The following paper is a review and
summation of scholarly material in relation to Six Sigma. This paper will
examine theoretical and methodological finding to include critical points and
current knowledge available within academic literature. This appraisal of
literature is not all-inclusive, but is a general overview of Six Sigma. This
Literature review was a synopsis of fifteen peer reviewed journal articles
written on the subject of Six Sigma, by various authors. The purpose of this
literature review is to securitizes and evaluate academic works for knowledge
related to Six Sigma. This review of literature will examine academic writings
in the context of, Six Sigma assertions of organizational transformation in
relation to business improvement processes and validity of such claims
according to the literature. The findings that were reached from this
literature review demonstrated that Six Sigma lacked actual scientific research
and rigor to demonstrate effectiveness of it implementation. Six Sigma is the
first of its kind to use the scientific process to effect organizational
change. The actual quality of this organizational model is yet to be
demonstrated through science. The fact that is has been used and praised for
the past twenty years by business organizations worldwide demonstrates the need
for further research into this organizational model of excellence. Six Sigma
was created in the business world not academia. For this reason the organizational
change created by Six Sigma has lack the rigors of scientific research
conducted by academia. With the continued interest of major companies around
the world, it would be beneficial for academia to take a further look into the
incorporation of Six Sigma into education and research practices. The
traditional approach to business is not always sustainable in today’s economy.
Six Sigma has made an impact on the world of business in the past twenty years,
if proven with scientific evidence or not. The question remains is Six Sigma
still sustainable in the business world today.
Theoretical review of literature a
overview of Six Sigma
With
a vastly growing competition and globalization of the world market, the need
for efficiency in business is greater than ever before. Businesses are required
to perform with speed, flexibility, adaptability and ease in an ever-changing
market place (Thawani, 2004). The demand for low cost, high quality products is
the driving force behind the business world.
The current Businesses challenge is to work with scarcer resources,
while producing safely, high quality products in a expedite manner, and
continuously maintaining optimal customer satisfaction (Vest & Gamm, 2009).
Businesses have no choice but to adapt to a customer driven economic force to
ensure survival of the organization.
Traditional business strategies are proving to
be ineffective in meeting current business trends (Tsoukas & Chia, 2002).
Businesses are searching for transformational strategies for improving quality,
process, performance and outcomes (Lanham, 2003). One approach that is leading
in the business world to improve efficiency by reducing process variation,
improving quality, and cutting cost is Six Sigma (Morris, 2013). Six Sigma is a
feasible model that has proven to be adaptable to different business
organizations (Lanham, 2003). This standardized approach appeals to many
organizations, because it uses scientific objectivity and statistical methods
to identify and analyze process inside an organization to promote quality and
efficiency (Lanham, 2003).
The
following paper is a review and summation of scholarly material in relation to
Six Sigma. This paper will examine theoretical and methodological finding to
include critical points and current knowledge available within academic
literature. This summary of literature is not all-inclusive, but is a general
overview of Six -Sigma. The purpose of
this literature review is to securitizes and evaluate academic works for knowledge
related to Six- Sigma. This review of literature will examine academic writings
in the context of, Six- Sigma assertions of organizational transformation in
relation to business improvement processes and validity of such claims
according to the literature.
Background
In
1987, when working for Motorola, Michel Harry created a quality enhancement
method, using statistical techniques to improve processes within an
organization, reduce business cycles, while improving quality, and cutting cost
(LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). Harry believed that the only way to make beneficial change in a company was to
alter how people behave at work. This behavior change was accomplished through
the evaluation and restructuring of work processes to decrease human error and
improve productivity. Out of this
initiative Six Sigma was born.
In
ten years, the net worth of Motorola increased by ten million dollars after the
implementation of Six Sigma process improvements (LLorens – Montes &
Molina, 2006). Other companies quickly caught on to this new business trend.
Samsung reported to save forty million dollars within six months after the
implementation of Six Sigma (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). Six Sigma
quickly caught on in Asia and Europe reporting the same organizational
transformation and profit gains (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). The Six
Sigma approach was a promising new program to transform companies by limiting
defective performance to increase profits.
This
was a historical unique approach to management theory (LLorens – Montes &
Molina, 2006). The strategy gave organizations a scientific method in which to
improve performance, quality and the efficiency of their businesses. The
approach challenged businesses to revise antiquated practice and take
accountability for process within a company, that needed altered to improve
efficiency. The theory was one of the first to evaluate how organizations and
people operate together to increase performance (LLorens – Montes & Molina,
2006). Six Sigma processes looked at the current systems in place, not the
employee as the reason for lack of proficiency and error (Lanham, 2003). This
process improvement changed how business practice throughout the world. Over twenty-five percent of fortune five
hundred companies currently have high functioning Six Sigma programs in place
(Thawani, 2004). Six Sigma has demonstrated effectiveness to improve process
control in both manufacturing and non-manufacturing business (Thawani, 2004).
Research has demonstrated over the last twenty years that by implementing the
Six Sigma model into organizational practices, companies can see dramatic
changes in decreased cost, increase profit, increased process efficiency and
customer loyalty (Psychogios & Tsironis, 2012).
Conceptual
framework
What
is Six Sigma? Six Sigma calculates the performance capabilities of existing
systems or processes using a structured methodology approach to problem
solving, defined by the customers classification of what is a defect (Lanham,
2003). Six Sigma focus is on improving efficiency through managing internal
processes (Lanham, 2003). The focus is
on removing defects, errors, variation with an emphasis on standardization
(Lanham, 2003). The object of Six Sigma is to have a product production level
with only 3.4 defects for every 1million products or services produced (Morris,
3013). Six Sigma is a statistical focused method to improve value of a product
or service, through removing flaws and their causes in business process
activities (Thawani, 2004).
The
model of Six Sigma is a data driven business approach determined by the
customer’s needs (Lanham, 2003). Date collected through surveys, data mining,
and research determines what process change the company focuses on (Chang, Yen,
Chou, Wu and Lee, 2012). Six Sigma concentrates on the factors important to the
customer (Lanham, 2003). Through improved quality and responsiveness, increased
profit is generated for the organization.
Six
Sigma is a collaborative team approach. Team members are inundated in the Six Sigma
model and it becomes part of the culture (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006).
Each team only works on one process improvement at a time (LLorens – Montes
& Molina, 2006). Teams are formed from individual with functional knowledge
of the process being reviewed (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). Six Sigma
participation requires continual learning and mentoring of the team members, by
more advanced members of the Six Sigma teams (LLorens – Montes & Molina,
2006). Continual training is vital to the success of the Six Sigma team members
(LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006).
The
participation in Six Sigma requires that the company and Six Sigma team define
what questions and intended results are to be the goals at the beginning of the
process (Polk, 2011). The first step of Six Sigma is to define what service,
product; process needs to be revised (Polk, 2011). The next step is to
calculate the performance of the object selected (Polk, 2011). Then the Six
Sigma group is to analyze possible reasons for flaws and come up with best
practice to eliminate weakness (Polk, 2011). Then the designated work group is
to design a corrective action (Polk, 2011). Finally, the new process is to be
measured using statistical analysis, to evaluate effectiveness (Polk, 2011).
Then the company will monitor all implemented projects for continued use and
effectiveness (Murphree, Vath, & Daigle, 2011). Continuous monitoring of
employees is necessary to ensure changes in process become part of the
companies culture (Lanham, 2003).
Six
Sigma has three principals of organizational design change for transformational
process improvement within a company. The model of Six Sigma is a philosophical
management approach (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006).The first and central
purpose of this model is the customer (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006).
Mangers most pertinent objective is to meet and exceed customers’ expectations
(LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). Leadership’s primary goal is to increase
customer satisfaction above the competitors (LLorens – Montes & Molina,
2006). Improvements implemented by the
Six Sigma model are defined by the impact they have on the customer (LLorens –
Montes & Molina, 2006).
The
second principal of Six Sigma is process improvement or new design development
(LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). The primary objective of this principle
is for the Six Sigma team to identify process improvements that have the
greatest impact on customer satisfaction (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006).
This is done through data mining, surveys, studying customer purchase decisions
and data warehouses (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). This is also when
core process both technical and administrative, within the organization are
identified for improvement and redesign (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006).
The Six Sigma teams develop better ways to carry out organizational process
identified to be insufficient (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006).
The
third principal of Six Sigma is collaboration and teamwork (LLorens – Montes
& Molina, 2006). The model of Six Sigma requires organizations to step
beyond traditional organizational design boundaries to a more global approach
to identifying and fixing process problems (LLorens – Montes & Molina,
2006). A collaboration between, customers, employees, suppliers and management
is needed to optimize organizational process for maximum efficiency (LLorens –
Montes & Molina, 2006). Leadership is responsible for setting up problem
solving teams for each individual process change that needs to be initiated
(LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). The Six Sigma team members then create
and take responsibility for the process changes necessary for organizational
efficiency and human error reduction (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006).
Companies
need for process improvement
Companies
are facing increase pressure from customers, governments and feeling social
responsibility to increase the quality of the products they provide. This
paradigm shift of organizational responsibility is necessary to protect the
public and the world we live in. High
performance is necessary when you look at the data as to why ninety-nine
percent quality is no longer good enough (Thawani, 2004). Example given in the
review of literature, is at ninety –nine percent effectiveness at least two
hundred thousand wrong drug prescriptions are filled each year, five thousand
wrong surgical procedures each week, everyone would have unsafe drinking water
for fifteen minutes a day, and fifty babies would be dropped each day (Thawani,
2004).
The
health care industry has also demonstrated that the execution of Six Sigma is
not just necessary for increased profits but, to practice business ethically as
well (Kells & Kells, 2012). A Harvard medical study concluded that 98,000
deaths happen annually due to medical errors and even more result in some type
of disability (Kells & Kells, 2012). The health care industry error rate is
considerably higher than any other industry in the United States (Kells &
Kells). If there was ever an industry that needed a zero rate of deficiency
health care is the one (Kells & Kells). Research has concluded that most of
these medical errors were preventable (Kells & Kells). In the United
States, people gamble more with their health then they do with their money
(Shutt, 2003). People should demand the same quality they receive from their
automaker as their health care professional (Shutt, 2003).
The
use of Six Sigma in health care has demonstrated a decrease in errors and
improved outcomes for patients (Shutt, 2003). Health care is becoming increasingly
complex. A scientific model is necessary to control the rate of error and
deviation from the norm, Six Sigma has demonstrated the ability to fill this
gap (Shutt, 2003). Six Sigma is a safety net for health care organizations.
(Betbeze, 2012).The stakeholder of the health care system is everyone in the
United States. The demand for quality health care is a major focus of 21 first
century medicine (Kells & Kells).
Leading companies in the health industry have emulated
one unexpected company, Fed Ex (Betbez, 2012). The leaders in the health care
industry in a Denver hospital came to realize, Fed Ex knew more about packages
then they knew about their patients (Betbez, 2012). Stakeholders are demanding
that health care industries become more efficient. The consumers of health care
are demanding a higher quality product at a cheaper price (Betbez, 2012). By
borrowing ideas from other business organizations, Denver hospitals are
improving the quality of health care (Betbez, 2012). Denver hospital believes
Six Sigma is the path to excellence; they need to meet the demands of the
modern consumer (Betbez, 2012).
Denver
hospital was able to decrease medical errors by 75 % and increase profits by
119 million dollars, in six years after the employment of Six Sigma into their
health care organization (Betbez, 2012). These results were achieved without
layoffs or decrease in patient services (Betbez, 2012). Six Sigma is a scientific
methodology that can be implemented into healthcare organizations with quick
results (Betbez, 2012). Examining, revising and standardizing human behavior in
the health care field is difficult but achievable with Six Sigma. This
methodology is clearly beneficial to the patient (Betbez, 2012). Six Sigma is
the future of health care; it is a business model that allows the culture of
the organization to be change through measurable goal attainment (Betbez,
2012).
Six
Sigma has helped engage employees in their company and have stake in the
product produce (Morris, 2013). Gaining employee commitment to internal
organizational changes is critical to the success of any Six Sigma project
(Lanham, 2003). Through the collaborative
team approach, this is accomplished. Collaboration also helps in changing the
organizational atmosphere to one of trust and teamwork (Morris, 2013). Six
Sigma teams are a source of learning and mentoring. Staff retention in
increased. Money is saved from staff turnover. The collaboration of employees
and management approach allows individuals to develop new skills and have
access to untapped resources within the organization that may otherwise go
unnoticed (Morris, 2013). Having
employees engaged in process changes increases acceptance of the change and
compliance is more likely to occur (Morris, 2013). The social interaction among
team members provides social reinforcement to accept and engage in new
organizational practices (Lanham, 2003).
Six
Sigma is also necessary for companies to compete in the current global market.
Companies are forced to do more with less to continue to remain profitable
(Lanham, 2003). This can only be accomplished with increased efficiency,
quality, decrease waste and production cost (Lanham, 2003). Companies have to
have organizational designs, which satisfy the changing needs of the customer
(LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006).
Leadership’s
role in process improvement
The
airline industry was one of the great successes of the implementation of Six
Sigma model (Psychogious & Loukas, 2012). Wisdom is gained from their story
of the implementation of this new organizational design model. Strong
leadership was essential for this organizational change to take place
(Psychogious & Loukas, 2012). Six Sigma is introduced into a business from
the top down (Psychogious & Loukas, 2012). Employee require a great deal of
education and support from leadership to create Six Sigma teams to evaluate
company processes (Psychogious & Loukas, 2012) Strong Leadership was necessary
to creating a quality driven culture (Psychogious & Loukas, 2012).
Leaders
in the airline industry found that current management tools were not effective
in dealing with current business demands (Psychogious & Loukas, 2012). In order for true organizational change
within the airline industry to take place mangers must alter, the way people
behave at work (Thawani, 2004). The only way to alter how people behave is
through process design (Thawani, 2004).
Six Sigma is distinctive from other quality improvement programs in the
fact that it does not place the burden of organizational change on the
leadership, but creates specialized positions within the company to implement
process change (Lanham, 2003).
Leadership is essential to aligning people,
processes and project to continual support ongoing goals of the organization
(LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). Leadership is needed for ongoing
evaluation of processes changes for continued implementation by staff (LLorens
– Montes & Molina, 2006). Leadership must continue to drive a culture of
quality through a continuous emphasis on education and training of staff
(Psychogious & Loukas, 2012).
Feedback from leadership regarding quality
initiatives is essential in creating a culture of quality (Psychogious &
Loukas, 2012). In the airline, industry leadership on a monthly basis audits
Six Sigma procedures changes for correct use and documentation (Psychogious
& Loukas, 2012). The audit process is not intended to be negative
reinforcement to employees, but rather to improve and avoid unnecessary
mistakes and cost provoked by unintentional human error (Psychogious &
Loukas, 2012). Leadership found this necessary in the culture of change
occurring through the practice implemented by the Six Sigma teams (Psychogious &
Loukas, 2012).
Limitations
One
limitation of Six Sigma is that the same individuals who implement the change
to organizational process determine the effectiveness of the change (LLorens –
Montes & Molina, 2006). Another emergent problem littered in the literature
is the cost and time required to train employees to serve on Six Sigma teams (Psychogios
& Loukas, 2012). Many times organizations receive resistance by employees
who believe that this is just another quality improvement tool that is only to
be replaced in a couple of years (Psychogios & Loukas, 2012). Decrease in
motivation and moral is experience by employees were leaders continually
implement ineffective organizational models (Psychogios & Loukas, 2012).
Employee morale is directly tied to customer satisfaction and profits
(Psychogios & Loukas, 2012).
Another
restraint that reoccurred throughout the literature was lack of familiarity
with the use of Six Sigma from the management that implemented the quality
improvement process (Psychogious & Loukas, 2012). Without the lack of
leadership, process changes and quality improvement were difficult to embed
into the culture of the organization (Psychogious & Loukas, 2012). Without
adequate training of all the employees within an organization, customers
received mixed messages about processes changes when asking for assistance and
customer service scores dropped (Psychogious & Loukas, 2012).
The
final limitation that explored in the literature review of Six Sigma was that
the organizational design in the modern business world is changing (Tsoukas
& Chia, 2002). Six Sigma creation was to serve organizations with a
vertical organizational design structure and implemented from top management
down the organizational structure (Tsoukas & Chia, 2002). Six Sigma was
conceived for an organizational model of stability, routine and order (Tsoukas
& Chia, 2002). In the business world
companies are moving to a more horizontal structure in business (Tsoukas &
Chia, 2002). Traditional change models and process improvement may no longer be
successful in today’s competitive fast past business world. It is yet to be
determined or researched if Six Sigma can be sustained in a business world with
patterns of rapid organizational changes in a company. Looking at business at a
macro level is the future of the new rapid business environment, Six Sigma was
created for a different time in business (Tsoukas, Chia, 2002).
The
literature review conducted showed little scientific evidence of continued
sustainable of improvement resulting from the implementation of Six Sigma
projects within an organization (Poling, 2012). Much of the research done by
organizations to support the effectiveness of Six Sigma demonstrates weak study
design, inappropriate analyses of research and a failure to rule out alterative
hypothesis (Vest &Gamm, 2009). The literature supported that many of the
Six Sigma quality process efforts failed to translate into sustainable results
(Psychogious & Loukas, 2012). Most of the studies the statistical
inferences were biased, because the individuals conducting the research for
effectiveness, had stake in the success of Six Sigma (Vest &Gamm, 2009).
Many of the individuals participating in these studies may have been exposed to
other quality intake messages (Vest &Gamm, 2009). The interventions that
were put in place by Six Sigma teams were specific to their respective protocols
and environments and could not be replicated using scientific rigor (Vest
&Gamm, 2009). There was limited statistical evidence and randomized trials
and research in the literature to support that the implementation of Six Sigma
is effective in organizational change (Vest &Gamm, 2009).
Improving
on limitations
Many
organizations can argue that Six Sigma improvements are more about the
psychology of an organization then the actual processes (Morris, 2013). Six
Sigma is about changing the way people behave (LLorens – Montes & Molina,
2006). By evaluating processes for efficiency and standardizing ways people do
things, productivity is improved and organizations are transformed (LLorens –
Montes & Molina, 2006). Companies can get results by initiating Six Sigma,
but lasting result occurs when organizations take a psychological approach
initiating it (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006).
When the process changes is the sole focus of Six Sigma
and the organization fails to have stake holders collaborate with the
organization on process changes, it is difficult to have long term
organizational change to take place
(Morris, 2013). Other problems that occurred with the initial
implementation with Six Sigma are companies had poor feedback from customer
surveys (Morris, 2013).The voice of the customer is crucial to any Six Sigma
project because, the projects are driven by customer feedback (Morris, 2013).
Leadership must plan methods to encourage internal and external customer
involvement, implement and Six Sigma projects with success (Morris, 2013).
Effective ways to encourage employees to participate in
collaboration with other departments and each other is by planning a two to
three day planning retreat (Morris, 2013). Management should give positive
feedback for successes to keep moral high among team members (Morris, 2013).
Leadership should also provide adequate support and time to complete projects
undertaken by the Six Sigma teams (Morris, 2013). When employees are engaged in
organizational change transformation of a company’s cultures is more likely to
occur (Morris, 2013).
One example of Six Sigma implemented frugally in the
literature was in gynecological office overseen by residents. The clinic was in
jeopardy of closing due to lack of funds to remain open. The health care clinic
claims it took little more than the staff time and commitment, to increase
profits, improve the environment for the patients as well as staff, using Six
Sigma methodology (Calhoun, 2013).
The
implementation took one staff member to conduct statistical analysis of the
throughput data collected by team members (Calhoun, 2013). Six Sigma was used
to inspire and make changes in workflow design (Calhoun, 2013). Prior to the
application of the Six Sigma initiative patients complained of long waits in
the office and obtaining an appointment, the average office visit was 3 ½ hours
long and it took 38 days to get an appointment (Calhoun, 2013). This situation
caused the customers to be unhappy, the staff to become frustrated and a decrease
in profits that almost made it impossible to keep the clinic open (Calhoun,
2013).
The health care clinic mapped the patients experience to
identify problems. The members of the health care team used the methodology of
Six Sigma to identify work process errors. Through revised scheduling
processes, reduced wait times for appointments and decreased office wait times,
identified using the Six Sigma model, profits increased and the clinic remained
opened (Calhoun, 2013). The cost was in the time and commitment of the staff to
implement the process changes (Calhoun, 2013).
The
role of academia in Six Sigma
Research
attention is lacking on the Six Sigma model of organizational change due to the
misunderstanding by academia that it is a new fad management tool. Six Sigma
incorporates the same principles of management theory except different
terminology is used (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). Both Six Sigma and
management theory are concerned with, organizational learning, organizational
change and information processing (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). Six
Sigma has been uses by many corporations throughout the world in the last
twenty years (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006).
Academia lags
behind in the adoptions of six-sigma into business curriculum, because Six
Sigma is similar to many other new management programs that are bright with
promise only to be replaced with the next current fad (LLorens – Montes &
Molina, 2006). Six Sigma was created in the business world not academia
(LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). For this reason the organizational
change created by Six Sigma has lack the rigors of scientific research
conducted by academia (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). Many leaders of
top corporations question why Six Sigma has not been incorporated into
education and research (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). With the
continued interest of major companies around the world, it would be beneficial
for academia to take a further look into the incorporation of Six Sigma into
education and research practices (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006).
Academia needs to be leaders in the role of Six Sigma not learners (LLorens –
Montes & Molina, 2006).
Sustaining
Six Sigma
How does a
company sustain improvements that are a result of a Six Sigma project? Many times
with improvement, changes once it is implemented people view the work as
completed (Poling, 2012). This misconception could be no farther from the
truth. Many times Six Sigma changes die over time or at the end of a budget
quarter (Poling, 2012).Throughout the literature there was a common thread
among organizations that sustained Six Sigma overtime.
Six Sigma begins at the top of the hierarchy within a
company (Poling, 2012). Six Sigma is not just about initiating project to
decrease defects it is about delivering the best quality product to the
customer (Poling, 2012). Quality is a continuous process that must be led by
leadership (Poling, 2012).
The values and visions
communicated by leadership are what create cultures of excellence within
organizations (Poling, 2012). Leadership is essential to aligning people,
processes and project to continual support ongoing goals of the organization
(LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006). Leadership is needed for ongoing
evaluation of processes changes for continued implementation by staff (LLorens
– Montes & Molina, 2006). Leadership must make continued implementation of
quality improvement created by six-sigma a management priority (Poling, 2012).
One way that quality can be continually monitored by
management within an organization is by identifying key performance indicators
and monitoring them (Poling, 2012). Managers should demand the quality measures
be carried out on a daily basis (Poling, 2012). This requires that leadership
make clear expectations, mentor employees and lead by example (Poling, 2012).
Leadership must have a goals and objective that are clearly communicated to everyone
(Poling, 2012). Great businesses have superior communicators in leadership
positions (Poling, 2012).In addition, management needs to communicate to
employees how they are doing on a daily, weekly and monthly basis (Poling,
2012). Organizations must create and live by values that they communicate to
all individuals under their leadership to sustain a culture of quality. Values
are the building blocks of successful organizations (Poling, 2012).
Conclusion
The
quality improvements demonstrated by six-sigma lack actual scientific research
and rigor that demonstrate effectiveness of it implementation (LLorens – Montes
& Molina, 2006). Six Sigma is the first of its kind to use the scientific
process to effect organizational change (LLorens – Montes & Molina, 2006).
The actual quality of this organizational model is yet to be demonstrated
through science. The fact that is has been used and praised for the past twenty
years by business organizations worldwide demonstrates the need for further
research into this organizational model of excellence (Lorenz – Montes &
Molina, 2006).
The
literature has demonstrated that organizational change to improve the quality of
business cultures have been affected upon the initiation of Six Sigma. Great
organizations are created by values they hold dear. Companies that initiate, Six Sigma value
quality and safety. Value of quality and
safety were clearly visible in all the organizations that implemented and used
the Six Sigma organizational model. Academia would benefit greatly from
research conducted regarding Six Sigma. The level and enterprises commits to
the principles of Six Sigma, correlate directly to the business creating a
culture of excellence within an organization. One roadblock that may be of
future concern is Six Sigma originally created for a more traditional model of
business (Tsouka & Chia, 2002). Traditional companies valued stability, a
vertical design structure, routine and order (Tsouka & Chia, 2002). The
traditional approach to business is not always sustainable in today’s economy.
Six Sigma has made an impact on the world of business in the past twenty years,
if proven with scientific evidence or not. The question remains is Six Sigma still
sustainable in the business world today.
Annotated Bibliography
References
Consumers,
the government, tax payers are demanding health care systems increase
efficiency
and cost effectiveness. The author of this journal article explores how
applying
the principles of organization transformation, lean Six Sigma transformed
Fed
Ex into a more profitable company and if these principle could be applied
successfully
to health care organizations. In the literary, review this article clearly
outlines
areas of waste that occur in health care and the dire need to overall
health
care organizations to remove waste.
and Increases Patient
Satisfaction, Visits, and Revenues in Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency
Clinic. AHRQ HEALTH CARE INNOVATIONS
EXCHANGE.
This
article author demonstrates how Six Sigma methodology was used to improve work
flow
increase
customer satisfaction and reduce cost.
The article also exhibits what planning and
development
where used to apply Six Sigma within the organization and how to sustain
excellence.
This article purpose in the literary review is to give an example of a process
improvement
in health care, how it will be planned, implemented and sustained.
The
authors of this article stress that problem solving can only be improved
through
the
use of the scientific method. Six Sigma is the first organizational change
method
to
use the scientific process. The Six Sigma model has been touted around the
world by
companies
as transformational. According to the
authors of this article the science to
support
that the changes that take place after using Six Sigma have very little science
to
support
it was due to the use of Six Sigma. This journal article will demonstrate in
the literary
review
an alternative perspective to why further research is needed before this model
of
business
change can claim legitimacy.
The
authors of this journal article consider the very serious problem of medical
errors in the
United
States and the high cost related to such errors. The author concludes that
despite attempts
to
decrease medical errors within the current health care system, medical errors
are a
huge
stain on the current health care system. The author demonstrates the need for
current
process
improvements within health care organizations. In the literary, review this
article with
Validates
the need for process changes that Six Sigma claims it can deliver.
This
work focuses on how Six Sigma can improve health care. The author articulates
what
challenges
may be faced when implementing Sigma Sigma in a health care environment
and
keys
to successful implementation. This article will demonstrate in the literary
review one of the
first
promising scientific methods to improve quality of patient care through process
improvement.
Cost saving has yet to be demonstrated despite the high initial cost of
implementation
of the Six Sigma. The author validates the Six Sigma program has an
abundance
of applications within the health care organization to improve quality of care
and
achieve
great financial gains for a company.
Progresses, Content and Effectiveness. Total Quality Management, 17.
The
authors of this article tell the history of Six Sigma and it current worldwide
success.
The
authors assert the only way for true organizational change to take place
organizations
have
to change the ways employees behave at work. The journal article concludes this
can
be
accomplished through the application of Six Sigma within an organization. This
article
gives
an overview of the history of Six Sigma
in the literary review and the fundamental ways it
is
effectively applied to a organization.
The
author of this article clearly articulates cast that Six Sigma is beneficial to
organizations
as
a way to meet goals, reduce cost and improve quality. The author believes that
is a
psychology
must also be used to implement the use of any process improvement within
an
organization. The author assert without the buy in from all members of an
organization
true
change will not occur. This journal article demonstrates ways for leadership to
effectively
implement
lasting cultural changes in an organization. This article illustrates in the
literary
review
ways leadership can maximize the implementation of the Six Sigma culture within
their
corporations.
The
authors of this journal supply evidence to support the need for sustaining
Six
Sigma in health care system. The article explores steps for integrating Six
Sigma into
health care practices. The
author conclude that sustaining lean Six Sigma projects in health
care ensures a quality
product. This journal article will give supporting evidence how
Six Sigma in applied effectively to health
care, for process improvement and sustained for
long term process change
through the use of formal checklist.
Poling, S. R. ( 2012,
September). The secret to sustaining Six Sigma. Management,46-50.
Poling discusses ways that
organizations can sustain continuous improvement within companies that are the
result of Six Sigma efforts. The author suggest tools to measure
the meaning of change in a
process improvement. In the literary, review this journal article
will demonstrate that the
values of a company are fundamental in the use of Six Sigma to
improve quality in a
company.
The
authors of this writing outline what Six Sigma consists of and how it
implemented
in an organization. It is demonstrated in
their article that Lean Six Sigma and innovation
can
be married to improve quality, lower cost and reduce waste. The writings of
these
authors
will assisting to define Six Sigma in
the literary review and keys for leadership
to
apply any new tool to encourage process improvement.
Traditional
methods and mentalities can no longer effectively cope with current business
trends.
The
authors review if Six Sigma can be adopted by different organizations, cultures
and sectors
of
business effectively to improve quality
assurance. It is clearly articulated by the writers of
this
article that further scientific research into Six Sigma methods would greatly
enrich the
model.
These authors make a clear case as to why the academia and scientific
communities
need
to investigate this model of change that has been effectively implemented world wide
for the last twenty years as articulated is
the literary review.
concept in strategic management provides a way to balance
quality and customer satisfaction with cost and long-range goals., 42-46.
This
Journal article portrays the necessity for health care managers to apply new
strategies of
process
improvement in the changing climate of health care to remain financially
responsible.
Health
care is no longer a pay for service industry it is much more complex and has
greater
expectations
from the customers . This journal article in the literary review describes the
current
challenges
facing health care and the ways Six Sigma may pave the way for those changes
The
Journal article written by Thawani, demonstrates the need to change from
traditional
business
practices to meet the competitive pressures of today’s worldwide market.
Thawani
makes
a case that many fortune five hundred companies have applied Six Sigma strategy
within
their organizations and have reaped great benefits despite an arduous operation
costs
and
rigorous training that had to be completed to implement the model. The author
also clearly
demonstrates
why continued process improvement should
be mandatory within all companies
to
be socially responsible. In the literary
review this article will demonstrate why, change
in
traditional business practice is
necessary to continued survival in today’s business market
and
model changes are necessary to practice business in an ethical manner.
This
journal article has a unique way of approaching organizational change. The
authors assert
for
corporations to have genuine process improvements that change must happen on a
macro
level
with each individual person within an organization. The authors clearly defend
the
argument
it is necessary for scientist to give priority to microscopic changes within a
system to
truly
understand how significant transformation take place. This article will give an
alternative
norm
in the literary review as to why Six Sigma, despite not being clearly supported
through
the
rigors of science may still be highly revolutionary in transforming
organizations.
This
journal article evaluates promising scientific process improvement strategies
to improve
quality
in the health care environment. The author evaluates claims of validity of the
success
of
Six Sigma and determines that at current times it does not meet the rigors of
scientific review.
Further
research is needed to demonstrate sustainability, validity of conclusions, and
actual
transformation
within an organization. This article will demonstrate in the literary review
that
despite
the current popularity of Six Sigma as an organizational transformation tool
further
research
is needed to prove with scientific rigor this is an effective organization
transformational
tool
that is cost effective with the high cost of implementation.
