organization to move from one paradigm to another; from oneway of working to another way of working. In making these shifts, work processes ofall kinds get changed. Lean Six Sigma provides the concepts, methods and tools forchanging processes. Lean Six Sigma is thus an effective leadership development tool inthat it pre- pares leaders for their role, leading change.

Lean Six Sigma is required because organizations and indi- viduals need amethodology for improvement and problem solving. Processes do not get better bythemselves. In fact, if not improved on some periodic basis, processes deteriorate over time.(Snee, 2010)

The Lean Six Sigma a builds on the knowledge, methods

and tools derived from decades of operational improvement research and implementation,Byrne et al (2007) concludes in the below figure the lean and six sigma progress and history, in the first Lean approaches focus on reducing cost through process optimization. Whilst sixsigma is about meeting cus- tomer requirements, stakeholder expectations and improving quality by measuring and eliminating defects. (Byrne et al 2007) 6.12 Technique of Lean six sigma deployment

The lean six Sigma incorporates key methods from its predeces- sors, which is clear identified in the next figure. Where in this figure shows the road map for lean and six sigma implementation. (Byrne et al 2007)

Fig.9 Lean Six Sigma incorporates, and deploys, the key methods, tools and techniques of its predecessors

6.13 Similarities between lean and six sigma approaces

The contents of Motorola’s “six steps to six sigma” in the next table. By comparing Motorola’s quality improvement process with the five principles oflean production it may, on the surface, look like, that there are not big differences.If there are differences they seem especially to be related to the lean production principles make the value flow without interrup- tions; and let the customer pull value from the produc- er.(Dahlgaard, Park 2006),

Tab.5 Motorola’s quality improvement process “six steps to

six sigma” Source Motorola Material, Fukuda (1983)

Manufacturing (manu- factured products)

Non-manufacturing (administration/office/service)

1. Identify physical and functional requirements

of the customers

1. Identify the product you create or the service

you provide to external or internal customers

2- Determine the critical characteristics of

Produce

2. Identify the customer for your product or service, and determine

what he or she considers important (your customer will tell you what they require to be satisfied. Failure to meet the customer’s critical re-

quirements is a defect

3. Determine for each characteristic, whether controlled by part, pro-

cess or both

3. Identify your needs (including needs from your suppliers) to pro-

vide product or service so thatit satisfies the customer

Determine maximum range of each characteristics

4. Define the process for doing the work (map the process)

5. Determine process variation for each

characteristics

5. Mistake-proof the process and eliminate

wasted effort and delays 6. If process capability (Cp) is less than two

then redesign materials, product, process as

required

6. Ensure continuous improve- ments by measuring, analyzing,

and controlling the improved pro- cess (establish quality and cycle

time measurements and improve- ment goals. The common quality

metric is number of defects per unit of work

6.13 The similarities between PDCA and DMAIC ap-

proaches DMAIC process may be viewed as a short version of the

following Quality Storywhich was developed in Japan in the 1960s as a standard for QC-circle presentations (PDCA cycle), but later on became an important quality improvement stand- ard (Dahlgaard et al.,1998a):

Plan: (1) Decide on a theme (establish goals). (2) Clarify the reasons this particular theme is chosen.

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1151 ISSN 2229-5518

(3) Assess the present situation. (4) Analysis (identify the causes). (5) Establish corrective measures. Do: (6) Implementation. Check: (7) Evaluate the results. Action: (8) Standardization. (9) After-thought and reflection, consideration of remaining

problems. (10) Planning for the future Kheradia, (2011) cited American Society for Quality, ASQ,

2010b; American Society for Quality, ASQ, 2010c;Tague, 2004 emphasizes that the relation between PDCA or PDSA and DMAIC as the shown in the next table (Kheradia, 2011)

Tab.6PDCA cycle and DMAICmethodology – therelation

source ASQ 2010

PDSA cycle DMAIC methodology PLAN: recognize an

improvement opportunity and plan a change

DEFINE: identify the prob- lem or the improvement

opportunity DO: test the change by

carrying out a small-scale study program

MEASURE: set process performance in terms of

sigma level i.e. DPMO STUDY: review the test,

analyze the results and identify the lessons

learned

ANALYZE: determine the root causes of poor

performance and whether the process can be

improved or redesigned ACT: take action based

on what you learned in the study step

IMPROVE and CON- TROL: improve the process

by attacking root causes and sustain using a

control plan

6.14 The integration cycle between lean and six sigma

(DMAIC)

In the below figure the DMAIC roadmap in ten step and overlap between six sigma approach and lean manufacturing methodology , DMAIC process is employed as the main func- tional system for the implementation of lean six sigma (LSS) approach. The blowcycle shows the conceptual development of the LSS framework. The main phases of the integrated LSS approach are:

(1) Define – what is the problem? Does it exist? (2) Measure – how is the process measured? How is it per-

forming? (3) Analyse – what are the most important causes of de-

fects? (4) Improve – how do we remove the causes of the defects?

(5) Control – how can we maintain the improvements? (6) Implement 5S technique. (7) Application of value stream mapping (VSM). (8) Redesign to remove waste and improve value stream. (9) Redesign manufacturing system to achieve single unit

flow (SUF). (10) Apply total productive maintenance (TPM) to support

manufacturing functions (Thomas et al., 2008)

Fig.10 Outline approach to LSS

6.15 Conceptual model for lean Six Sigma

In the next Figure how both lean and SixSigma can be inte- grated together to form a coherent management tool for busi- nessprocess improvement. Lean philosophy underpins the framework, providing strategicdirection and a foundation for improvement, orientating the general dynamics of thesystem by informing the current state of operations. From this, lean thinking identifieskey areas for improvement (“hot spots”). Once these hot spots have been identified, SixSigma provides a focused, project based improvement methodology to target these hotspots and ultimately drive the system towards th desired future state (Pepper ,Spedding 2010)

Fig.11 Conceptual model for lean Six Sigma

Source (Pepper M, Spedding T, (2010))

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1152 ISSN 2229-5518

6.16 conclusions

The Lean Six Sigma application, in the form of different packages used in a wide range of projects at various levels, is interesting. However, it is not feasible to adopt the same ap- proach for incremental micro-projects performed at the lowest level by small improvement teams as for extensive projects performed by highly trained improvement experts. Reasons for this include the different problem-solving tools and expert resources that are needed. For larger improvement projects, therefore, a more complex traditional Six Sigma method may be appropriate. In such cases, the standard DMAIC cycle may provide structure and ensure that each step is performed thor- oughly, thereby aiding the success of the project. Lean can contribute to these projects by staking out the direction; that is, indicating where to start, for example through the use of value stream mapping (V phase) where the process is reviewed in order to find waste .The Lean Six Sigma application studied here does not point towards one well-defined Lean Six Sigma approach; the company does not adopt any particular stand- ardized approach to larger improvement projects. Instead, the company supports the integration atthis level by ensuring that their improvement specialists are widely trained in both Lean- and Six Sigma, as integration at this level is ultimately up to the individuals. In theimprovement teams on the other hand, the dominance of Lean is obvious, althoughSix Sigma’s influ- ence can be seen in the idea of a ubiquitousDMAIC.

However, this is not tosay that the company does not gain

complementary benefits from the two improvementinitiatives, as both methodologies definitely exist and thrive within the company boundary, also must insert inside DMAIC roadmap. First, selection phase (S phase) to collect the projects, the se- cond insertion is value stream map (V phase), third insertion is replication phase (R Phase).

There is also clear interaction between Lean and Six Sigma,

particularly as projects arepassed back and forth between one and the other. Having studied this application, it is ourview that the benefits of Lean and Six Sigma can be achieved with- out the need for astandardized approach of an integrated Lean Six Sigma concept.

Refer to Lean Six Sigma as an integrated entity thatexploits

the benefits of both Lean and Six Sigma. One rationale for im- plementing bothsystems in the case study company was to gain the benefits of continuous improvement, for example by waste elimination, as well as breakthrough improvements throughlarger improvement projects. At a company level, it can be said; therefore, thatintegrated use of Lean and Six Sig- ma does exist, although not always in individualprojects. Lean and Six Sigma could be said to provide complementary rather thansynergistic benefits. Instead of discussing whether to im- plement “Lean Six Sigma”,the company has selected the parts of Lean and Six Sigma that are the most appropriatefor their business and adopted them into their production system.

7 REFERENCES

Näslund, D., (2008), “Lean, six sigma and lean sigma: fads or real process improvement methods?”Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 14 Iss: 3 pp. 269 – 287.

Nave, D. (2002), “How to compare six sigma, lean and the theory of constraints”, Quality Progress, Vol. 35 No. 3, p. 73.

Arnheiter, D, Maleyeff, J (2005), “The integration of lean manage- ment and Six Sigma”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 17 Iss: 1 pp. 5 - 18

McFadden, F.R. (1993), “Six-Sigma quality programs”, Quality Progress, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 37-42.

Inman, R.R. (1999), “Are you implementing a pull system by put- ting the cart before the horse?”, Production and Inventory Manage- ment Journal, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 67-71.

Shingo, S. (1986), Zero Quality Control – Source Inspection and the Poka-yoke System, Productivity Press, Cambridge, MA.

Emiliani, M.L. (2001), “Redefining the focus of investment ana- lysts”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 13No. 1, pp. 34-50.

Emiliani, M.L. (2003), Better Thinking, Better Results, the Center for Lean Business

Management, Kensington, CT. Manville G, Greatbanks R, Krishnasamy R, Parker D,

(2012)“Critical success factors for Lean Six Sigma programmes: a view from middle manage-

ment”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 29Iss: 1 pp. 7 - 20

Roy Andersson, Henrik Eriksson, Håkan Torstensson, (2006),"Similarities and differences between TQM, six sigma and lean", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 18 Iss: 3 pp. 282 - 296

Hellsten, U. and Klefsjo¨, B. (2000), “TQM as a management sys- tem consisting of values, techniques and tools”, TQM Magazine, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 238-44.

Magnusson, K., Kroslid, D. and Bergman, B. (2003), Six Sigma – The Pragmatic Approach, Lund, Student litterateur.

NIST (2000), Principles of Lean Manufacturing with Live Simula- tion, Manufacturing Extension Partnership, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD.

Rancour, T. and McCracken, M. (2000), “Applying six sigma meth- ods for breakthrough safety performance”, American Society of Safe- ty Engineers, October, pp. 31-4

Pyzdek, T. (2001), The Six Sigma Revolution, Quality America, Tuscon, AZ, available at: www.Qualityamerica.com /Knowledge Cen- tre/articles/pyzdeksixrev.htm (accessed 6 October 2004)

Eckes, G. (2001), the Six Sigma Revolution, Wiley, New York, NY Klefsjo¨, B., Wiklund, H. and Edgeman, R.L. (2001), “Six sigma

seen as a methodology for total quality management”, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 31-5.

McCurry, L. and McIvor, R.T. (2001), “Agile manufacturing: 21st century strategy for manufacturing on the periphery?”, Conference Proceedings, Irish Academy of Management Conference, University of Ulster, September.

Dove, R. (1999), “Knowledge management, response ability and the agile enterprise”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 18-35.

Cusumano, M.A. (1994), “The limits of lean”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 27-32.

George, M., Rowlands, D. and Kastle, B. (2003), what is Lean Six Sigma?, McGraw-Hill Companies, New York, NY.

Hellsten, U. and Klefsjo¨, B. (2000), “TQM as a management sys- tem consisting of values, techniques and tools”, TQM Magazine, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 238-44

Ingle, S. and Roe, W. (2001), “Six sigma black implementation”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 13No. 4, pp. 273-80.

Ishikawa, K. (1985), what is Total Quality Control? The Japanese Way, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Juran, J.M. (1989), Juran on Leadership for Quality: An Executive Handbook, the Free Press, New York, NY.

Klefsjo¨, B., Wiklund, H. and Edgeman, R.L. (2001), “Six sigma seen as a methodology for total quality management”, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 31-5.

Mast, J. (2004), “A methodological comparison of three strategies for quality improvement", International Journal of Quality & Reliabil- ity Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 198-213.

M.P.J. Pepper, T.A. Spedding, (2010),"The evolution of lean Six Sigma", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

http://www.qualityamerica.com/

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 1153 ISSN 2229-5518

Vol. 27 Iss: 2 pp. 138 - 155 Womack, J. and Jones, D.T. (1996), Lean Thinking: Banish Waste

and Create Wealth in Your Corporation, Simon and Schuster, London Womack, J., Jones, D.T. and Roos, D. (1990), the Machine that

Changed the World, Rawson Associates, New York, NY Katayama, H. and Bennett, D. (1996), “Lean production in a chang-

ing competitive world: a Japanese perspective”, International Jour- nal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 8-23.

Bartezzaghi, E. (1999), “The evolution of production models: is a new paradigm emerging?”International Journal of Operations & Pro- duction Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 229-50.

Rother, M. and Shook, J. (1999), Learning to See: Value Stream Mapping to Add Value and Eliminate Muda, Lean Enterprise Institute, Cambridge, MA.

Brady, J.E. and Allen, T.T. (2006), “Six sigma literature: a review and agenda for future research", Quality and Reliability Engineering International, Vol. 22, pp. 335-67

Black, K. and Revere, L. (2006), “Six Sigma arises from the ashes of TQM with a twist”, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 259-66.

Pyzdek, T. (2000), “Six Sigma and lean production”, Quality Di- gest, January. Quality (2004), “Mitsubishi goes beyond MES to incor- porate lean”, Quality, Vol. 43 No. 10,

pp. 48-9. Higgins, K.T. (2005), “Lean builds steam”, Food Engineering: The

Magazine for Operations and Manufacturing Management, available at: http://www.foodengineeringmag.com/Articles/Feature_Article/1e1b90 115c2f8010VgnVCM100000f932a8c0_.

Harrison, J. (2006), “Six sigma vs. lean manufacturing: which is right for your company?”, Foundry Management & Technology, Vol. 134 No. 7.

Smith, B. (2003), “Lean and Six Sigma – a one-two punch”, Quality Progress, Vol. 36 No. 4,pp. 37-41.

Arnheiter, E.D. and Maleyeff, J. (2005), “The integration of lean management and six sigma”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 5- 18.

Ronald D. Snee, (2010),"Lean Six Sigma - getting better all the time", International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 1 Iss: 1 pp. 9 – 29

George, M.L. (2002), Lean Six Sigma – Combining Six Sigma Qual- ity with Lean Speed, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

George, M.L. (2003), Lean Six Sigma for Service – How to Use Lean Speed and Six Sigma Quality to Improve Services and Transac- tions, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY

Snee, R.D. (2000), “Impact of Six Sigma on quality engineering”, Quality Engineering, Vol. 12No. 3, pp. ix-xiv.

Snee, R.D. (2007a), “Managing Six Sigma’s most profound change of all: a new way of thinking", Six Sigma Forum Magazine, February, pp. 41-3.

Tony Bendell, (2006),"A review and comparison of six sigma and the lean organizations", The TQM Magazine,Vol. 18 Iss: 3 pp. 255 – 262

George Byrne, Dave Lubowe, Amy Blitz, (2007),"Using a Lean Six Sigma approach to drive innovation", Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 35 Iss: 2 pp. 5 – 10

Jens J. Dahlgaard, Su Mi Dahlgaard-Park, (2006),"Lean produc- tion, six sigma quality, TQM and company culture", The TQM Maga- zine, Vol. 18 Iss: 3 pp. 263 – 281

Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T. and Roos, D. (1990), the Machine that Changed the World, Maxwell Macmillan International, New York, NY.

Fukuda, R. (1983), Managerial Engineering, Productivity Inc., Stan- ford, CA

Park, S.H. (2003), Six Sigma for Quality and Productivity Promo- tion, Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo.

Dahlgaard, .J, Kristensen, K. and Kanji,.K. (1998a), Fundamentals of TQM, Carfax, London.

AmitKheradia, (2011),"TALEVAS model: an integrated quality methodology", The TQM Journal, Vol. 23 Iss: 4pp. 403 – 422

American Society for Quality (ASQ) (2010a), “Organization-wide approach: total quality management”, available at: www.asq.org/learn-about-quality/total-quality- management/overview/overview.html

American Society for Quality (ASQ) (2010b), “Organization-wide

approach: the DMAIC methodology”, available at: www.asq.org/learn- about-quality/six-sigma/overview/dmaic.Html

Thomas, A Barton, R and Okafor, C (2008),"Applying lean six sig- ma in a small engineering company - a model for change", Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 20 Iss: 1 pp. 113 - 129

Nabhani, F and Shokri, A (2009),"Reducing the delivery lead time in a food distribution SME through the implementation of six sigma methodology", Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 20 Iss: 7 pp. 957 – 974

Kwak, P.H. and Anbari, F.T. (2006), “Benefits, obstacles, and future of six sigma approach”, Technomation, Vol. 26, pp. 708-15.

Nave, D (2002) "How to compare six sigma, lean and the theory of constraints" quality progress, Vol 35 No 3 pp 77.

Arnheiter, E.D. and Maleyoff, J. (2005), “The integration of lean management and six sigma", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 5- 18.

Breyfogle, F (2003) "Implementing six sigma: smarter solutions using statistical methods "John Wily Sons Inc vol III -2nd ed

Assarlind, M Gremyr, I and Bäckman, K (2012),"Multi-faceted views on a Lean Six Sigma application", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 29 Iss: 1 pp

IJSER

http://www.ijser.org/

http://www.asq.org/learn-about-quality/total-quality-management/

http://www.asq.org/learn-about-quality/six

1 Lean and six sigma overview

2.4 lean benefits