Search results

This paper gives the background to the ISO 18404:2015 standard and explains its rationale. It aims to correct misconceptions and erroneous statements about the standard appearing in the paper by Antony et al. (2021) and to demonstrate the usefulness of the standard in a wide range of application sectors.

A review of recently reported misconceptions and erroneous statements is presented and clarifications are provided. A qualitative interview approach was utilised to obtain the views of leading academics and practitioners familiar with Six Sigma and Lean in a range of sectors and from different parts of the world. This includes the results of a survey for capturing expectations and requirements for the next ISO18404 version.

Clarifications were needed to correct some misconceptions and erroneous statements in recently published work. However, on review, the reports of the interviews in Antony et al. (2021) indicate that most Lean Six Sigma professionals have positive experiences with ISO 18404:2015 and see the advantages of a common standard in helping continuous improvement deployment. Possible causes of some reported negative results are already scheduled to be addressed in the forthcoming review of ISO 18404:2015.

A very real constraint when conducting research into ISO 18404:2015 is to obtain a balanced view of the standard from those who have a vested interest in its continuation and evolution, or not. Whilst the authors cannot claim to be any more objective than Antony et al.’s (2021) authors and commentators, they are, in contrast to that group, highly knowledgeable about the reality of the standard, rather than speculating in ignorance.

A very real constraint when conducting research into ISO 18404:2015 is to obtain a balanced view of the standard which is balanced with respect from those who have a vested interest in its continuation and evolution, or not. Whilst the current authors cannot claim to be any more objective than previous authors, Antony et al.’s (2021) authors and commentators, they are, in contrast to that group, highly knowledgeable about the reality of the standard, rather than speculating in ignorance.

The paper gives a clear description of the ISO standard development process and provides a resource for people to obtain insight into the value or non-value add of a standard in Six Sigma and Lean, and the appropriate details of such a standard. These results can form the basis of a case for the implementation of the standard for those organisations currently trying to decide whether or not to implement it.

The international quality systems standard ISO 9000 is changing. Whilst much maligned, the standard has still done much to ensure basic quality requirements in world industry, commerce and the public sector. In November ISO 9001 is changing – dramatically – and ISO 9002 will no longer exist. This is probably the most substantial change in its history. In one major leap the international standard will come up to date with modern development in quality thinking. Quality assurance will never be quite the same again!The new version of ISO 9001 places emphasis on process management and resource management and has commonality of architecture with ISO 9004, so that quality assurance requirements and quality management aspirations can be aligned holistically. The standard will be reduced from a 20‐clause standard to a four‐clause standard. Further, it will be more holistic, more customer orientated and have more in common with other quality and excellence models. It is a good development, but it will mean changes, and the sooner organisations start to understand the new requirements, the readier they will be for avoiding the pitfalls!What, though, are the implications for organisational excellence? This paper discusses how the changes may assist the development of a holistic approach to excellence, but also the remaining areas of difficulty.

This paper gives the background to the ISO 18404:2015 standard and explains its rationale. It aims to rebut the Oudrhiri et al. (2022) paper. Furthermore, this paper adds further evidence of the misplacement and unfitness for use of the standard, as evidenced in the previous work by Antony et al. (2021, 2022).

A point-counterpoint methods approach with a literature review of studies available on ISO 18404:2015 to respond to the Oudrhiri et al. (2022) study.

The findings indicate that Oudrhiri et al.'s (2022) work is not open minded in relation to ISO18404. Each point raised in the Oudrhiri et al. (2020) study has been answered and counter argued.

Other than Antony et al.'s three studies (2021 and 2022) and Oudrhiri et al.’s (2022) study empirical studies looking into the impact of the ISO 18404 standard in the literature were limited. As the literature has shown, many companies are not utilising the standard given its current format; hence, a lack of information relating to the practical implementation is sparse.

The findings indicate that Oudrhiri et al.'s (2022) work can be answered and counter argued.

This study consolidates and strengthens the findings from the three studies by Antony et al. (2021 and 2022) and acts as a rebuttal to the Oudrhiri et al. (2022) study.

The purpose of the paper is to review and compare six sigma and the lean organisation approaches to process improvement. The basis for combination and compatibility is evaluated and a holistic approach proposed.

The examination is based on the author's extensive practical consulting and training experience with diverse six sigma, lean and business process improvement programmes in numerous companies across Europe and worldwide, as well as theoretical development of his previous published work.

The paper contends that the current literature on the compatibility and combination of six sigma and lean is limited and disappointing when examined for a common model, theoretical compatibility or mutual content or method, but that they can be effectively combined into one system.

The study is experience‐based and not supported by a specific‐quantitative investigation.

Companies pursuing six sigma and lean implementation programmes need to carefully examine how the proposed initiatives relate to each other and other initiatives before fully committing, or at least to review the programme, to enable sensible programme design and management.

This paper focuses on six sigma and lean programmes in practice, rather than the theoretical basis or motivationally based argument.

The ISO 9000 standard has been revised as of December 2000. It has been thought that the implications of addressing the changes may be particularly acute for small businesses, for which the impact of requirements and relative commercial costs of compliance can be greatest. In view of this, the Quality Research Group at the University of Leicester in collaboration with the Centre for Enterprise has conducted a research project with representatives from major internationally accredited UKAS certification bodies to explore the implications that the revision to ISO 9000 is likely to have on the small business community. This current paper reports on the study undertaken by the University of Leicester team with financial and collaborative support from Lloyds Register Quality Assurance and SGS Yarsley, two of the largest international ISO 9000 certification bodies. A detailed survey involving more than 1,000 respondents from UK‐based SMEs has provided a detailed empirical profile of the company’s own views of the value of ISO 9000:2000 on the path to excellence and what they will need to do to make it work. Face‐to‐face interviews were also used to provided verification and views from non‐certified companies. The results of the study are very positive and indicate a changing view and use of a standard that used to be seen as bureaucratic, officious and complacent.

This paper aims to present and summarise the arguments for and against the ISO 18404 standard and the perceived advantages and disadvantages of implementing it.

A qualitative interview approach was utilised by interviewing a panel of leading academics and practitioners familiar with Lean Six Sigma.

The results indicate that Lean Six Sigma professionals have conflicting opinions on ISO 18404. An overwhelming majority of the panel questioned the “quality” of the standard and whether it is “fit for purpose”, while others see the advantages of a common standard in helping continuous improvement deployment.

As the standard has not been widely adopted, there were limited examples on ISO 18404 discussion in the literature. Much of the current literature focuses on the theoretical application of the standard, with sparse practical examples providing case study deployment. Also, the interviews were short and at a high level. There is an opportunity for further study and analysis. It was difficult to find qualified interviewees who were familiar with the standard. A very real constraint when conducting research into ISO 18404 is to obtain a balanced view of the standard from those who have a vested interest in its continuation and evolution, or not.

The paper provides a resource for people to obtain insight into the value or non-value add of a standard in Lean Six Sigma and the appropriate details of such a standard. These results can form the basis of a case for the implementation of the standard for those organisations currently trying to decide whether to implement it or not.

The purpose of this paper is to assess whether the implementation of a total quality management (TQM) approach positively affects the financial performance of European companies. This paper tests whether North American results showing the relative out‐performance of companies that have successfully implemented TQM approaches are replicated in Europe.

This research uses the same methodology as the seminal work of Hendricks and Singhal. The winning of a Quality Award is used as a proxy for the sound implementation of TQM. Publicly available share price and accounting data is analysed over a ten year period. Changes in the performance of award winning companies relative to non‐award winning companies are tested using a matched‐pair comparison approach.

The results confirm that, despite evident and marked differences in company structures and institutional environments between North America and Europe, stronger performance is again achieved by the TQM‐oriented award winning companies.

There is little empirical research establishing the link between TQM and improved financial performance within Europe, with most existing studies presenting findings only based on perception data. The findings presented in this paper close some of the limitations of previous European studies and use rigorous research methods to estimate the financial and business impact of TQM on company performance in Europe. Furthermore, extending Hendricks and Singhal's seminal study to include Europe, has been an objective of those in the European TQM practitioner community ever since the early results were published.

Discusses the major contributions of various quality gurus. Highlights the main messages and how principles which originally focused on the product can now be applied to services. Draws attention to the competitive importance of quality and concludes that business survival depends on quality.

The paper aims to investigate the pros and cons of having a standard for lean six sigma developed in 2015. The study follows up on a previous study by Antony et al. (2021) in more depth and aims to provide a more detailed investigation of various aspects of the standard.

A sequential mixed methodology was utilised by interviewing a panel of leading academics and practitioners familiar with lean six sigma followed by distributing a survey questionnaire to continuous improvement and operational excellence (OPEX) personnel.

The findings indicate that continuous improvement and OPEX professionals have conflicting views of International Standards Organisation (ISO) 18404. A majority of the participants of the qualitative study suggested, whilst supporting the requirement for a lean sigma standard, voiced concerns about the auditability of the standard and whether it is currently “fit for purpose” and proposed that it needs to be revised. Within the quantitative survey, 42% had never heard of the standard, and of the 58% who had heard of it, 90% had read it. Just 10% stated that they had or would apply the standard within their organisations. Just fewer than 50% felt that the standard was fit for purpose which suggests for further refinements of the standard in the future. Finally, 85% of respondents of the quantitative survey suggested for the revision of the standard whilst just 15% felt it should be removed.

Other than a previous study by Antony et al. (2021), implementation of ISO 18404 in organisations and its benefits as well as empirical study looking into the impact of the standard on corporate performance in the literature were limited. An opportunity to review lessons learnt from a case study on the ISO 18404 standard implementation within an organisation would further enhance the research.

The paper provides a valuable resource for organisations to obtain insight into a standard in lean six sigma and whether to implement it or not. Furthermore, the results can form the basis of a case for the future revision of the standard by consolidating and strengthening the findings from the first study with more detailed quantitative and qualitative study.

ISO 18404:2015 standard defines the proficiencies to the attainment of distinct competency levels with either Lean Manufacturing or Six Sigma or separately combined strategy Lean Six Sigma (LSS). The purpose of this paper is to perform a detailed investigation of the applicability of current LSS competency standard in SMEs and examine the need for further improvement.

A qualitative-based semi-structured interview method was utilized globally by interviewing a group of LSS professionals with knowledge about the LSS implementation working in different leading organizations. All participants were asked to review the standard before the interview process to ensure that they are familiar with the standard.

The results reveal that the current ISO 18404:2015 standard does not fit SMEs to implement the LSS approach as it has several shortfalls that need to be fixed before its adoption or an urgent need to develop a more customized LSS standard for SMEs. The outcome further helps organizations understand theoretical knowledge about ISO 18404:2015, its role in operational excellence implementation, pros, cons, critical success factors and required changes for further improvement within the standard.

There were very limited baseline studies in the literature. A mixed method strategy that includes qualitative and quantitative data would yield better data so that more robust outcomes can be derived from the research.

To the best of authors' knowledge, this is the first empirical research on the applicability of ISO 18404:2015 for SMEs, which encapsulate opinions of LSS professionals working in several SMEs.