12

Accepted Manuscript
A Comparative Exploration of Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma in terms of their

Critical Success Factors
Ibrahim Alhuraish, Christian Robledo, Abdessamad Kobi
PII: S0959-6526(17)31315-X
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.146
Reference: JCLP 9896
To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production
Received Date: 27 December 2016
Revised Date: 19 May 2017
Accepted Date: 15 June 2017
Please cite this article as: Ibrahim Alhuraish, Christian Robledo, Abdessamad Kobi, A Comparative
Exploration of Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma in terms of their Critical Success Factors, Journal
of Cleaner Production (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.146
This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form.
Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the
content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
A Comparative Exploration of Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma in

terms of their Critical Success Factors
Ibrahim Alhuraish
University of Angers,
LARIS systems engineering research Laboratory
ISTIA engineering school
0033684327136
62 Avenue de Notre Dame du Lac
Angers 49000, France
E‐mail: Ibrahim.alhuraish@gmail.com
Christian Robledo
University of Angers,
0033241962363
E‐mail:Christian.robledo@univ-angers.fr
Abdessamad Kobi
0033244687531
E‐mail: Abdessamad.kobi@univ-angers.fr
Abstract
Lean manufacturing and six sigma methodologies have been widely used in a large
number of companies worldwide. However, many companies have found it difficult
to successfully implement and sustain lean manufacturing and six sigma. It is,
therefore, very important for companies to identify and understand the critical success
factors for successfully implementing either six sigma or lean manufacturing. A
comparative examination of lean manufacturing versus six sigma was conducted, and
the success factors relevant to these two methodologies were identified. It was found
that the most important success factors differed in terms of their significance for six
sigma and lean manufacturing. Specifically, for organizations that have successfully
implemented six sigma, skills and expertise ranked highest in importance. In contrast,
for organizations that have successfully implemented lean manufacturing, employee
involvement and culture change ranked highest. This study builds on current
knowledge and fills a gap in the literature by providing more insight into the most
critical success factors within companies that have already successfully implemented
these methodologies. The results of the study will help organizations to make more
1
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
mature and careful decisions regarding the critical success factors of each method.
Therefore, in the pre-implementation stage, organizations can identify how their
capabilities and resources can be utilized to accomplish the critical success factors for
the implementation of lean manufacturing and six sigma, either simultaneously or
sequentially. This is the first study that has conducted an examination to compare lean
manufacturing and six sigma in terms of the importance of the same specific critical
success factors.
Keywords: Lean Manufacturing; Six Sigma; Sustainability; Critical Success Factors;

Model for Capacity; SME
1. Introduction
In the modern business environment, lean manufacturing and six sigma are essential
methodologies for ensuring that the contemporary firm/organization acquires and
retains a competitive advantage. A competitive advantage is achieved when
companies maintain practices consistent with sustainable development strategies and,
as such, control waste and implement practices that are environmentally and socially
responsible (Pfeffer, 2010). As reported by Cherrafi et al. (2016), a modern
organization is required to embrace sustainable development to remain competitive.
Both lean and six sigma have been identified as important methodology for achieving
sustainable development objectives (Cherrafi et al., 2016). As a manufacturing cost
and waste management practice, lean manufacturing is consistent with the
environmental and social responsibility aims of sustainable development (Chiarini,
2014). An undisputed link has been established between environmentally responsible
production and lean manufacturing (Hartini and Ciptomulyono 2015). Specifically,
Aguado et al. (2013) argued that when production is conducted using lean
manufacturing, it promotes an innovative environmental system that improves both
social and sustainable development. With regards to the link between six sigma and
sustainable development, there is an impression that six sigma can indirectly
influence sustainable development through the application of its tools to
environmental management systems. Six sigma has been directly linked to
environmental protection by Calia et al. (2009), who considered 2,096 pollution
prevention programs and confirmed that six sigma methodologies were effective in
developing pollution reduction strategies and solving problems. In addition, Sagnak
and Kazancoglu (2016) reported that for producing environmentally responsible
products, i.e., products that can be recycled and reduce pollution, lean and green
practices may not be able to identify and manage variations in processes such as
storage, inventorying, and waste management practices. Therefore, when six sigma is
integrated with lean and green initiatives, sustainable development is more efficient
(Sagnak and Kazancoglu, 2016). There are a number of benefits to integrating lean
manufacturing or six sigma with sustainability. The advantages include several
dimensions, such as economic performance, social performance, and environmental
2
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
performance and sustainability. The implications are that companies familiar with
lean or six sigma will easily grasp the concept of sustainability (Cherrafi et al., 2016).
Together or alone, lean and six sigma are both techniques for improving processes
that create and deliver quality in services and products (Nave, 2002). Any reference to
quality in services and products in modern business is a reflection on how companies
prioritize production and outcomes. Modern companies assimilate quality with
socially and environmentally responsible business operations, which includes
respecting and protecting the environment. Moreover, six sigma and lean are among
the main methodologies available to organizations to implement the successful and
efficient continuous improvement of services and product processes (Alhuraish et al.,
2016c; Corbett, 2011; Pacheco et al., 2015). The continuous efficiency and
improvement of products and services is important for achieving production goals
(Indrawati and Ridwansyah, 2015). Many modern companies are consistently
implementing lean and six sigma as a means of reducing waste and improving
efficiency (Alhuraish et al., 2015, Mousa, 2013; Tjahjono et al., 2010). At the same
time, successful lean six sigma implementation may be hindered by critical factors
such as a lack of top management support, and a lack of skills and training
(Montgomery, 2016).
Due to the impressive results experienced by US or Japanese companies, such as

Motorola and Toyota, six sigma and lean manufacturing have begun to be adopted
globally (Andersson et al., 2006). Both six sigma and lean manufacturing have,
therefore, emerged among the most commonly used methodologies for implementing
and achieving continuous improvement in business processes (Alhuraish et al.,
2016a). While they differ in terms of their objectives, together or separately they can
improve business processes and in turn service and product quality. Lean
manufacturing is aimed at waste reduction or elimination (Womack et al., 1990),
while six sigma is aimed at the reduction of variations in processes (Andersson et al.,
2006; Breyfogle, 1999; Pacheco et al., 2015). Thus, a company will typically identify
which of its processes needs improvement and which methodology is compatible with
this need. The company will also have to determine how and when to implement six
sigma and/or lean manufacturing. Without doing this the company may not achieve
the benefits that lean manufacturing and/or six sigma can yield. There is a gap in the
published literature regarding this issue. There have been scientific studies published
that have revealed that for optimal performance outcomes, companies should
implement an integrated methodology of lean manufacturing and six sigma. At the
same time, because the two methodologies have two different philosophies, there is
some debate over whether the two methodologies should be implemented
simultaneously or separately. The debate is largely centered on whether lean
manufacturing or six sigma should be implemented first. This is, therefore, a focal
point of this research study. This study identified the critical success factors that
contribute to or actualize the successful implementation of lean manufacturing and six
sigma. Therefore, we investigated lean manufacturing and six sigma by comparing the
3
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
importance of the same specific success factors to both methodologies. This may also
enable companies to identify the most appropriate method for their business, by
identifying the organizational capabilities and resources that are consistent with the
critical success factors for implementing lean manufacturing or six sigma, or both
methods at the same time.
Within the literature there are a large number of studies devoted to the critical success
factors for the implementation of lean (Achanga et al., 2006; Näslund, 2008; Dora et
al., 2013). More recent studies have also continued to focus on the critical success
factors for lean implementation (Noori, 2014; Lukman and Salim, 2017). There has
been a similar level of attention given to the critical success factors for implementing
six sigma (Antony et al., 2005; Brun, 2011; Kwak and Anbari, 2006). Moreover,
published studies have tended to emphasize the critical success factors for the
integration of lean and six sigma (Laureani and Antony, 2012; Manville et al., 2012;
Näslund, 2013). Therefore, a second gap has been observed in the literature in that
there have been no published studies that have conducted an examination to compare
the importance of the same specific critical success factors between lean
manufacturing and six sigma. Thus, this study addresses this gap in the literature by
comparing the critical success factors of both lean manufacturing and six sigma. In
doing so, it identified shared success factors and differences between the two
methodologies. Andersson et al. (2006) suggested that it is possible that there are
significant commonalities and/or distinctions between lean and six sigma
methodologies that have not been identified. Moreover, additional research is needed
regarding sustainable business practices in terms of the contribution of lean and six
sigma, and there is still much to learn about the critical success factors with regard to
the integration of lean and six sigma for sustainable business practices (Cherrafi et al.,
2016). Thus, a comparison of the importance of the same specific critical success
factors for implementing lean and six sigma can help companies form an appropriate
organizational culture and direct attention toward the societal aspirations for the
successful implementation of lean and six sigma. Such studies will, therefore, not
only build on the current knowledge of the utility of lean and six sigma integration,
but will also identify areas for further research.
This study identifies the differences and similarities between lean manufacturing and
six sigma in terms of the importance of critical success factors. The critical success
factors as regards the implementation of lean manufacturing and six sigma have
various levels of importance. It is, therefore, important that companies are aware of
the critical success factors for the successful implementation of these two
methodologies. This will put the organization in a position to plan the implementation
strategies and/or to determine and plan for the appropriate methodology (pre-
implementation) i.e., lean manufacturing or six sigma, or an integrated method. The
company will be able to make this determination by weighing the critical success
factors against the company’s resources and capabilities. This represents an extension
of the current knowledge of critical success factors for implementing lean
4
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
manufacturing and six sigma (Alhuraish et al., 2016b). Consequently, secondary

sources were consulted that consisted of theoretical and empirical studies, while
primary data was collected from lean manufacturing and six sigma experts and
subjected to statistical analysis.
This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 is a literature review that considers the
debate over an integrated version of lean manufacturing and six sigma, and the critical
success factors for implementing lean manufacturing and six sigma. Section 3
explains the research method used in this study. The results of the study and an
analysis of the results are presented in section 4. Section 5 presents the conclusions
and recommendations for future research.
2. Literature Review
2.1 Lean manufacturing, six sigma, and sustainability
The reduction of waste is an undisputed universal goal. Lean manufacturing aims to

reduce waste, and six sigma aims to reduce variations in processes, such as waste
production. As such, lean manufacturing provides tools that can successfully
eliminate waste linked to environmental degradation (Chiarini, 2014). For example,
value stream mapping has been found to successfully ascertain the environmental
impact of production, and 5S has been found to successfully reduce oil leaks and
enhance waste management (Chiarini, 2014). Total productive maintenance (TPM)
has the benefit of improving environmental results and can reduce waste emanating
from machines and equipment (Fliedner, 2008). Both the TPM and 5S systems are
related to social practices and can help avoid injuries and lead to better health and
safety practices (Sarkis et al., 2010; Verrier et al., 2016). The correct use of the
Kaizen "continuous improvement" procedure can assist in the management of
environmental waste (Vais et al., 2006).
In social terms, the involvement of employees in such programs has generated

environmental benefits (Piercy and Rich, 2015). Yang et al. (2011) found that
organizations that had implemented lean manufacturing experienced a positive impact
on financial and environmental management practices, and the implementation of lean
manufacturing was positively correlated with the ability to deploy environmental
management practices. It has been found that within Brazilian organizations, lean
manufacturing is more positively correlated with environmental management
practices than human resources in terms of its ability to drive and improve sustainable
development strategies (Jabbour et al., 2013). Yadav et al. (2016) also found that the
lean manufacturing and six sigma methodologies could be used to improve business
management systems in corporate social responsibility initiatives (Asif et al., 2013).
More recent research has considered lean six sigma from an environmental
5
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
perspective, such as identifying significant elements of the method that contribute to

sustainable environmental practices (Powell et al., 2017).
As previously discussed, an integration of lean and six sigma can improve, promote,
and maintain sustainable development measures and reduce variations in processes to
ensure the efficiency of production. However, there is some controversy in the
literature over whether to implement lean manufacturing, six sigma, or a combination
of the two methodologies. Lately, there has been significant interest in the integration
of lean and six sigma (Assarlind and Aaboen, 2014). In addition to this new area of
inquiry is a research interest in the critical success factors for efficient implementation
(Siddiqui et al., 2016). Researchers have identified basic constraints in the
implementation of integrated six sigma and lean, but this remains an area requiring
further research (Albliwi and Antony, 2013; Kumar et al., 2006). This research needs
further development because at this stage, organizations do not have sufficient
guidance regarding what should be the first stage in the implementation of lean and
six sigma. It is not clear if the first step should be lean or six sigma, or both combined
(Albliwi and Antony, 2013; Kumar et al., 2006). The primary expectation is to
achieve simultaneous, fast, and obvious operational improvements through the
implementation of integrated lean and six sigma (Gamal Aboelmaged, 2010; George,
2002; Huang and Klassen, 2016).
For businesses interested in the implementation of integrated lean and six sigma, there
is uncertainty regarding which methodology should be implemented first. Antony
(2011) maintains that it is preferable to start with lean. In this regard, a 5S exercise is
an effective starting point, because it can help to set up the workplace for the process
to take shape. Because lean tools are not as complicated as six sigma tools, it is more
feasible to start with lean as a means of getting staff members involved early on,
while at the same time rapidly yielding results for the company (Antony, 2011). Nash
et al. (2006) state that a number of firms have implemented integrated lean and six
sigma by implementing one method first. Research results have shown that six sigma
is typically implemented effectively only after a lean manufacturing process is already
in place (Nash et al., 2006). In one case, a company decided to implement six sigma
after having previously implemented lean manufacturing, and this scenario may
accelerate the use of six sigma (Bożek and Hamrol, 2012).
There is evidence that small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) have experienced
success through the implementation of lean first (Kumar and Antony, 2009).
Typically, SMEs lack the requisite resources to implement both lean and six sigma at
the same time. As a result of their limited resources, some SMEs have difficulty
allocating resources for implementing either methodology, as shown by Moeuf et al.
(2016) for lean manufacturing and Antony et al. (2005) for six sigma. The
implementation of either lean manufacturing or six sigma can be complicated.
Researchers have suggested the simultaneous implementation of both lean
manufacturing and six sigma because they complement one another; however, they
6
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
may fail to take account of the resources available within a business. A number of
companies have experienced challenges when implementing one of these
methodologies. The results of this study hopefully, will help companies devise an
appropriate strategy for implementing lean manufacturing, six sigma, or an integrated
form of both methodologies. The key to success is the ability to identify the critical
success factors regarding implementation and the organization’s resources and
capabilities, and then to plan and strategize accordingly.
An analysis of the available literature has shown that lean implementation could lead
to the deployment of green practices (Pampanelli et al., 2014; Dhingra et al., 2014). In
a review article considering the integration of lean and green practices, Pampanelli et
al. (2014) found several articles discussing and recommending the use of a combined
method. Dües et al. (2013) reported that lean practices can effectively reduce costs,
while the implementation of green practices can reduce environmental risk and ensure
continuous environmentally friendly production practices. Dhingra et al. (2014)
considered whether lean and green methodologies should be implemented either
simultaneously or sequentially. Their findings were similar to those of the present
study but in the present study, further consideration has been given to whether lean
and six sigma should be implemented simultaneously or sequentially. Furthermore,
Cherrafi et al. (2016) stated that when lean or six sigma is combined with
sustainability better results are likely to be generated than with the implementation of
either lean, six sigma, or sustainability practices alone. Therefore, it is important for
organizations to be sustainable, and it is recommended that future studies investigate
how these methods can be combined.
2.2 Critical success factors in the implementation of lean manufacturing and six
sigma
A review of the literature has revealed that there are a number of critical success
factors for implementing six sigma and lean manufacturing. The key critical success
factors include communication, culture change, and top management commitment.
Several critical success factors for the efficient and effective implementation of six
sigma are identified in the literature (Antony and Banuelas Coronado, 2002; Brun,
2011; Näslund, 2008). These specific factors are set out below, although it should be
noted they are more frequently reported in the literature as critical success factors for
six sigma. For the purpose of this study, a slight change was made to these factors.
The factor ‘understanding the tools and techniques’ was added and applied to shop
floor and office workers. This approach was necessary to identify the different levels
of significance when comparing lean manufacturing and six sigma in the shop floor
and office working environments. In addition, employee involvement was also added
as a critical success factor.
1. Top management commitment and support

2. Education and training
7
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
3. Communication
4. Involvement of employees
5. Culture change
6. Understanding the tools and techniques within six sigma methodology
7. Skills and expertise
8. Linking the six sigma method to customers
9. Linking the six sigma method to the business strategy
10. Linking six sigma method to suppliers
11. Linking six sigma method to human resources
12. Reward system
13. Project management skill
All of the critical success factors above pertain specifically to six sigma. However, all
of the factors can also be adopted in lean manufacturing as a means of identifying the
level of significance between lean manufacturing and six sigma (Alhuraish, 2016b)
(see below).
1. Top management commitment and support

2. Education and training
3. Communication
4. Involvement of employees
5. Culture change
6. Understanding the tools and techniques within lean methodology
7. Skills and expertise
8. Linking the lean method to customers
9. Linking the lean method to the business strategy
10. Linking the lean method to suppliers
11. Linking lean method to human resources
12. Reward system
13. Project management skill
3. Methods
This study undertook a comparison of the importance of the same specific critical
success factors between six sigma and lean manufacturing. To participate in this study,
the experts were required to have an understanding of lean manufacturing and six
sigma. Data was collected via an online survey. To authenticate the survey, a pilot
study was conducted. The objective of the data collection was to compare the
importance of the same specific critical success factors in the implementation of lean
manufacturing and six sigma methods. Two experts on lean manufacturing and six
sigma participated in the pilot study. Based on feedback and advice from these
experts an additional question was added to the survey, i.e., what are the reasons for
implementing lean manufacturing and six sigma simultaneously? At the conclusion of
the pilot study, the survey was distributed online. The survey used a five-point Likert
8
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
scale to enable measurements of the importance of the same specific critical success
factors between lean manufacturing and six sigma. The survey participants were
asked to choose from the following indicators: 1 = unimportant; 2 = slightly
important; 3 = important; 4 = very important; and 5 = critical. An ordinal scale was
used for measuring the dependent variable. Therefore, a statistical analysis was
conducted using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test to determine whether there were
statistically significant differences between lean manufacturing and six sigma in terms
of the importance of the same specific success factors.
The survey participants consisted of 33 experts on lean manufacturing and six sigma.
To test the reliability of the survey, Cronbach’s alpha was used and it showed a
reliable internal consistency for the critical success factors for implementing lean
manufacturing (0.814-0.858) and six sigma (0.944-0.953). This indicates good
internal consistency of the data gathered (i.e., in the range of 0.814 to 0.953 with a
value of more than 0.7). Therefore, it was concluded that the survey was reliable
(Gliem and Gliem, 2003).
4. Results and discussion
The experts that participated in the evaluation of the success factors, and who
evaluated the differences between lean manufacturing and six sigma in terms of the
importance of the critical success factors, worked in different industrial sectors,
including electronics, automotive, health, transportation, services, aerospace, and oil.
These industries have experience in using lean manufacturing and six sigma practices.
Despite this, some of the experts participating in the study had not implemented lean
manufacturing and/or six sigma within their respective industries. It was found that 20
companies had implemented lean manufacturing, nine companies had implemented
both lean manufacturing and six sigma methodologies, and four had not implemented
either lean manufacturing or six sigma methods.
The experts were experienced and understood the advantages of implementing lean
manufacturing and six sigma. They were required to answer questions regarding the
reasons for implementing lean manufacturing and six sigma simultaneously. The
majority (36.1%) of the experts opined that implementing both methodologies
simultaneously yielded a rapid improvement in processes. A further 19.4% of the
experts felt that the simultaneous implementation of six sigma and lean manufacturing
increased customer satisfaction. Another 19.4% stated that there was a lack of
improvement when lean manufacturing and six sigma were implemented separately.
Only one company, representing 2.7% of the total, indicated an improvement in sales.
Other improvements following the simultaneous implementation of six sigma and
lean manufacturing, noted by 22.2% of the experts, were improved safety,
sustainability, and time savings. One expert observed rapid improvements, but still
suggested separate implementation because their firm had conducted sequential
implementation using tools inclusive of the 5S, Kaizen, Poka Yoke, Small Group
9
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Projects, and Quality Circle procedures, which was then followed by the
implementation of lean manufacturing and then six sigma methodology. This is
inconsistent with findings in the literature, which indicate that the separate
implementation of lean manufacturing and six sigma yields weak results, including
modest improvements in performance, customer satisfaction, and profits.
It is important to understand that not all organizations, and in particular SMEs, have
the capacity to implement six sigma and lean manufacturing simultaneously. A lack
of funds, time, and expertise can be obstacles to the simultaneous implementation of
both methodologies. The reality is that integrating lean and six sigma is not a common
phenomenon among SMEs (Antony et al., 2008). The experts participating in the
study were required to select answers indicating solutions for SMEs in the
implementation of six sigma and lean manufacturing (Alhuraish et al., 2016). The
results suggested that SMEs take a sequential approach. SMEs usually have limited
resources, such as skills and human resources (Jessica Hwang and Lockwood, 2006).
It is likely that the lack of resource capacity is the reason SMEs typically do not have
the ability to implement lean manufacturing and six sigma simultaneously. However,
some SMEs have had success in the sequential implementation of lean and six sigma
(Kumar and Antony, 2009). Furthermore, as indicated above, one of the experts
participating in this study reported organizational success in the sequential
implementation of lean manufacturing and six sigma. In fact, as Chakravorty and
Hales (2013) showed, six sigma can be successful when lean is implemented ahead of
it. However, as stated by Kumar et al. (2006), the guidance regarding which
methodology to start with and how to initially implement the methodology is unclear
and lacking in detail. There is a lack of clarity as to whether the appropriate starting
point is lean manufacturing or six sigma, or an integrated version of both. This is
important because some organizations are uncertain about which improvement
practices are compatible with the organization’s business and environment
(Chakravorty, 2009).
It must also be noted that there is a paucity of research illustrating success in the
implementation of six sigma followed by lean. While there are few published studies
regarding the success of sequential implementation, this study and the few case
studies available in the literature have indicated that sequential implementation of
lean manufacturing and six sigma can be successful. The literature reviewed revealed
that the simultaneous implementation of both six sigma and lean manufacturing is
preferable to their individual implementation. If this is not possible, a sequential
implementation is an option, taking care to respect the critical success factors of each
method. Consequently, businesses should evaluate their resources and the critical
success factors for each methodology and select the method that they are most likely
to implement efficiently and effectively based on the resources they have available to
meet the critical success factors.
10
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
4.1 Comparison of the critical success factors for lean manufacturing and six sigma
This study compared 14 success factors related to lean manufacturing and six sigma.
The data used in this study were ordinal. Therefore, a Wilcoxon signed-rank test was
used at the significance level of 0.05 to compare the importance of critical success
factors in lean manufacturing and six sigma. As a non-parametric test, the test was
constructed to test repetitious measures, such as the importance of the same specific
critical success factors in lean manufacturing and six sigma. A Wilcoxon signed-rank
test was conducted to assess whether the importance of each success factor was
significantly different between lean manufacturing and six sigma.
Therefore, the next step in the research was to compare the importance of the same
specific critical success factors for lean manufacturing and six sigma. It was found
that some critical success factors did not yield a statistically significant difference in
terms of their level of importance in each method (p >0.05). The most relevant factors
were top management commitment and support, linking the method to suppliers, skill
and expertise, linking the methods to customers, reward system, and project
management skills. From the Wilcoxon signed-rank test it was found that 25 of the
participating experts claimed that top management commitment and support had the
same level of importance in the successful implementation of lean manufacturing and
six sigma. Only three experts claimed that top management commitment was more
important for the implementation of six sigma than for the implementation of lean
manufacturing. In contrast five experts stated that top management commitment was
more important for implementing lean manufacturing than for implementing six
sigma. However, the majority of experts claimed that the level of importance of top
management commitment for the success of both six sigma and lean manufacturing
was virtually the same, with no statistically significant difference in the importance of
this factor. These results were drawn from the outcomes of the Wilcoxon signed-rank
test and with regards to other factors as shown in Table 1. The results implied that
these factors had the same level of importance in terms of implementing either lean
manufacturing or six sigma.
Table 1 Comparison of the statistical significance of the importance of the same

specific critical success factors in the implementation of lean manufacturing and six
sigma
Lean
Six sigma Number of observations
manufacturing
Critical success
Result
factor Lean =
Six
Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Lean Six
sigma
sigma
Top management
commitment and 4.30 1.317 4.70 0.596 3A 5B 25C Not sig
support
11
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Skill and expertise 3.47 1.252 3.63 0.809 8A 8B 17C Not sig
Project Management
skills
3.13 1.074 3.40 1.003 6A 11B 16C Not sig
Linking method to
customers
3.07 1.311 3.37 1.129 8A 9B 16C Not sig
Reward system 2.40 1.192 2.57 1.006 4A 11B 18C Not sig
Linking method to
suppliers
2.37 1.066 2.57 .817 6A 12B 15C Not sig
A: Six Sigma > Lean Manufacturing, B: Six Sigma < Lean Manufacturing, C: Six Sigma = Lean Manufacturing
4.1.1 Employee involvement
A statistically significant difference was found between lean manufacturing and six
sigma for some of the critical success factors. Employee involvement was the first
success factor to show a statistically significant difference in the level of importance
between lean manufacturing and six sigma. Marin-Garcia and Bonavia (2015)
reported that over the past sixteen years there have been no published analyses of
employee involvement and lean manufacturing in process industries. However, it is
commonly accepted in the literature that employee involvement is a crucial factor in
lean manufacturing (Forza, 1996). Moreover, Bożek and Hamrol (2012) argue that the
organizational changes that are necessary during the implementation of lean require
the involvement of all employees, whereas this is not necessary in the implementation
of six sigma. Concerns have been raised with regard to the lack of a requirement for
employee involvement in six sigma compared to lean, which requires a high level of
employee involvement, especially in activities leading to continuous improvement
(Antony, 2011). For lean to be successfully implemented, all employees from the
bottom up must be involved in its implementation and practice (Chinvigai et al., 2007;
Dulaimi and Ellahham 2016), otherwise implementation has a higher failure risk
(Cudney and Elrod, 2010). For lean implementation to be successful, all members of
the organization must be committed to the implementation and practice of lean tools
and techniques (Pepper and Spedding, 2010).
Six sigma, on the other hand, does not require the involvement of the entire
organization (Andersson et al., 2006). This is because only a select group of
professionals who have been trained for the implementation will be involved (Bożek
and Hamrol, 2012). Six sigma is actioned by designated individuals, while lean builds
talent and, therefore, involves everyone. The talent required in the implementation of
lean is the ability to only do those things that add value (Higgins, 2005). Prior to
implementing six sigma, the workplace roles are described in detail and are clearly
distributed, and, therefore, all those involved know precisely what they are doing and
what needs to be done (Pepper and Spedding, 2010). For the implementation of lean
manufacturing, working with employees for the resolution of problems is a critical
success factor (Netland, 2016). For example, based on the Hofstede cultural model, an
individualistic culture is more likely to implement lean manufacturing to a significant
12
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
degree by focusing on employee involvement, creativity, and efficiency (Pakdil and

Leonard, 2016).
Lean tools and techniques can be used to solve environmental issues and innovate
with regard to sustainability issues (Cherrafi et al., 2016; Vinodh et al., 2011).
According to a recent study of global manufacturing and engineering businesses from
Brazil and UK, the using of Kaizen in the proposed model led to improvements in
mass and energy flow outcomes, and a reduction in costs, while assuring the full
involvement of the workforce (Pampanelli et al., 2014). The team implementing
Kaizen has to consider environmental issues, while at the same time it has to ensure
the involvement of all employees. There have been few published studies linking six
sigma directly with environmental sustainability (Cherrafi et al., 2016)
Lean tools facilitate the involvement of as many people as possible, and this includes
tools such as TPM, and Single-Minute Exchange of Die (SMED) (Cherrafi et al.,
2016; Chiarini and Vagnoni, 2015). TPM requires a meeting of all employees from
janitorial staff to top executives (Taghizadegan, 2006). Biazzo and Panizzolo (2000)
explained that lean requires flexibility and the interconnectedness of employees. In
comparison, SMED requires at least two to three individuals to be involved, which
could include the assembly line and links between employees in production lines to
ensure the flexibility of the work flow. Operated in parallel, these practices produce
significantly better operational improvements in terms of environmental impacts
(Chiarini, 2014).
There have been many scientific studies linking environmental benefits with the use
of lean tools. Lean manufacturing practices can lead to a significant improvement in
the work environment (Corbett and Klassen, 2006; Pampanelli et al., 2014).
Organizations implementing lean gain financial advantages from reducing the cost of
waste disposal, as well as other cost reductions due to the benefits of environmental
improvements generated by using lean tools (Pampanelli et al., 2014). It was found in
this study that lean manufacturing and six sigma practices enhance workplace safety
and sustainability, which are objectives of green practices and can reduce damage to
the environment. Therefore, implementing lean and six sigma can solve environment
problems. These findings agree with those of other studies that reported lean
manufacturing companies are more likely to be greener than non-lean companies
(Dües et al., 2013).
Six sigma only requires employees to be aware of their own duties and to understand
the statistical analyses required. Therefore, each individual could perform the
statistical analysis alone. In this study, a statistically significant difference was found
in the level of importance of employee involvement between lean manufacturing and
six sigma (see Table 2). The table shows interesting data regarding the opinions of the
experts. It can be seen from the table that 12 experts indicated that employee
involvement is more important for lean manufacturing than it is for six sigma, while
13
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
only one expert considered the reverse to be true. The experts gave a higher rating to
lean manufacturing than six sigma, with regard to this critical success factor. A
Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicated that employee involvement was more important
in lean manufacturing than in six sigma. It was found from the literature review that
the involvement or engagement of employees was more frequently mentioned with
regard to lean manufacturing than six sigma methodology. However, the results of
this study suggest that six sigma require less employee involvement than lean
manufacturing. Consequently, companies willing to implement lean manufacturing
should ensure that they have the necessary capacity to create and maintain an
extensive involvement between their employees. Thus, as Pampanelli et al. (2014)
state: “The essence of lean thinking lies in the involvement of people”. Employees
should know their individual responsibilities and be able to perform specific tasks
when implementing six sigma, while within lean manufacturing all tasks should be
performed through the involvement of everyone. It can, therefore, be concluded that
lean manufacturing requires more significant employee involvement than six sigma.
4.1.2 Communication
The level of importance of communication was significantly different as a critical

success factor for lean manufacturing and six sigma. Significant levels of
communication are required for the successful implementation of lean (Duque and
Cadavid, 2007; Worley and Doolen, 2006). This was confirmed by Scherrer-Rathje et
al. (2009) who stated that a lack of organizational communication leads to the failed
implementation of lean manufacturing, while effective communication also ensures
the successful implementation of six sigma within the organizational framework
(Banuelas Coronado and Antony, 2002; Ho et al., 2008). The results showed that
communication was more important for lean than for six sigma. This could be
explained by the fact that lean does not include the organizational infrastructure. In
contrast, six sigma includes the organizational infrastructure, and thus aids
communication between employees. Employees are required to communicate in a
shared language. One of the benefits of a six sigma program is the creation of a
common language (Antony, 2006). Henderson and Evans (2000) referred to the
organization infrastructure of six sigma as: “Having everyone in the organization
speaking the same language”. The exclusion of organizational infrastructure is also a
reason for lean to be integrated with six sigma (George, 2003). For this reason, the
lean manufacturing methodology may require strong communication networks to be
established. Therefore, it is recommended that a degree of communication between
the employees in the implementation of lean manufacturing should be given a high
priority.
14
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 2.
Comparison of the statistical significance of the importance of the same specific
critical success factors in the implementation of lean manufacturing and six sigma
Lean
Six sigma Number of observations
manufacturing
Critical success factor
Result
Lean =
Six
Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Lean Six
sigma
sigma
Linking method to the
business strategy
3.57 1.305 4.00 0.830 4A 11B 18C Sig
Involvement of employees 3.50 1.253 4.27 0.691 1A 12B 17C Sig

Communication 3.50 1.253 4.43 0.679 0A 12B 20C Sig
Education and training 3.43 1.223 4.00 0.830 5A 12B 16C Sig
Culture change 3.27 1.258 3.97 1.098 2A 13B 18C Sig
Understanding the tools and
techniques within method to
the employees that perform
3.07 1.230 4.00 0.983 3A 18B 12C Sig
job in shop floor
Understanding the tools and
techniques within method to
the employees that perform
2.87 1.224 3.60 1.070 4A 14B 15C Sig
job in office
Linking method to human
resources
2.73 1.202 3.20 1.126 2A 12B 19C Sig
A: Six Sigma > Lean Manufacturing, B: Six Sigma < Lean Manufacturing, C: Six Sigma = Lean Manufacturing
4.1.3 Culture change
Lean manufacturing and six sigma originated from a diverse range of countries with
different cultures (Laureani and Antony, 2010; Pacheco et al., 2015). Lean
manufacturing tools are geared toward behavioral changes. As a result, some
organizations erroneously believe that it is only possible to implement lean within a
specific culture, e.g., Japanese (Arnheiter and Maleyeff, 2005), while six sigma is tied
primarily to statistical analyses. The results of this study showed that culture was less
important for the implementation of six sigma than it was for the implementation of
lean manufacturing.
The mean ranking value of culture change for lean manufacturing in this study was
higher than the value for six sigma. Thirteen of the 33 experts considered culture
change to be a more important critical success factor for lean manufacturing than six
sigma. This may be because culture change is challenging for lean. This may also be a
result of human behavior and social factors, which can play a pivotal role in the
successful implementation of lean (Eswaramoorthi et al., 2011; Grant and Hallam,
2016). The culture of the organization and the behavior of its staff are a pivotal part of
the implementation and practice of lean (Sawhney and Chason, 2005). Ortiz (2012)
indicated that is difficult for employees to change habits when conducting lean. While
15
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
the concept of lean is simple to understand, there are some difficulties with its day-to-
day implementation by the employees because systems such as 5S require behavioral
changes (Alhuraish, 2016b). Workers require a time to become accustomed to the
requirements of 5S (Gunasekaran and Lyu, 1997). 5S obliges workers to change their
habits to maintain a clean workplace (Ayabakan and Eken, 2014; Gupta and Jain,
2015; Veža et al., 2011). This is not easy to accomplish, and they may return to old
habits (Bayo-Moriones et al., 2010; Mann, 2014).
Lean manufacturing consists of a variety of techniques. One of the main principles of

lean manufacturing is a value stream map. Hellano et al. (2016) tested the value
stream mapping tool for its ability to identify sustainable development indicators and
found it to be effective and efficient for this purpose. Faulkner and Badurdeen (2014)
reported that the value stream mapping tool used in lean manufacturing has
increasingly become of interest to companies seeking to ascertain the impact of waste
on society and the environment. The changing of habits is one of the sub-
requirements of successfully achieving a value stream map (Chen and Meng, 2010).
Changing cultural behavior is a critical success factor for successfully implementing
lean manufacturing (Emiliani and Stec, 1998; Puvanasvaran et al., 2009). However,
changing the behavior of people is an onerous task within lean manufacturing
(Eswaramoorthi et al., 2011).
According to Holweg (2007), cultural differences in Japan are responsible for a better
production efficiency than has been achieved in other countries. There is a debate
regarding the extent to which national culture impacts on the effectiveness of lean
manufacturing and whether lean is more consistent with Japanese culture (Pakdil and
Leonard, 2016). Behavioral change is problematic in the implementation of lean
manufacturing because lean is a mental approach, while six sigma is statistical in
nature. Therefore, lean requires the involvement of people and a change in their
behavior, whereas six sigma requires people to understand statistics. Lean
manufacturing requires employees to change their behavior, to solve problems, and
cooperate with one another. While these factors can be taught, it is more challenging
to introduce the cultural and behavioral changes consistent with the lean approach. It
takes compromise to create new habits and the phrase “what is bred in the bone
cannot come out of the flesh” can be applied. However, the results of this study
indicate that culture change is a more important critical success factor for lean
manufacturing culture than it is for six sigma. Therefore, awareness of cultural
influences can be helpful in a business because it places the organization in a position
to predict how culture will influence the interpretation and implementation of new
practices. The appropriate adjustments can then be made to plan and communicate
strategies for the application and maintenance of critical success factors for the
successful implementation of lean manufacturing.
16
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
4.1.4 Understanding the tools within the methodology for employees on the shop floor
Lean production has been well-documented in the literature since the 1990s.
(Cusumano, 1992; Nilsson, 1996). However, the focus has primarily been on shop
floor workers. As a result, there is still a lot to learn about lean production with regard
to office workers. The development of lean conceptualization has made significant
progress among shop floor workers in the automobile industry (Jørgensen et al., 2007).
Losonci et al. (2011) attempted to determine the critical success factors of
implementing lean on the shop floor
Six sigma programs can often take months to bring to a conclusion, and can create an
elite group of Black Belts (BBs), who are often distinct from the shop floor (Smith,
2003). Lean programs are geared toward working in teams, coordination, and the
undertaking of unusual, but productive activities. In contrast, six sigma tends toward
elitism as its performers devote months of their time harvesting data and are remote
from the work floor (Smith, 2003). One of the experts commented that, “it is true that
lean methods can be implemented at the work floor level without implementing Six
Sigma as a companywide improvement program” (Antony, 2011).
Six sigma does not involve much employee participation in the shop floor work
environment (Pojasek, 2003). This is because it takes a number of months for data to
be collected. Lean, however, can yield results quickly based on Kaizen activities on
the shop floor (Pojasek, 2003). According to Hines et al. (2004), many studies have
emphasized the importance of lean implementation for the shop floor. A review of the
literature suggests that research has focused more primarily on the shop-floor
implementation of lean, while few studies have attempted to understand the
motivations of shop-floor workers for implementing lean. However, no studies have
been undertaken to directly compare the critical success factors for the shop-floor
between the two methodologies. However, the results of this study indicate that the
shop floor is a more important critical success factor for lean than it is for six sigma.
It is more important that all employees on the shop floor understand the philosophy
for the lean manufacturing method than for six sigma. Additional research on this
issue is required to confirm the results of this study and to understand why this is
more important for lean than six sigma.
4.1.5 Education and training
The literature review indicated that education and training have a high level of
importance for both six sigma and lean methodology. The results of this study showed
that education and training were more important for lean manufacturing than six
sigma. An attempt was made to analyze why the experts considered lean more
important than six sigma in education and training. An operator can understand lean
easily (Kumar et al., 2012). Also, lean consists of individual methods that deliver fast
improvements (e.g., Kaizen) (George, 2002). The benefits of lean are also
17
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
immediately obvious (Lee and Strategos, 2014). For six sigma, it takes time for the
benefits to become observable, and therefore any positive outcomes are not
immediately apparent. Six sigma relies on high levels of investment and is not aimed
at common problem solving methodologies (Antony and Kumar, 2012). Therefore, as
Montgomery and Woodall (2008) state, “the level of technical training in six sigma is
generally deeper and more extensive than in the typical TQM programs.” Lean favors
minimal use of resources, with the primary strategy being training and the
development of skills (Antony and Kumar, 2012). Thus, to implement six sigma, a lot
more education and training is required compared to lean methodology (Antony,
2011). Six sigma seems to be difficult to understand, especially within SMEs,
(Antony 2011), while lean is simpler to comprehend. Six sigma takes a period of time
to understand the philosophy, and targets only specific people in the organization
(Vijaya Sunder, 2015). Antony et al. (2008) state that six sigma projects could fail if
the teams working on the project are larger than four to seven individuals. Higgins
(2005) reported that education is linked to everyone within the organization for lean
implementation compared to six sigma where only certain persons are involved.
Employees are capable of learning about and understanding lean manufacturing

philosophies without much difficulty. Lean manufacturing tools are uncomplicated
and are, therefore, easily comprehended and user-friendly. For example, the standard
work lean tool produces rapid results. From anecdotal experience, a maintenance
worker reported that his manager periodically received information related to an
assignment that they had received. The assignment required six steps to complete (the
maintenance worker performed the procedure as part of their usual work). The
maintenance worker was not familiar with either the lean philosophy or the standard
work lean tool. The maintenance worker was later provided with training regarding
the standard lean work tool and its philosophy. Subsequently, a significant
improvement was discovered in the approach of the maintenance worker to the same
assignment, following the execution of a standard work approach involving three
steps to perform the assignment. The same assignment was executed differently in an
attempt to minimize the steps/waste. This experience indicates that employees can
learn basic lean tools at all levels of employment and can be trained to appreciate and
achieve continuous improvement without much difficulty. These differences might
lead to a preference for lean manufacturing. However, the results of this study suggest
that, for lean manufacturing, training is important to everyone within the organization,
whereas, for six sigma, it may only be required for select people. Thus, lean methods
necessitate that everyone within the organization understands the philosophy.
The importance of the remaining critical success factors was significantly different
between lean manufacturing and six sigma. These factors included understanding the
tools and techniques within the methodology by employees that perform jobs in an
office, linking the method to the business strategy, and linking the method to the
human resources. This result is interesting and difficult to explain. Nevertheless, it is
recommended that future studies attempt to determine why the importance of these
18
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
critical success factors is significantly different between lean manufacturing and six
sigma.
4.2. Comparison of the critical success factors for the implementation of lean
manufacturing and six sigma within companies that have successfully implemented
these methodologies
Some companies that have invested in lean manufacturing and six sigma have seen
little or no benefit. Other companies have benefitted from implementing these
methodologies. Thus, there is a need to understand which critical success factors help
companies to successfully implement six sigma and lean manufacturing. This was
addressed by identifying the critical success factors for lean manufacturing and six
sigma within those companies that have already succeeded in implementing both
methodologies. Thus, the experts participating in this study were asked to rate the
degree of success of the implementation of lean manufacturing and six sigma using a
five-point scale: 1 = not successful; 2 = slightly successful; 3 = successful, 4 = very
successful; and 5 = totally successful. The level of success is summarized in the box
plot shown in Figure 1. By excluding the companies that were less than slightly
successful, this study conducted a comparison and estimated the level of success
between lean manufacturing and six sigma for companies that have successfully
implemented these methodologies. It was then possible to verify whether the critical
success factors for each method were different.
Estimated level of success
0
Lean Manufacturing Six Sigma
Fig. 1. Estimated level of success of implementing lean manufacturing vs. six sigma
4.2.1 Critical success factors for the implementation of lean manufacturing in

companies that have successfully implemented lean manufacturing
Most of the experts estimated the level of success of the implementation of lean
manufacturing. Twenty-one out of the 29 companies that had implemented lean
19
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
manufacturing successfully were evaluated, to identify the critical success factors for
the successful implementation of lean manufacturing. A minimum mean score of 4
was attained for top management commitment, culture change, education and training,
communication, involvement of employees, and linking the lean method to the
business strategy. These were, therefore, considered to be the most critical factors for
successfully implementing lean manufacturing.
4.2.2 Critical success factors for the implementation of six sigma in companies that
have successfully implemented six sigma
A similar criterion was followed for six sigma. Only a few experts estimated the
success level of six sigma because not all had implemented six sigma within their
companies. However, using the criteria of a minimum mean score of 4, the most
important critical success factors for implementing six sigma were top management
commitment, communication, skills and expertise, and education and training.
Based on the combined results of the estimated level of success for implementing lean
manufacturing and six sigma, top management commitment was found to be the most
important critical success factor for the successful implementation of both lean
manufacturing and six sigma. The findings also indicated that culture change and
involvement of employees were critical to successfully implementing lean
manufacturing. On the other hand, skill and expertise were the most important critical
success factors for successfully implementing six sigma. The critical success factors
improve the likelihood of success in the implementation of lean manufacturing and
six sigma. This study improved the likelihood of success by identifying the level of
importance of the critical success factors for each methodology within companies that
have already successfully implemented these methodologies.
4.2.3 How to choose the appropriate methodology in terms of critical success

factors
The results of this study can be used as a guide by companies attempting to

implement lean manufacturing, six sigma, or an integrated version of both
methodologies simultaneously. The results will help companies determine how their
resources and capabilities fit with the critical success factors needed for each
methodology and they can strategize accordingly (see Figure 2). Thus, prior to
implementing lean manufacturing, the organization should determine whether it
possesses the capacity to implement critical success factors such as a culture change,
education and training. There are questions that a company should ask before
implementing lean manufacturing. For example, do they have the capacity for culture
change, employee involvement, linking the lean method to the business strategy,
communication and other factors that have been shown previously to be critical to the
implementation of lean manufacturing? If the answer to this question is yes, the firm
can move forward with the implementation planning and action. Additionally, if a
20
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
firm has the capacity to implement six sigma and wishes to do so, they should
evaluate their resources and their capacity to apply critical success factors such as
skills and expertise, top management commitment, and other factors, which are the
critical factors necessary for implementing six sigma.
Fig. 2. Lean manufacturing and six sigma capacity
This study identified the most important critical success factors for companies that
have successfully implemented lean manufacturing and six sigma. The way that these
companies have implemented lean manufacturing and six sigma will provide
guidance for SMEs that also wish to implement these methodologies, especially those
SMEs that lack the capacity to implement both methodologies simultaneously.
Understanding critical success factors could help to facilitate lean six sigma
implementation in SME (Lande et al. 2016). SMEs can, therefore, consider the critical
success factors with the highest priority and pre-plan the implementation of lean
manufacturing or six sigma. By adopting this approach, the implementation will most
likely be successful as the results of the study demonstrated that this approach was
successful within many organizations. It is therefore important for SMEs to identify
the critical success factors with the highest priority and strategize accordingly.
Given the vast differences in the constructs and methodologies of six sigma and lean,
the integration of the two can be too challenging for organizations. Some companies
have developed lean and six sigma independently of each other. This study identified
21
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
strategies for organizations wishing to implement lean and/or six sigma successfully.
Essentially, the results of this study indicate that organizations should identify the
methodology that they want to implement and then identify and understand the
critical success factors for each methodology. By taking this approach companies can
maximize the opportunity for successful and efficient implementation of lean and six
sigma methodologies. The most significant aspect of this research was the
identification of critical success factors for the successful implementation and use of
lean manufacturing and six sigma. Recently, researchers have given much attention to
the potential to integrate lean, six sigma, and green initiatives, which can lead to more
sustainable business practices. These management systems have similar objectives
and are complemented by each other (Cherrafi et al., 2016). Thus, in future research, a
comparison of the most important critical success factors between these management
systems would improve the success rate of their implementation.
5. Conclusions
An integrated lean manufacturing and six sigma methodology improves the ability of
an organization to achieve optimal outcomes in terms of increased/improved
operational and financial performance. Therefore, both the sequential and
simultaneous implementation of lean manufacturing and six sigma requires an
understanding of how to successfully implement each methodology. However, the
simultaneous integration of both methods is not always possible, especially within
SMEs. The common reason for this barrier is a lack of the requisite resources for
implementation. This study investigated the differences in the levels of importance of
the critical success factors for lean manufacturing and six sigma implementation. By
understanding these differences, firms could decide whether they have the necessary
resources to address the critical success factors for the implementation of lean
manufacturing and six sigma, either simultaneously or sequentially. This study has
provided new insights into the implementation of six sigma and lean manufacturing
because previous studies have focused primarily on the critical success factors for the
individual implementation of lean manufacturing or six sigma or an integration of
both methodologies. Thus, this comparative study can not only help organizations
identify which methodology is compatible with their goals and resources, but can also
help them determine where to begin and how to get started based on their
organizational capabilities in terms of the critical success factors for lean
manufacturing or six sigma.
The results of this study were obtained by consulting experts. While expert opinions
are valuable, further studies would benefit substantially from empirical evidence of
how organizations with fewer resources than those studied here manage to implement
lean manufacturing and six sigma successfully. The practical implications are obvious.
Practitioners can focus attention on the critical success factors for implementing lean
and/or six sigma and make the necessary plans and preparations accordingly. This
22
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
would help practitioners avoid experimental implementation strategies that can lead to
wasted effort and a failed implementation. It was also found that cultural influences
play an important role in the interpretation and implementation of lean manufacturing
critical success factors. Therefore, future research should consider how different
national cultural dimensions interact with specific critical success factors in the
implementation of lean manufacturing. Organizations confronting a diverse range of
cultures will benefit from this knowledge. Organizations will be better able to adjust
their internal systems, so that cultural dimensions do not conflict with critical success
factors. In conclusion, this study provides clear evidence that each critical success
factor has a different weighting in the implementation of lean manufacturing and six
sigma. This is an issue that requires clarification in future research, having not been
considered to date with respect to lean manufacturing and six sigma
References
Achanga P., Shehab E., Roy R., Nelder G. (2006). Critical success factors for lean
implementation within SMEs. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management,
17(4), 460 – 471.
Aguado, S., Alvarez, R., Domingo, R. (2013). Model of efficient and sustainable
improvements in a lean production system through processes of environmental
innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 47, 141-148.
Albliwi, S., Antony, J. (2013). Implementation of a lean six sigma approach in the
manufacturing Sector: a systematic literature review. In Proceedings of the 11th
International Conference on Manufacturing Research (ICMR2013), Cranfield
University, UK, pp. 431-436.
Alhuraish, I., Robledo, C., Kobi, A. (2014). Key success factors of implementing lean
manufacturing and six sigma. In Liverpool (2014): 17th Toulon-Verona Conference
Excellence in Services.
Alhuraish, I., Robledo, C., Kobi, A. (2015). The effective of lean manufacturing and six
sigma implementation. In Industrial Engineering and Systems Management (IESM),
2015 International Conference IEEE, pp. 453-460.
Alhuraish, I., Robledo, C., Kobi, A. (2016a). Assessment of lean manufacturing and six sigma
operation with decision making based on the analytic hierarchy process. IFAC-Papers
On Line, 49(12), 59-64.
Alhuraish, I., Robledo, C., Kobi, A. (2016b). The key success factors for lean manufacturing
versus six sigma, Research Journal of Applied Sciences. Engineering and
Technology, 12(2), 169-182.
Alhuraish, I., Robledo, C., Kobi, A. (2016C). Impacts of lean manufacturing and six sigma. In
22nd ISSAT International Conference on Reliability and Quality in Design-RQD.
Arnheiter, E. D., Maleyeff, J. (2005). The integration of lean management and six sigma. The
TQM magazine, 17(1), 5-18.
Andersson, R., Eriksson, H., Torstensson, H. (2006). Similarities and differences between
TQM, six sigma and lean. The TQM Magazine, 18 (3), 282-96.
Antony, J. (2006). Six sigma for service processes. Business Process Management Journal,
12(2), 234-248.
23
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Antony, J. (2011). Six Sigma vs Lean: Some perspectives from leading academics and
practitioners. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,
60(2), 185-190.
Antony, J., Banuelas Coronado, R. (2002). Key ingredients for the effective implementation
of six sigma program. Measuring Business Excellence, 6(4), 20-27.
Antony, J., Kumar, J., Labib, A. M. (2008). Gearing six sigma into UK manufacturing SMEs:
results from a pilot study. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59(4), 482-
493.
Antony, J., Kumar, M., Madu, C. N. (2005). Six sigma in small-and medium-sized UK
manufacturing enterprises: Some empirical observations. International Journal of
Quality & Reliability Management, 22(8), 860-874.
Assarlind, M., & Aaboen, L. (2014). Forces affecting one lean six sigma adoption process.
International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 5(3), 324-340.
Asif, M., Searcy, C., Zutshi, A., Fisscher, O. A. (2013). An integrated management systems
approach to corporate social responsibility. Journal of cleaner production, 56, 7-17
Ayabakan, M., Eken, Ö. (2014). Creating 5S climate at the shopfloor. In Proceedings of
PICMET'14 Conference: Portland International Center for Management of
Engineering and Technology; Infrastructure and Service Integration, Kanazawa,
Japan, pp. 1907-1928.
Banuelas Coronado, R., Antony, J. (2002). Critical success factors for the successful
implementation of six sigma projects in organisations. The TQM magazine, 14(2),
92-99.
Bayo-Moriones, A., Bello-Pintado, A., Merino-Díaz de Cerio, J. (2010). 5S use in
manufacturing plants: contextual factors and impact on operating performance.
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 27(2), 217-230.
Biazzo, S., Panizzolo, R. (2000). The assessment of work organization in Lean production:
The relevance of the worker’s perspective. Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 11(1),
6-15.
Bożek, M., Hamrol, A. (2012). Analysis of efficiency of lean manufacturing and six sigma in
a production enterprise. Management and Production Engineering Review, 3(4), 14-
25.
Breyfogle, F. W. (1999). Implementing six sigma: smarter solutions using statistical methods.
Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Press, Hoboken, NJ, USA.
Brun A. (2011). Critical success factors of six sigma implementations in Italian companies.
International Journal Production Economics, 131(1),158–164.
Calia, R. C., Guerrini, F. M., de Castro, M. (2009). The Impact of Six Sigma in the
Performance of a Pollution Prevention Program. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17,
1303-1310.
Chakravorty, S. S. (2009). Six sigma programs: An implementation model. International
Journal of Production Economics, 119(1), 1-16.
Chakravorty, S. S., Hales, D. N. (2013). Lean systems: Soft OR in practice, OR Insight,
26(3), 149-166.
Chen, L., Meng, B. (2010). The application of value stream mapping based lean production
system. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(6), 203
Cherrafi, A. Elfezazi, S. Chiarini, A. Mokhlis, A., Benhida, K. (2016). The integration of lean
manufacturing, six sigma and sustainability: A literature review and future research
directions for developing a specific model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 139, 828-
846.
24
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Chiarini, A. (2014). Sustainable manufacturing-greening processes using specific lean

production tools: An empirical observation from European motorcycle
manufacturers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 85, 226-233.
Chiarini, A., & Vagnoni, E. (2015). World-class manufacturing by Fiat. Comparison with
Toyota production system from a strategic management, management accounting,
operations management and performance measurement dimension. International
Journal of Production Research, 53(2), 590-606.
Chinvigai, C., Dafaoui, E. M., Mhamedi, A. E. (2007). An approach for enhancing process
and process interaction capability. In 19th International Conference on Production
Research. Valparaiso, Chile.
Corbett, L. M. (2011). Lean six sigma: the contribution to business excellence. International
Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 2(2), 118-131.
Corbett, C. J., Klassen, R. D. (2006). Extending the horizons: environmental excellence as
key to improving operations. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 8
(1), 5-22.
Cudney, E., Elrod, C. (2010). Incorporating lean concepts into supply chain management.
International Journal of Six Sigma and Competitive Advantage, 6(1-2), 12-30.
Cusumano, M. A. (1992). Japanese technology management--innovations, transferability, and
the limitations of "lean" production. MIT Japan Program, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, USA
Dhingra, R., Kress, R., Upreti, G. (2014). Does lean mean green?. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 85, 1-7.
Dora, M., Kumar, M., Goubergen, D.V., Molnar, A., Gellynck, X. (2013). Operational
performance and critical success factors of lean manufacturing in European food
processing SMEs, Trends in Food Science & Technology 31(2), 156-164.
Dües, C. M., Tan, K. H., Lim, M. (2013). Green as the new Lean: how to use Lean practices
as a catalyst to greening your supply chain. Journal of cleaner production, 40, 93-100.
Dulaimi, M., Ellahham, S. (2016). Using Lean management to leverage innovation in
healthcare projects: case study of a public hospital in the UAE. BMJ Innovations, 2:
22-32, 22-32.
Duque, D. F. M., Cadavid, L. R. (2007). Lean manufacturing measurement: The relationship
between lean activities and lean metrics, Estudios Gerenciales, 23(105), 69-83.
Emiliani, M. L., Stec, D. J. (2004). Leaders lost in transformation. Leadership and
Organization Development Journal, 26(5), 370-387
Eswaramoorthi, M., Kathiresan, G. R., Prasad, P. S. S., Mohanram, P. V. (2011). A survey on
lean practices in Indian machine tool industries. The International Journal of
Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 52(9-12), 1091-1101.
Faulkner, W., Badurdeen, F. (2014). Sustainable value stream mapping (Sus-VSM):
methodology to visualize and assess manufacturing sustainability performance.
Journal of cleaner production, 85, 8-18.
Fliedner, G. (2008). Sustainability: a new lean principle. In Proceedings of the 39th annual
meeting of the decision sciences institute, Baltimore, Maryland. pp. 3321-3326.
Forza, C. (1996). Work organization in lean production and traditional plants: what are the
differences. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 16 (2),
42-62.
Gamal Aboelmaged, M. (2010). Six sigma quality: a structured review and implications for
future research. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 27(3),
268-317.
25
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
George, M. L. (2002). Lean six sigma for Service: how to use lean speed and six sigma
quality to improve services and transactions. McGraw-Hill Press. New York.
George, M. (2003). Lean six sigma: combining six sigma quality with lean production speed.
New York: McGraw-Hill Press. New York.
Gliem, J. A., Gliem, R. R. (2003) Calculation, interpreting and reporting Cronbach’s
alphareliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. Midwest Research to Practice
Conference in Adult, Continuing andCommunity Education, Columbus, OH, pp. 82–
88.
Grant, K. P., Hallam, C. R. (2016). Team performance in a lean manufacturing operation: it
takes the will and a way to succeed. International Journal of Technology
Management, 70 (2-3), 177-192.
Gunasekaran, A, Lyu, J. (1997). Implementation of just in time in a small company. Case
study Production Planning & Control, 8(4), 406-412.
Gupta, S., Jain, S. K. (2015). An application of 5S concept to organize the workplace at a
scientific instruments manufacturing company. International Journal of Lean Six
Sigma, 6(1), 73-88.
Hartini, S., Ciptomulyono, U. (2015). The relationship between lean and sustainable
manufacturing on performance: literature review. Procedia Manufacturing, 4, 38-45.
Hellano, A.L. de Moraes, A. J. I. Simon, A. T. (2016). Integrating sustainability indicators
and lean manufacturing to sssess manufacturing processes: application case studies in
Brazilian industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 153, 1-12.
Henderson, K. M., Evans, J. R. (2000). Successful implementation of six sigma:
benchmarking General Electric Company. Benchmarking: An International Journal,
7(4), 260-282.
Higgins, K.T. (2005). Lean builds steam, food engineering: the magazine for operations and
manufacturing management. Available at: www.foodengineeringmag.com/ articles/
Lean-builds-steam.
Hines, P., Holweg, M., & Rich, N. (2004). Learning to evolve: a review of contemporary lean
thinking. International journal of operations & production management, 24(10), 994-
1011.
Ho, Y. C., Chang, O. C. Wang, W. B. (2008). An empirical study of key success factors for
six sigma green belt projects at an Asian MRO company. Journal of Air Transport
Management 14(5), 263– 269.
Holweg, M. (2007). The genealogy of lean production. Journal of Operations Management 25
(2), 420–437.
Huang, Y., Klassen, K. J. (2016). Using six sigma, lean, and simulation to improve the
phlebotomy process. The Quality Management Journal, 23(2), 6.
Indrawati, S., Ridwansyah, M. (2015). Manufacturing continuous improvement using lean six
sigma: an iron ores industry case application. Procedia Manufacturing, 4, 528-534.
Jabbour, C. J. C., Jabbour, A. B. L., Govindan, K., Teixiera, A. A., Freitas, W. R. S. (2013).
Environmental management and operational performance in automotive companies in
Brazil: the role of human resources management and lean manufacturing. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 47, 129-140.
Jessica Hwang, L. J., & Lockwood, A. (2006). Understanding the challenges of implementing
best practices in hospitality and tourism SMEs. Benchmarking: An International
Journal, 13(3), 337-354.
26
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Jørgensen, F., Matthiesen, R., Nielsen, J., Johansen, J. (2007). Lean maturity, lean
sustainability. In Advances in Production Management Systems. Springer USA, pp
371-378.
Kumar, M., Antony, J., Sigh, R. K., Twaari, M. K., Perry, D. (2006). Implementing the lean
sigma framework in Indian SMEs: a case study. Journal of Production Planning &
Control, 17 (4), 407-423.
Kumar, M., Antony, J. (2009). Multiple case-study analysis of quality management practices
within UK six sigma and non-six sigma manufacturing small-and medium-sized
enterprises. Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 223(7), 925-934.
Kumar, M., Khurshid, K. K., Manoj, K. D., Timas, W., Anton, J. (2012). Lean/six sigma
implementation in SMEs: key findings from international research. In 4th Joint World
Conference on Production & Operations Management/19th International Annual
European OMA Conference, Amsterdam, pp. 1-5.
Kwaka, Y. H., Anbari, F.T. (2006). Benefits, obstacles, and future of six sigma approach.
Technovation 26(5-6),708–715.
Lande, M., Shrivastava, R. L., Seth, D. (2016). Critical success factors for lean six sigma in
SMEs (small and medium enterprises). The TQM Journal, 28(4), 613-635.
Laureani, A., Antony, J. (2010). Reducing employees' turnover in transactional services: a
Lean Six Sigma case study. International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, 59(7), 688-700.
Laureani, A., Antony, J. (2012). Critical success factors for the effective implementation of
Lean Sigma: Results from an empirical study and agenda for future research.
International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 3(4), 274-283
Lee, Q., Strategos, P. E. (2014). Lean in hard times. Kansas City, USA.
Losonci, D., Demeter, K., Jenei, I. (2011). Factors influencing employee perceptions in lean
transformations. International Journal of Production Economics, 131(1), 30-43.
Lukman, H., Salim, S. (2017). Factors influencing implementation of lean manufacturing:
Ccse on manufacturing in Indonesia. Entrepreneurship in Technology for ASEAN.
Springer Singapore, pp 47-58.
Mann, D. (2014). Creating a lean culture: tools to sustain lean conversions. CRC Press. USA.
Manville, G., Greatbanks, R., Krishnasamy, R., Parker, D. W. (2012). Critical success factors
for Lean Six Sigma programmes: a view from middle management. International
Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 29(1), 7-20.
Marin-Garcia, J. A., Bonavia, T. (2015). Relationship between employee involvement and
lean manufacturing and its effect on performance in a rigid continuous process
industry. International Journal of Production Research, 53(11), 3260-3275.
Moeuf, A., Tamayo, S., Lamouri, S., Pellerin, R., Lelievre, A. (2016). Strengths and
weaknesses of small and medium sized enterprises regarding the implementation of
lean manufacturing. FAC-Papers On Line 49-12, 71-76
Mousa, A. (2013). Lean, six sigma and sean six sigma overview. International Journal of
Scientific & Engineering Research, 4(5), 1137-1153.
Montgomery, D. C., Woodall, W. H. (2008). An overview of six sigma. International
Statistical Review, 76(3), 329-346.
Montgomery, D. C. (2016). Why do lean six sigma projects sometimes fail?. Quality and
Reliability Engineering International, 32(4), 1279-1279.
Nash, M., Poling, S. R., Ward, S. (2006). Six Sigma speed: faster results come from a lean
culture. Industrial Engineer, 38(11), 40-45.
27
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Näslund, D. (2008). Lean, six sigma and lean sigma: fads or real process improvement
methods?. Business Process Management Journal (14)3: 269-287.
Näslund, D. (2013). Lean and six sigma-critical success factors revisited. International
Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 5(1), 86-100.
Nave, D. (2002). How to compare six sigma, lean and the theory of constraints. Quality
Progress, 35(3), 73.
Netland, T. H. (2016). Critical success factors for implementing lean production: the effect of
contingencies. International Journal of Production Research, 54(8), 2433-2448
Nilsson, T. (1996). Lean production and white-collar work: The case of Sweden. Economic
and Industrial Democracy, 17(3), 447-472.
Noori, B. (2014). The critical success factors for successful lean implementation in hospitals.
International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, 15(1), 108-126.
Ortiz, C. A. (2012). The psychology of lean improvements: Why organizations must
overcome resistance and change the culture. CRC Press
Pacheco, D., Pergher, I., Vaccaro, G. L. R., Jung, C. F., ten Caten, C. (2015). 18 comparative
aspects between lean and six sigma: complementarity and implications. International
Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 6(2), 161-175.
Pfeffer, J. (2010). Building sustainable organizations: the human factor. Academy of
Management Perspectives, 24(1), 34-45.
Piercy, N., Rich, N. (2015). The relationship between lean operations and sustainable
operations. International journal of operations & production management, 35(2), 282-
315.
Pakdil, F., Leonard, K. M. (2016). Implementing and sustaining lean processes: the dilemma
of societal culture effects. International Journal of Production Research, 1-19. DOI:
10.1080/00207543.2016.1200761
Pampanelli, A. B., Found, P., Bernardes, A. M. (2014). A lean & green model for a
production cell. Journal of cleaner production, 85, 19-30.
Pepper, M. P. J., Spedding, T. A. (2010). The evolution of lean six sigma. International
Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 27(2), 138-155.
Pojasek, R. B. (2003). Lean, six sigma, and the systems approach: management initiatives for
process improvement. Environmental Quality Management, 13(2), 85-92.
Powell, D., Powell, D., Lundeby, S., Lundeby, S., Chabada, L., Chabada, L. Dreyer, H.
(2017). Lean six sigma and environmental sustainability: the case of a Norwegian
dairy producer. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 8(1), 53-64. doi:
10.1108/IJLSS-06-2015-0024.
Puvanasvaran, A. P., Megat, M. H. M. A., Tang, S. H., Muhamad, M. R., Hamouda, A. M. S.
(2009). Lean behavior in implementing lean process management. INSInet
Publication.
Sagnak, M. Kazancoglu, Y. (2016). Integration of green lean approach with six sigma: an
application for flue gas emissions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 127, 112-118.
Sarkis, J. Helms, M. M. Hervani, A. A. (2010) Reverse logistics and social sustainability.
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 17, 337–354.
Sawhney, R., Chason, S. (2005). Human behavior based exploratory model for successful
implementation of lean enterprise in industry. Performance Improvement Quarterly,
18(2), 76-96.
Scherrer-Rathje, M., Boyle, T.A. Deflorin P. (2009). Lean, take two! Reflections from the
seecond attempt atlLean implementation, Business Horizons, 52(1): 79-88.
28
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Siddiqui, S. Q., Siddiqui, S. Q., Ullah, F., Ullah, F., Thaheem, M. J., Thaheem, M. J., Gabriel,
H. F. (2016). Six sigma in construction: a review of critical success factors.
International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 7(2), 171-186.
Smith, B. (2003). Lean and six Sigma-a one-two punch. Quality progress, 36(4), 37-41
Snee, R. D. (2010). Lean six sigma – getting better all the time. International Journal of Lean
Six Sigma 1 (1), 9-29.
Taghizadegan, S. (2006). Essentials of lean six sigma. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Tjahjono, B., Ball, P., Vitanov, V. I., Scorzafave, C., Nogueira, J., Calleja, J., Srivastava, S.
(2010). Six Sigma: a literature review. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 1(3),
216-233.
Vais, A., Miron, V., Pedersen, M., Folke, J. (2006). “Lean and green” at a Romanian
secondary tissue paper and board mill—putting theory into practice. Resources,
conservation and recycling, 46(1), 44-74.
Veža, I., Gjeldum, N., Celent, L. (2011). Lean manufacturing implementation problems in
beverage production systems. International Journal of Industrial Engineering and
Management (IJIEM), 2(1), 21-26.
Verrier, B., Rose, B., Caillaud, E. (2016). Lean and green strategy: the lean and green house
and maturity deployment model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 116, 150-156.
Vijaya Sunder, M. (2015). Corporate perspectives: commonalities and differences between
Six Sigma and Lean. Sigma, 6(3), 281-288.
Vinodh, S., Arvind, K. R., Somanaathan, M. (2011). Tools and techniques for enabling
sustainability through lean initiatives. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy,
13(3), 469-479.
Womack, J. P., Jones, D. T., Roos, D. (1990). The machine that changed the world. Simon
and Schuster. New York.
Worley, J. M., Doolen, T. L. (2006). The role of communication and management support in
a lean manufacturing implementation. Management Decision, 44(2), 228-245.
Yang, M. G. M., Hong, P., & Modi, S. B. (2011). Impact of lean manufacturing and
environmental management on business performance: an empirical study of
manufacturing firms. International Journal of Production Economics, 129(2), 251-
261.
29
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Appendix A: Comparison of the importance of the same specific critical success

factors between lean manufacturing and six sigma
Table A1
Success factors for lean manufacturing
Standard
Success factors for lean manufacturing Min Max Mean
deviation
Top management commitment and support 3 5 4.7 0.596
Communication 3 5 4.43 0.679

Involvement of employees 3 5 4.27 0.691
Linking the lean method to the business strategy 2 5 4.00 0.83
Education and training 2 5 4.00 0.83

Understanding the tools and techniques within
the lean method by employees that perform jobs 1 5 4.00 0.983
on the shop floor
Culture change 1 5 3.97 1.098
Skills and expertise 1 5 3.63 0.809
Understanding the tools and techniques within
the lean method by employees that perform jobs 1 5 3.6 1.07
in an office
Project management skills 1 5 3.4 1.003
Linking lean methods to customers 1 5 3.37 1.129
Linking lean methods to human resources 1 5 3.2 1.126
Linking lean methods to suppliers 1 4 2.57 0.817
Reward system 1 5 2.57 1.006
30
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table A2
Success factors for six sigma
Stander
Success factors for Six Sigma Min Max Mean
deviation
Top management commitment and support 1 5 3.57 1.317
Linking the six sigma method to the business strategy 1 5 3.57 1.305
Involvement of employees 1 5 3.5 1.253
Communication 1 5 3.5 1.253
Skills and expertise 1 5 3.47 1.252
Education and training 1 5 3.43 1.223
Cultural change 1 5 3.27 1.258
Project management skills 1 5 3.13 1.074
Understanding the tools and techniques within the
lean method by employees that perform jobs on the 1 5 3.07 1.23
shop floor
Linking six sigma to customers 1 5 3.07 1.311
Understanding the tools and techniques within the
lean method by employees that perform job in an 1 5 2.87 1.224
office
Linking the six sigma method to human resources 1 5 2.73 1.202
Reward system 1 5 2.4 1.192
Linking the six sigma method to suppliers 1 5 2.37 1.066
31
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table A3
Box plot for two categories (lean Manufacturing and six sigma)
Success Level Q1 Q2 Q3
Lean Manufacturing 2 3 4
Six Sigma 1.5 3 3.5
Table A4
The results of a Wilcoxon signed-rank test
N Mean Sum of
rank ranks
Negative ranks 5a 5.60 28.00
Top management commitment and
Positive ranks 3b 2.67 8.00
support - Top management commitment
Ties 25c
and support
Total 33
Negative ranks 12d 7.21 86.50
Involvement of employees - Involvement Positive ranks 1e 4.50 4.50
of employees Ties 20f
Total 33
Negative ranks 12g 9.54 114.50
Linking the six sigma method to suppliers Positive ranks 6h 9.42 56.50
- Linking the lean method to suppliers Ties 15i
Total 33
Negative ranks 16j 8.50 136.00
Positive ranks 0k .00 .00
Communication - Communication
Ties 17l
Total 33
Negative ranks 12m 10.04 120.50
Education and training - Education and Positive ranks 5n 6.50 32.50
training Ties 16o
Total 33
Negative ranks 11p 8.55 94.00
Linking the six sigma method to the
Positive ranks 4q 6.50 26.00
business strategy - Linking the lean
Ties 18r
method to the business strategy
Total 33
Negative ranks 13s 8.15 106.00
Positive ranks 2t 7.00 14.00
Cultural change - Cultural change
Ties 18u
Total 33
32
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Negative ranks 8v 10.38 83.00

Positive ranks 8w 6.63 53.00
Skills and expertise - Skills and expertise
Ties 17x
Total 33
Negative ranks 11y 7.27 80.00
Positive ranks 4z 10.00 40.00
Reward system - Reward system
Ties 18aa
Total 33
Understanding the tools and techniques Negative ranks 18ab 11.39 205.00
within six sigma by the employees that Positive ranks 3ac 8.67 26.00
perform jobs on the shop floor - Ties 12ad
Understanding the tools and techniques
within the lean method by the employees Total 33
that perform jobs on the shop floor
Understanding the tools and techniques Negative ranks 14ae 10.43 146.00
within six sigma by employees that Positive ranks 4af 6.25 25.00
perform jobs in an office - Understanding Ties 15ag
the tools and techniques within lean by
Total 33
employees that perform jobs in an office
Negative ranks 9ah 10.89 98.00
Linking six sigma to customers - Linking Positive ranks 8ai 6.88 55.00
lean to customers Ties 16aj
Total 33
Negative ranks 12ak 7.38 88.50
Linking six sigma to human resources - Positive ranks 2al 8.25 16.50
Linking lean to human resources Ties 19am
Total 33
Negative ranks 11an 9.68 106.50
Project management skills - Project Positive ranks 6ao 7.75 46.50
management skills Ties 16ap
Total 33
33
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table A5
The results of a Wilcoxon signed-rank test
Asymp.
Critical success factors Z Sig. (2-
tailed)
Top management commitment and support -1.414b 0.157
Involvement of employees -2.946b 0.003
Linking method to suppliers -1.356b 0.175
Communication -3.593b 0.00
Education and training -2.173b 0.03
Linking method to the business strategy -1.982b 0.048
Cultural change -2.664b 0.008
Skills and expertise -.794b 0.427
Reward system -1.191b 0.234
Understanding the tools and techniques within the method by employees that
perform jobs on the shop floor -3.170b 0.002
Understanding the tools and techniques within the method by employees that
perform jobs in an office -2.674b 0.007
Linking the method to customers -1.052b 0.293
Linking the method to human resources -2.336b 0.019
Project management skills -1.482b 0.138
34
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Highlighted
1. Compare the importance of the same specific critical success factors between lean
manufacturing and six sigma.
2. Results offer guidance for implementing lean, six-sigma, or both practices together.
3. Initial methodology should be based on capacity to meet the critical success factors.
4. Strategies were identified for successful implementation of lean and/or six sigma.
5.Opportunity for successful implementation of lean and/or six sigma was maximized.

12

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

12

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Accepted Manuscript

A Comparative Exploration of Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma in terms of their

Ibrahim Alhuraish, Christian Robledo, Abdessamad Kobi

Reference: JCLP 9896

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Received Date: 27 December 2016

Revised Date: 19 May 2017

Accepted Date: 15 June 2017

A Comparative Exploration of Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma in

Keywords: Lean Manufacturing; Six Sigma; Sustainability; Critical Success Factors;

Due to the impressive results experienced by US or Japanese companies, such as

manufacturing and six sigma (Alhuraish et al., 2016b). Consequently, secondary

2.1 Lean manufacturing, six sigma, and sustainability

The reduction of waste is an undisputed universal goal. Lean manufacturing aims to

In social terms, the involvement of employees in such programs has generated

perspective, such as identifying significant elements of the method that contribute to

1. Top management commitment and support

1. Top management commitment and support

4. Results and discussion

Table 1 Comparison of the statistical significance of the importance of the same

4.1.1 Employee involvement

degree by focusing on employee involvement, creativity, and efficiency (Pakdil and

The level of importance of communication was significantly different as a critical

Involvement of employees 3.50 1.253 4.27 0.691 1A 12B 17C Sig

4.1.3 Culture change

Lean manufacturing consists of a variety of techniques. One of the main principles of

4.1.5 Education and training

Employees are capable of learning about and understanding lean manufacturing

Estimated level of success

4.2.1 Critical success factors for the implementation of lean manufacturing in

4.2.3 How to choose the appropriate methodology in terms of critical success

The results of this study can be used as a guide by companies attempting to

Fig. 2. Lean manufacturing and six sigma capacity

Chiarini, A. (2014). Sustainable manufacturing-greening processes using specific lean

Appendix A: Comparison of the importance of the same specific critical success

Top management commitment and support 3 5 4.7 0.596

Communication 3 5 4.43 0.679

Linking the lean method to the business strategy 2 5 4.00 0.83

Education and training 2 5 4.00 0.83

Six Sigma 1.5 3 3.5

Negative ranks 8v 10.38 83.00

S-ar putea să vă placă și