Search results

Concurrent designing of products, processes and supply chains (three‐dimensional concurrent engineering (3‐DCE)) has proved to be beneficial in rendering holistic, market‐responsive architecture to organizations through linkages created by dynamic capability development and innovation. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the promises of 3‐DCE in synthesizing and sustaining critical success factors (CSFs) for organizations, and also to underpin the existing gap between its offerings in devising the CSFs and the “real solutions” essential in a dynamic system's perspective.

The paper adopts an intermediary approach combining both explanatory and exploratory researches. The conceptual framework of the paper is based on a matrix for organizational mapping of textile, clothing and fashion (TCF) firms prepared through content analysis. This is followed by an extensive semi‐structured survey. The selection of firms was based on contacting TEKO and Europages. Usable responses were obtained from 42 firms for detailed analysis, making the response rate around 15 percent.

The results were manifold. It showed that most of the key success factors are synthesized and sustained through 3‐DCE designing. The paper also highlights the necessity of incorporating intangible value propositions of culture, leadership and governance, knowledge, image and relationship into the 3‐DCE model to generate an “extended 3‐DCE” framework for mediating operational performance and hence organizational success. Such a model required in a dynamic environment is argued to show a fit to represent a design for resilience perspective, requiring further research.

First, the selection of sample size of organizations was small and arguments regarding its representation of the Swedish TCF firms' population could be raised. So the claims and propositions of the paper cannot be widely generalized. Second, the responses to the survey were based on judgments of the company top management and could vary if intra‐organizational responses were considered.

The findings from the paper can be beneficial for organizations to understand the key areas in which to invest and how to invest their resources and time, as CSF identification is largely qualitative and can result in differing opinions in pinpointing them. It is thus recommended to synthesize or identify them from the 3‐DCE perspective.

The paper is original in realizing how 3‐DCE can be instrumental in devising CSFs in organizations and also what factors needs to be incorporated into its “extended” framework to match the requirements for organizations in a dynamic environment.

During the last decades, different quality management concepts, including total quality management (TQM), six sigma and lean, have been applied by many different organisations. Although much important work has been documented regarding TQM, six sigma and lean, a number of questions remain concerning the applicability of these concepts in various organisations and contexts. Hence, the purpose of this paper is to describe the similarities and differences between the concepts, including an evaluation and criticism of each concept.

Within a case study, a literature review and face‐to‐face interviews in typical TQM, six sigma and lean organisations have been carried out.

While TQM, six sigma and lean have many similarities, especially concerning origin, methodologies, tools and effects, they differ in some areas, in particular concerning the main theory, approach and the main criticism. The lean concept is slightly different from TQM and six sigma. However, there is a lot to gain if organisations are able to combine these three concepts, as they are complementary. Six sigma and lean are excellent road‐maps, which could be used one by one or combined, together with the values in TQM.

The paper provides guidance to organisations regarding the applicability and properties of quality concepts. Organisations need to work continuously with customer‐orientated activities in order to survive; irrespective of how these activities are labelled. The paper will also serve as a basis for further research in this area, focusing on practical experience of these concepts.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the effectiveness of Six Sigma as an innovation tool in management system. In this regard, the comprehensive impact of Six Sigma is provided based on Osada's management system model in terms of driver, enabler, and performance. Then, the causal relationship diagram is drawn among critical success factors to show how Six Sigma innovates the management system. Finally, the comparison between Six Sigma and total quality management (TQM) is discussed to reveal the strength of Six Sigma as an innovation tool in management system.

An empirical study of world‐class companies was undertaken. Several of the companies were analyzed intensively namely Sony and Du Pont by interviewing and circulating questionnaires to the key actors of Six Sigma.

The paper confirms that Six Sigma has a positive and comprehensive impact on changing the management system. Six Sigma has been harmonizing and synergizing people and processes by establishing a clear linkage among critical factors. This linkage, as a critical strength in innovation, is described by a causal relationships diagram using the system dynamics principle. By comparing with TQM, this paper has identified that Six Sigma has additional features named as disseminating commitment and sustaining spirit.

The findings suggest that Six Sigma can potentially be used as an innovation tool for leveraging organizational performance. This paper provides a comprehensive perspective on how Six Sigma should be perceived and implemented to gain maximum potential. Hence, this paper is expected to provide a significant contribution to academia and practitioners in understanding the application of Six Sigma.

The paper analyzes the impact of Six Sigma in a more organized approach than previous report. This approach categorizes the impact based on driver, enabler, and performance through an empirical study. Additionally, the relationship diagram and the comparison between Six Sigma and TQM are established in this paper. It is believed that such study is rarely published in academic journals.