英语论文怎么写 Lean Six Sigma Advantages and disadvantages of alignment

Lean thinking as a starting point

Six Sigma complements Lean philosophy by providing tools and know-how to tackle waste elimination issues (Pepper and Spedding, 2010). Furthermore, as Six Sigma focuses on the variation reduction in the process, combined with Lean application, the spotlight could then be redirected to the customer through highlighting key adding-value areas.

An adaptation from Pyzdek (Pyzdek, 2000) by Pepper and Spedding (2010) proposes that implementing Lean principles is supported by Six Sigma tools. In other words, it is suggested here that Lean philosophy is backed up by Six Sigma practical aspects. Table 1 below summarizes the most “palpable” synergies that can be seen on the work-floor.

Going further on using Six Sigma’s scientific approach to problem solving, some argue (Arnheiter and Maleyeff, 2005) that Lean thinking requires targeted data and a methodical approach to waste elimination, while, at the same time, Six Sigma should widen its approach to quality improvement by taking the whole system into consideration (i.e. waste or muda pointed out by the Lean approach).

Based on literature review, Lean approach should be used first, so as to focus on value-adding activities, reducing waste and complexity in the system. Then, Six Sigma tools and techniques will help to improve core processes with a methodical and data-based evidence approach. Paraphrasing Pepper and Spedding words: Six Sigma will be used as a powerful improvements-opportunities-leverage, while Lean provides strategic orientation as to where improvements should be implemented. This is illustrated by a personal adaptation of Pepper and Spedding (2010) proposed model (Figure 3).

Another example that justifies this approach is described by Sheridan (2000) on the BAE Systems Control plant in Fort Wayne (Ind., USA),

Lean – Six Sigma outcomes

Based on a 165 organization survey, where 17% adopted a Lean – Six Sigma management system, Debusk and Debusk (2010) provide a strong observation that advocates positive advantages of a LSS implementation.

The average savings per year after a Lean – Six Sigma implementation is $529,000 while 75% of interviewees were considering the combination of the two approaches as “very beneficial” or “beneficial”, not only as a quality outcome, but also for financial gains (costs savings, increased margin).

The survey also shows a “positive correlation between the positive effects and the length of use, as well as between benefits realized and the extensiveness of the deployment” throughout the business. Therefore, it can be said that LSS is a long-term – sustainable performance improvement approach. This idea can also be found in Sharma’s (2003) work on a battery manufacturing company, insisting on the resulting synergy of LSS.

Three major benefits of Lean – Six Sigma are described as following (Arnheiter and Maleyeff, 2005)

Incorporation of an overriding philosophy that seeks to maximize the value-added content of all operations, backed up through training and education with defined leaders.

Constant evaluation of systems to ensure a global optimization (and not only local) combined with variation reduction within the process.

Management decision-making that bases decision on relative impact on the customer stressed by data-driven methodologies.

Criticism exists about the outcome and positive effects of Lean – Six Sigma implementation among the literature as well. A company adopting both integrated practices will see itself engaged in too many time- and resources consuming projects, that don’t necessarily provide sufficient results (Spector and West, 2006). The complexity of Six Sigma concepts is pointed out to be responsible for the incompatibility of the two approaches (Mika, 2006).

A Lean – Six Sigma could easily fall under the domination of immediate costs saving, rather than focusing on customer experience. Indeed, even if it is mentioned in both theories, in practice, the necessity of rapid cash results is predominant (Bendell, 2006) due to a lack of a policy deployment.

Lean – Six Sigma in the pharmaceutical R&D

Experts (academics and practitioners) disagree on the validity in applying Lean Sigma in the R&D department. Some argue that such an approach “would kill creativity” and is “inconsistent with all but incremental innovation and change” (Carleysmith et al. 2009).

On the other hand, authors like Calabrese or DePalma (cited in Carleysmith et al. 2009) defend Lean – Six Sigma of “having a positive impact” (on the drug development process) or that it “doesn’t inhibit creativity but rather frees creativity for more productive work”.

A successful example of LSS application in the R&D is the UK pharmaceutical company GSK (GlaxoSmithKline) where three major achievements significantly proved the beneficial use of the combination of both theories (Carleysmith et al. 2009)

Process harmonization through reduced waste and inefficiency

Increased productivity by greater focus on value-adding activities

Improved experimental variability and efficiency

Lean – Six Sigma in the public sector

Very little work has been done in assessing the potential of LSS in the service / public sector. Kumar and Bauder (2010) take the example of the Dakota County Community Development Agency that implemented an improvement project using most of Lean and Six Sigma tools and techniques. As a result, the lead time of a tenant’s file re-examination has been reduced by 80%, allowing a cycle time falling from 90 days to just more than 30.

Another report in the NHS (Proudlove, Moxham & Boaden, 2008) describes an LSS implementation but argues that most of processes should rather be redesigned before introducing such techniques.

There is therefore no theoretical evidence that Lean and Six Sigma cannot be used in the Public sector. But public organizations should be aware of their unique characteristics, such as rules and regulations, the organizational structure, the election cycle and more importantly, their focus.

discussion

It has appeared quite evidently that Lean – Six Sigma is a powerful weapon for companies, based on the theoretical point of view, as well as taking practical successful examples. Even if, taken separately, both of them suffer from some flaws in their application, one has proved that when combined, one strategy would subdue the other’s weaknesses. Thus, companies would be able to act at the same time on their process flow, cleared out from ineffective and non-relevant activities while those remaining would see their variation (and in fine their quality output) improved. Not to mention that LSS incorporate a top-down approach concerning training and direction while using bottom-up experience and support.

This paper therefore is strongly in favour of an LSS application following Pepper and Spedding (2010) proposed model: Lean narrows down the focus on vital value-adding activities that Six Sigma then improves using statistical control. In this case, KPIs (Key Performance Objectives) are limited but relevant, and easier to identify, record and control.

However, the ideal theoretical situation is subject to some reserves. The very first one is the high complexity of integrating both philosophies at once on existing processes and culture. Therefore, bringing in too much change and novelty incurs the risk of greatly perturbing the production process, adding to that a decline in staff motivation. Hence, long-term management commitment is imperative. Executives and managers have to stand back and try to adapt best practices that suit their organizations. The danger could be that “a la carte” Lean – Six Sigma only targeting convenient problems, meaning that root causes of change would be ignored, leading to an unsatisfactory experience.

The second critic of Lean – Six Sigma is that it could result in a management headache to coordinate too many projects at the same time, worsen by a different focus rubbing off both distinguished theories. Most of what has been investigated suggests that one theory is applied first and then the second one is introduced.

Finally, one would be more or less legitimated to say that Lean – Six Sigma doesn’t provide any complementary tools or techniques, neither another approach to performance improvement projects, as only combining two theories, without a clear framework of application.

conclusion

It is quite evident that Lean – Six Sigma would theoretically work, enabling companies to tackle root causes of quality issues and customer dissatisfaction, as well as high costs and inefficiency. Nevertheless, this strategy is mostly based on the combination of two other approaches. As organizations are already struggling to succeed in implementing Lean or Six Sigma as the theory explains it, Lean – Six Sigma seems all the more a biggest challenge. This paper therefore advocates for a need of clarification on a “how-to” guide for LSS implementation, integrating both approaches and not just adding them together.

英语论文怎么写 Lean Six Sigma Advantages and disadvantages of alignment