The purpose of this study is to examine if there is a difference between service-sector Lean Six Sigma (LSS) project teams that progress through Tuckman’s group development model…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to examine if there is a difference between service-sector Lean Six Sigma (LSS) project teams that progress through Tuckman’s group development model and those that do not in terms of the number of completed projects, the number of projects completed on time, the length of time to complete the projects and the total cost savings and avoidance because of the projects.
Design/methodology/approach
The research consisted of a quantitative, descriptive methodology. The design included a sample from a service-sector LSS practitioner population, a survey instrument, one independent construct with two levels, four dependent constructs and a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA).
Findings
The progression of service-sector LSS teams through Tuckman’s group development model, as measured with the group process questionnaire, significantly influences the teams in terms of the number of completed projects, the number of projects completed on time, the length of time to complete the projects and the total cost savings and avoidance because of the projects.
Research limitations/implications
A limitation of the study is there may be other factors not related to Tuckman’s group development model that can influence the outcomes of LSS projects. These variables may include senior executive buy-in, number of LSS practitioners in the organization, the robustness of LSS training programs, level of talent and other factors not related to Tuckman’s group development model. Another limitation of the study encompassed using a sample of convenience instead of a random sample.
Practical implications
The recommendation for practice is binate. First, service-sector LSS project teams should ensure they progress through the stages of Tuckman’s group development model to enjoy the significantly improved project outcomes. Second, LSS practitioners and trainers should ensure that Tuckman’s group development model is part of the training curriculum.
Social implications
The study demonstrates that all groups should attempt to progress through the stages of Tuckman and Jensen (2010) group development model to enjoy the benefits of working in a cohesive, task-focused team.
Originality/value
This study adds to the body of knowledge because, prior to this study, there was not prior research involving Tuckman’s group development model and LSS team outcomes.
Details
Keywords
This paper aims to explore some initial and necessarily broad ideas about the effects of the world wide web on our methods of understanding and trusting, online and off.
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to explore some initial and necessarily broad ideas about the effects of the world wide web on our methods of understanding and trusting, online and off.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper considers the idea of trust via some of the revolutionary meanings inherent in the world wide web at its public conception in 1994, and some of its different meanings now. It does so in the context of the collaborative reader‐writer Web2.0 (of today), and also through a brief exploration of our relationship to the grand narratives (and some histories) of the post‐war West. It uses a variety of formal approaches taken from information science, literary criticism, philosophy, history, and journalism studies – together with some practical analysis based on 15 years as a web practitioner and content creator. It is a starting point.
Findings
This paper suggests that a pronounced effect of the world wide web is the further atomising of many once‐shared Western post‐war narratives, and the global democratising of doubt as a powerful though not necessarily helpful epistemological tool. The world wide web is the place that most actively demonstrates contemporary doubt.
Research limitations/implications
This is the starting place for a piece of larger cross‐faculty (and cross‐platform) research into the arena of trust and doubt. In particular, the relationship of concepts such as news, event, history and myth with the myriad content platforms of new media, the idea of the digital consumer, and the impact of geography on knowledge that is enshrined in the virtual. This paper attempts to frame a few of the initial issues inherent in the idea of “trust” in the digital age and argues that without some kind of shared aesthetics of narrative judgment brought about through a far broader public understanding of (rather than an interpretation of) oral, visual, literary and multi‐media narratives, stories and plots, we cannot be said to trust many types of knowledge – not just in philosophical terms but also in our daily actions and behaviours.
Originality/value
This paper initiates debate about whether the creation of a new academic “space” in which cross‐faculty collaborations into the nature of modern narrative (in terms of production and consumption; producers and consumers) might be able to help us to understand more of the social implications of the collaborative content produced for consumption on the world wide web.