Search results

The purpose of this paper is to discuss how using an experiential Lean Six Sigma training model will dramatically decrease the amount of time it takes to become competent and capable at applying process improvement within a healthcare environment. The model was first put into use in 2006 and has evolved and been evaluated to its current state.

Typical Lean approaches use a Kaizen methodology that is dependent on a skilled facilitator entering the organization and leading a team of process content experts from the organization through the change process. It is costly to hire such facilitators and does not build sustainable capacity within the organization or the internal knowledge to apply the Kaizen approach to the many varying sizes and complexities of improvements within the healthcare arena. The root of the problem is compounded by many factors including cost, urgency, political pressure, and inconsistency in the Lean Six Sigma body of knowledge. The principles behind the Kaizen methodology are fundamentally sound but the difference in the approach of this training model lies in who is doing the educating and application rather than changing the Lean Six Sigma body of knowledge.

The first finding is that more people are capable of almost instantly leading change, given the right model, than organizations may be aware of. The second is the paradigm that an expert has to “live at least 500 miles away” simply meaning that people working within their current system are rarely seen as capable to solve the organization's problems. The third is that any organization can easily have a complete infrastructure in place within a week and their staff leading improvements within two weeks. The organization can be at a level of self‐sustaining internal capacity within four months of starting their Lean Six Sigma journey.

The paper consequently focuses on value created for the organization, by the organization, with minimal support of an external consultant.

The purpose of this paper is to depict how Kaizen and continuous improvement (CI) are represented in scientific journals focusing on quality management (QM) from the 1980s until 2017. Additionally, the study aims to examine how Kaizen is studied and described and how the relationship between Kaizen and CI is portrayed.

The study applies a mixed methods approach to search for tendencies and outlines concerning Kaizen and CI in four scientific journals focusing on QM and two focusing on OM. The data set contains entries from 1980 until 2017, which makes it possible to depict how Kaizen has evolved over more than 30 years.

The findings show that Kaizen and CI attained special interest in the mid-1990s, after which interest appears to have decreased. However, the findings imply that a regenerated interest for the areas spiked post 2010. In addition, the results indicate that Kaizen is on the one hand accepted by one part of the management community but on the other hand completely ignored by the rest. Finally, the data illuminate a need to strengthen and clarify Kaizen’s theoretical basis and its relationship to CI.

If an aspiration exists to increase the success rate of Kaizen implementation, the results from the study highlight the need to address and clarify epistemological, terminological and theoretical issues.

Prior data mining studies pinpointing how Kaizen and CI have evolved over the last 30 years appear not to exist.