IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/ijppmp/v60y2011i2p185-190.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Six Sigma vs Lean

Author

Listed:
  • Jiju Antony

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to present the fundamental and critical differences between two of the most powerful methodologies in a process excellence initiative in any organisation. Design/methodology/approach - The approach taken was to collate opinions from a number of leading academics and practitioners from five different countries. It was also important to ensure that all participants have a good knowledge and expertise in the field of both Lean and Six Sigma methodologies. Findings - Although both methodologies are focused on process and quality improvement, Lean is formalisation and codification of experience and judgement which is not a feature of Six Sigma. Lean emphasises speed and waste, however Six Sigma emphasises variation, defects and process evaluation. Research limitations/implications - The viewpoints expressed in the article are those of a few academics and practitioners. It is important to capture the viewpoints of more academics and practitioners to arrive at sound and valid conclusions. Originality/value - The paper provides an excellent resource for many researchers and for practitioners who are engaged in research and applications of the most two powerful methodologies for achieving and sustaining operational excellence. It is also critical to understand the fundamental differences between these two methodologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiju Antony, 2011. "Six Sigma vs Lean," International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 60(2), pages 185-190, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:ijppmp:v:60:y:2011:i:2:p:185-190
    DOI: 10.1108/17410401111101494
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/17410401111101494/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/17410401111101494/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/17410401111101494?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kai Sandner & Sebastian Sieber & Marleen Tellermann & Frank Walthes, 2020. "A Lean Six Sigma framework for the insurance industry: insights and lessons learned from a case study," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(5), pages 845-878, June.
    2. Angels Niñerola & Ramon Ferrer-Rullan & Antoni Vidal-Suñé, 2020. "Climate Change Mitigation: Application of Management Production Philosophies for Energy Saving in Industrial Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, January.
    3. Dag Øivind Madsen & Terje Berg & Tonny Stenheim & Janne Vagnild Moum & Inger Overland Bordewich & Maria Storsveen, 2019. "The Long-term Sustainability of Lean as a Management Practice: Survey Evidence on Diffusion and Use of the Concept in Norway in the Period 2015–2017," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-18, June.
    4. Fabiane Letícia Lizarelli & Jiju Antony & José Carlos Toledo, 2020. "Statistical thinking and its impact on operational performance in manufacturing companies: an empirical study," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 295(2), pages 923-950, December.
    5. Erceg Aleksandar & Dotlić Predrag & Mikuš Monika, 2018. "The 20 Keys Methodology – Continuous Improvement for Organizational Efficiency," Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Oeconomica, Sciendo, vol. 63(1), pages 20-36, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:ijppmp:v:60:y:2011:i:2:p:185-190. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.