18 comparative aspects between Lean and Six Sigma

Abstract

Purpose – 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. Design/methodology/approach – Qualitative approach based on the results obtained from literature review about Lean and Six Sigma. Findings – 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. Research limitations/implications – This article mitigates the literature gap regarding whether and how Lean and Six Sigma are synergistic approaches. Practical implications – 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. Originality/value – 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.

A new Lean Six Sigma framework for improving competitiveness

“…It was demonstrated that proposed LSS leads a company to competitiveness. It presents an organizational structure dedicated to the methodology (Shokri et al, 2016), which selects projects whose portfolios align with strategic planning (Hu et al, 2008). This selection is undergirded by risk assessment and stakeholder involvement.…”

“…Although the reviewed studies applied LSS, their practical validity should be assessed in terms of lessons learned (Näslund, 2008). The results should be disseminated to the other business unit (Shokri et al, 2016).…”

“…Accordingly, some enterprises that had adopted LM or SSdriven methodologies have elected to use both (Snee, 2010). Other adopters of LM or SS have sought to enhance their methodologies by incorporating elements of the other (Pacheco, Pergher, Vaccaro, & Jung, 2015). Such combination, LM and SS, known as LSS, may yield better results than the use of two parallel methods independently (Nicoletti, 2013).…”

“…A key to innovation is the application of methodologies aimed at improving manufacturing, as well as processes such as lean manufacturing focusses on reduction of lead time and six sigma a well-established approach that looking for eliminate defects, which complement each other as Lean Six Sigma (LSS) (Godinho Filho & Utiyama, 2016). The combination of LSS is beneficial because it compensates for limitations in their components (Shokri, Shirley, & Nabhani, 2016). In addition, it is important for practitioners to be aware of LSS implementation processes, in view of limitations and impeding characteristics such as motivation (Albliwi, Antony, & Lim, 2015;Freitas & Costa, 2017).…”

New Paradigm of Lean Six Sigma in the 4th Industrial Revolution Era

“…However, if we compare both initiatives, we can find the clear differences as shown in Table 1 below. Good references to compare Six Sigma with Lean production are Dahlgaard and Dahlgaard-Park (2006), Andersson, Eriksson and Torstensson (2006), Arnheiter and Maleyeff (2005), Bendell (2006), Nave (2002) and Pacheco et al (2015). Those references also show a detailed and historical analysis of Six Sigma, Lean production and Total Quality Management combined with a focus on the human factor and the needed corporate culture.…”