Search results

Benefits of modularity are being limited by the lack of agreement over terminology. Neither researchers nor managers use the same typology, complicating comparisons of modular strategies.

Presents existing problem, then develops comprehensive and necessary typology. Examples illustrate practical use of the typology, and help reader understand implications on product design and future research.

Development of modularity typologies, including their characteristics and implications for product design and production systems, has been minimal. A well‐defined typology for soft modules exists, but literature on categorization of hard modules is limited. Most existing definitions of modularity are related to a common type called manufacturing modularity.

Each type of modularity is characterized by a different set of design attributes. For example, appearance, durability, and ergonomics are important for product‐use modularity, while accessibility, recycling and cost are key considerations for limited life modularity. Designers must understand these different characteristics in order to design products that address relevant customer needs such as cost, customization, serviceability and upgradeability that can give product a competitive edge in the marketplace. When developing individual modules, focus on core characteristics of that module type. When developing a multiple module type product, balance characteristics of the interdependent module types in order to ensure that the product meets customer needs.

Four types of modularity are defined: manufacturing, product‐use, limited life and data access. New products often incorporate all four types in order to address both the needs of the customers as well as the manufacturer.

Companies are emphasizing modular designs and manufacturing approaches, but to stay competitive and retain market share they must continue to offer products and services of the highest quality. Therefore, since modularity is increasingly popular and product quality is always critical, the purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of modular strategies on key quality dimensions.

This paper first presents an overview of modularity, and then outlines eight commonly used dimensions of quality. Each dimension is then examined in terms of how it can be affected by modularity.

It is shown that modular product design has a significant impact on key attributes of product quality. Six of the eight quality dimensions examined are potentially affected in a positive way by modularity, while five of the eight attributes are affected in a potentially negative manner by the use of modularity.

Since modularity can have both a positive and negative impact on quality, managers must proceed with caution when adopting modular strategies.

This is a seminal work because it considers the impact of modularity on the dimensions of quality. It is argued that the use of modularity should not be considered a panacea by companies searching for a quick solution. That is, there are potentially significant negative side effects associated with modularity.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that management decision making and corporate strategy must start by questioning all prior assumptions and arguments, while focusing on simple fundamental truths.

The paper examines fundamental principles practiced by foreign‐owned transplants (e.g., Honda, Toyota, and Nissan) that have entered the automotive marketplace in the latter half of the twentieth century. They use lean production methods, while traditional industry players utilize mass production methods. The authors refer to these two production methods as “The Toyota Way” and “The Traditional Way.” Comparative analysis is conducted to identify and contrast key differences, which are examined using root cause analysis.

The paper finds that problems facing US industry could have been prevented, if companies had taken the time, and made the effort to fully understand the root causes.

Managers learn that it is beneficial to take time to properly identify and understand the root cause of any problem, no matter how large or small the problem may seem.

By turning 14 principles of lean management upside down the point is made in the paper is that one must start out questioning everything. Even changing something as simple as the order of principals examined could force a very different look at the situation. A summary of root cause analysis suggests a simple answer to the seemingly complex question: “If everyone knows what the problems are, then why isn't anyone fixing them?”

To eliminate many misconceptions regarding Six Sigma and lean management by describing each system and the key concepts and techniques that underlie their implementation. This discussion is followed by a description of what lean organizations can gain from Six Sigma and what Six Sigma organizations can gain from lean management.

Comparative study of Six Sigma and lean management using available literature, critical analysis, and knowledge and professional experience of the authors.

The joint implementation of the programs will result in a lean, Six Sigma (LSS) organization, overcoming the limitations 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 perfection.

A lean, Six Sigma (LSS) organization would capitalize on the strengths of both lean management and Six Sigma. An LSS organization would include three primary tenets of lean management, and the LSS organization would include three primary tenets of Six Sigma.

Suggestions are made regarding concepts and methods that would constitute a lean, Six Sigma organization. Figures summarize the nature of improvements that may occur in organizations that practice lean management or Six Sigma, and the corresponding improvements that an integrated program could offer.

The purpose of this paper is to identify upcoming challenges related to the implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) principles and techniques. Particular emphasis is placed on the changes needed to ensure that LSS continues to support an organization's competitiveness.

The methodology begins with a review of the projections of business experts as they relate to the practice of LSS. Then, the ASQ Six Sigma Body of Knowledge forms the basis of a reconciliation of these changes and the methods currently employed by LSS practitioners. Finally, four main modifications to standard LSS are proposed.

In total, four implications to LSS practice are defined (rigorous value definition, vigorous accounting for risk, global workforce considerations, and international regulatory concerns); specifics are offered that explain how LSS practitioners need to respond. A construct is presented illustrating how the complexity of a LSS project will be affected by the four implications.

Changes that supplement or replace LSS tools and techniques are suggested, including; a more robust methodology for value definition, expansion of the importance of risk assessment, appreciation for international regulations, and understanding how to motivate workers in various jobs, locations, and cultures. Coverage of manufacturing issues should not be sacrificed for the incorporation of these concepts.

The construct developed can be effective in a number of ways, including assisting project teams with understanding the scale of the effort needed, the key skills necessary for project team members, and the selection among a number of candidate projects.

This paper aims to presents a conceptual comparative analysis of Lean manufacturing and Six Sigma, highlighting 18 critical aspects between such approaches and their respective implications for management decision-making.

Qualitative approach based on the results obtained from literature review about Lean and Six Sigma.

The main points of divergence between Lean and Six Sigma have been highlighted based on 18 criteria. Seventeen criteria are proposed as a result of a review of the literature and one criterion, and “quality control”, is suggested by the authors.

This article mitigates the literature gap regarding whether and how Lean and Six Sigma are synergistic approaches.

This study enables decision-makers to evaluate the Lean and Six Sigma practices. The results of the analysis performed originated three observations: first, both approaches are predominantly complementary; second, it is possible to create a single model integrating both approaches studied in this research; and third, when Lean is implemented as stand-alone approach, it falls short of specific tools to leverage its full potential according to the complexity of the problem under consideration.

This paper analyzes which aspects from Lean and Six Sigma can be learnt from organizational change and productivity improvement efforts. The analysis includes a comparison of 18 critical aspects for practical use of Lean and Six Sigma.

Nowadays, firms are keen on improving the quality culture in the organizations. The proven success of Lean and Six Sigma has given rise to the synergetic Lean Six Sigma (LSS) approach that has been catching fire in the past one decade. However, there exists a gap between the understanding and implementation of LSS in the organizations, especially in the emerging economies. Taking this as a valuable opportunity, the purpose of this paper is to present a development of LSS training module.

This study starts with a literature review of LSS to reinforce the understanding of the research subject in scope of manufacturing sector. Then, an online questionnaire was designed and used to collect responses from 181 companies located in the Indian sub-continent. Subsequently, the results obtained from the survey were analyzed using COARSE approach.

This study reveals two key findings and associated contributions. First, it was found that the overall awareness of LSS within the responded manufacturing firms is about 70.4 percent. Second, there is no single standard training module that exists in any of the sampled firms to cater to their quality programs. Hence, in order to improve the LSS awareness which could subsequently help managers as a resource for creating an efficient workplace, this paper presents a structured LSS training framework.

Although this paper presents the importance of LSS and associated awareness level among the responded firms, more empirical evidence is required to generalize the model findings. Second, this study is scoped to firms that work out of the Indian sub-continent, and this provides a future opportunity to expand the scope of this research toward a global study for a comparison between emerging and developed economies. Third, this study is limited to manufacturing firms and hence paves an opportunity to research on a similar theme in services context as well.

Before embarking on an LSS journey, an organization can use the LSS training module proposed in this study to assess the employee awareness on LSS. Furthermore, organizations that already have a mature LSS practice can incorporate the LSS training module for periodic evaluation of the employees for effective change management.

The training module presented in this paper is the original contribution by the authors. This is no association to any single identifiable organization or associated funding. The direct practical implication of its application in real time is the value that managers could derive from the proposed LSS training framework.

This paper aims to identify and review the critical success factors (CSFs) for successful Six Sigma implementation in service and manufacturing companies given in published literature.

A descriptive evaluation of the literature body is followed by future research opportunities. Studies published on the topic of Six Sigma during 2005-2016 are reviewed to retrieve identified CSFs.

From published literature, 48 CSFs vital for Six Sigma implementation were identified. The identified CSFs were classified under eight core categories. As per the categorization, 35 out of 48 CSFs identified are either Company Strategy related, Six Sigma Project related or Human Resources related. Only a limited number of studies are carried out mainly focusing on the stated three core areas. Hence, it is vital that these three core areas are further explored in future research.

With the outcome of this paper, the identified CSFs for Six Sigma will be taken for further studies, where they will be applied to service and manufacturing companies based in Sri Lanka. Hence, it would provide Sri Lankan service and manufacturing companies guidelines for successful implementation of Six Sigma for future endeavors.

The purpose of this paper is to review the existing literature on Lean Six Sigma (LSS) for services, construct a morphological analysis (MA) framework and identify research gaps to point to future research possibilities and priorities.

The MA framework is based on literature review of 175 papers published from 2003 to 2015, across 67 journals recognised by Scopus or ABS Academic Journal Quality Guide 2015. A three-phased methodology is used by the authors, with Phase1 featuring a five-stage systematic review protocol to identify relevant journal papers for review; Phase2 presenting a framework for classifying the reviewed papers in terms of their fundamental, methodological, chronological and sector-wise orientations; and Phase3 constructing an MA framework on the classified papers and identifying the research gaps.

The MA framework constructed based on six dimensions, namely, organizational context of applications, desired outcomes, implementation systems, LSS tools and techniques, integration with other management philosophies and evaluation methods, involving 40 focused themes, has revealed 355 distinct research gaps as opportunities for future research.

This paper confirms the existence of substantial scope and points to specific topics for further research in the area of LSS for services. The findings demonstrate the gaps in academic research on the subject. In addition, the study also helps organisational leaders and practitioners to look at LSS from a holistic perspective in the services context.

The MA framework of the existing literature on LSS for services presents a unique, systematic effort to identify research opportunities. In addition, a five-stage systematic review protocol is proposed in this paper. This could be valuable to researchers and practitioners in enabling them to systematically review the literature on research subjects of interest to them.