The TQM MagazineIntegrating six sigma with quality management systemsTilo Pfeifer Wolf Reissiger Claudia Canales

Article information:To cite this document:Tilo Pfeifer Wolf Reissiger Claudia Canales, (2004),"Integrating six sigma with quality management systems", The TQMMagazine, Vol. 16 Iss 4 pp. 241 - 249Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09544780410541891

Downloaded on: 15 October 2014, At: 00:43 (PT)References: this document contains references to 29 other documents.To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.comThe fulltext of this document has been downloaded 5131 times since 2006*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:Mohamed Gamal Aboelmaged, (2010),"Six Sigma quality: a structured review and implications for future research", InternationalJournal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 27 Iss 3 pp. 268-317Edward D. Arnheiter, John Maleyeff, (2005),"The integration of lean management and Six Sigma", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 17Iss 1 pp. 5-18Ricardo Bañuelas, Jiju Antony, (2004),"Six sigma or design for six sigma?", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 16 Iss 4 pp. 250-263

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 382916 []

For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors serviceinformation about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visitwww.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio ofmore than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of onlineproducts and additional customer resources and services.

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F Q

UE

EN

SLA

ND

At 0

0:43

15

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

Integrating six sigmawith qualitymanagementsystems

Tilo Pfeifer

Wolf Reissiger and

Claudia Canales

The authors

Tilo Pfeifer is a Professor, and Wolf Reissiger andClaudia Canales are scientific assistants, at the Chair ofMetrology and Quality Management, Laboratory for MachineTools and Production Engineering (WZL) at RWTH Aachen,Aachen, Germany.

Keywords

Quality programmes, ISO 9000 series, Quality management,Cross-functional integration

Abstract

The six sigma concept gains more and more importance becauseof its successful implementation in many European companies. Itcan be assumed that it will also play a role for small and mediumenterprises as a competitive criteria in the future. Approachesare to be found in order to implement six sigma even incompanies with low financial and personal capacities. Six sigmashould be integrated with established quality concepts wherebyquality management systems are the most disseminatedapproaches. The challenge is to combine conveniently aspects ofboth approaches in order to reach a maximum benefit through atargeted application. The optimal exploitation of improvementpotentials and an efficient provision of resources are importantprerequisites for this purpose. This paper shows importantaspects in order to meet these prerequisites.

Electronic access

The Emerald Research Register for this journal isavailable atwww.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

The current issue and full text archive of this journal isavailable atwww.emeraldinsight.com/0954-478X.htm

Introduction

In the last ten years, six sigma has written an

incomparable success story. Six sigma was

especially publicized by Jack Welch, who has

established it successfully since 1995 as CEO of

General Electric. According to one of the last

annual reports, more than a billion dollars were

spent in the necessary project resources, as well as

in the advanced training of employees in the last

years. Nevertheless, an enormous profit in the

billion dollar range could be achieved annually

(Topfer, 2002). The numerous publications of this

success story have set the basis for the success of

six sigma. This success has motivated many

well-known organisations throughout Europe,

such as Siemens, Nokia, Volvo, Deutsche

Telekom, Ford, etc. to deal with six sigma.

If you ask users what six sigma means, you will

find different opinions. Successful users often

consider six sigma as the “modern form of quality

management”. Our experience shows that many of

the traditional tasks of quality management are

displaced by these users directly in the line of

business processes.

Consequently, the tasks of quality management

as a staff department change: in a case of a general

establishment of Six sigma in organisations,

quality managers would assume the task of a

controller for the fulfilment of customer

requirements and the execution of improvement

actions. Furthermore, they would organize

training programs for employees (Weigang, 2003).

Traditionally oriented users of quality concepts

consider six sigma mainly as a tool which might

complement the existing approaches, in spite of

our experience that shows that the demand of

consulting services for six sigma is considerably

higher than for traditional approaches of quality

management. The high expenditures for employee

qualification as well as a large amount of human

resources required for the implementation are

willingly accepted due to the hugely successful

experiences of several OEMs (original equipment

manufacturers).

If OEMs demand their suppliers develop and

manufacture their products according to the six

sigma scale, then also small and medium

enterprises (SMEs) will have to find a way to

implement it, in spite of their limited financial

resources (Topfer and Gunther, 2003a, b).

In the past, many of these enterprises decided to

implement quality management systems (QMS) in

order to ensure their process and product quality.

Therefore in these organisations often exists know-

how on the use of quality management methods.

Different quality management standards such as

the ISO/TS 16949 explicitly require the

The TQM Magazine

Volume 16 · Number 4 · 2004 · pp. 241-249

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited · ISSN 0954-478X

DOI 10.1108/09544780410541891

241

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F Q

UE

EN

SLA

ND

At 0

0:43

15

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

application of quality management methods such

as FMEA (failure mode and effect analysis).

According to this the future challenges for the

implementation of six sigma will be the link of six

sigma with the existing approaches of quality

management and a smart qualification which is

oriented at the existing knowledge in the

organisations.

In order to demonstrate the call for action for

linking the approaches of six sigma and QMS, the

strengths and weaknesses of each approach are

presented. Subsequently, this paper will analyse

how the concepts of six sigma and QMS can be

conveniently combined.

Within this context, the approaches to

implement six sigma as efficiently as possible

against the background of often limited financial

and personal resources in small and medium

enterprises, will also be discussed.

Aspects and success factors of six sigma

The basis for six sigma is the sigma level, which is

described in numerous publications. The sigma

level is a benchmark for the ability of a process to

accomplish the demanded requirements.

From the statistical basis, the strategy for six

sigma initiatives can be derived so that all products

and processes reach this high quality level. By

raising the fulfilment of customer requirements, a

detectable monetary benefit in a manageable time

frame should be achieved. Thus, there should be

adequate, predetermined organisational

structures, proceedings and tools in order to realise

this strategy (Magnusson et al., 2001).

A prerequisite for the realisation of six sigma

projects is the establishment of a special six sigma

organisational structure. On the one hand, this

supports the definition of program objectives on

the management level. On the other hand, this

organisational structure helps accomplish the

project objectives by engaging well-qualified

employees (master black belts, black belts, green

belts) on the operational level. They ensure the

quality of the processes for which they are

responsible. The consequential pursuit of project

objectives is guaranteed by a top-down-bottom-up

approach realised by the six sigma organisational

structure. Thus Pande interprets six sigma also as

an “integral approach to run the business” (Harry

and Schroder, 2000; Pande et al., 2000).

Six sigma offers project management

approaches for project implementation, which

place consequently the increase of the customer

benefits into the center of consideration. The

approaches lean on the Deming-cycle, which is an

established simple model for learning and problem

solving within the framework of continuous

improvement (Pyzdek, 2001). Because of the fact

that this is mainly a model of explanation than a

guideline for a continuous improvement process,

the defined project management approaches in the

context of six sigma are more structured.

Two approaches for six sigma projects can be

differentiated: the DMAIC (define-measure-

analyse-improve-control) and the DMADV

(design-measure-analyse-design-verify). The

DMAIC approach is applied in the context of the

realisation of products and services (core and

support processes). Different approaches for the

planning and the development of products and

processes exist, but the DMADV-approach is the

most popular one in literature. The six sigma

projects in development are commonly called

design-for-six-sigma (Harry and Schroder, 2000;

Topfer and Gunther, 2003a).

Six sigma provides different methods and tools

from two fields:

(1) Statistics (such as methods of statistical

analysis or the tools of Design of Experiments).

(2) Quality management (i.e. for ensuring

customer orientation in the product

development and failure prevention).

Several alternative methods are available and

applicable within these areas. In order to run a

project successfully it is often sufficient to posses

an analytical background and to use only part of

the available methods. Particularly the wise

application of statistical techniques can be

accomplished through the use of statistical analysis

software (Breyfogle et al., 2001).

Thus, six sigma is, from our point of view, a

quality concept, Magnusson calls it an entire

business concept (Magnusson et al., 2001). Its

effectiveness results from the interrelation of the

described strategy, the organisational structure,

the procedures, the tools and the methods. Success

factors and benefits of six sigma are (Pande et al.,

2000; George, 2002):. customer focus for project choice;. project feasibility of the projects in a limited

timeframe;. evaluation of resp. of profitability;. consequent agreement on objectives and

controlling of results;. focus on the essential business processes;. application of an approved toolset; and. consequent enabling of employees and

provision of resources.

Limitations of six sigma

The quality of business processes before the start

of a project has to be taken into consideration for

Integrating six sigma with quality management systems

Tilo Pfeifer, Wolf Reissiger and Claudia Canales

The TQM Magazine

Volume 16 · Number 4 · 2004 · 241-249

242

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F Q

UE

EN

SLA

ND

At 0

0:43

15

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

evaluating the success of six sigma initiatives. If

they provide a high improvement potential,

considerable savings can normally be realised with

low expenditures (Harry and Schroder, 2000).

Compared to the USA, European organisations

have to undergo significantly higher personnel

costs, waste disposal and energy, so that their

processes have often already been optimised for

years (McElhiney, 2002). For these “mature”

enterprises, the project focuses on the

maximisation of the customer satisfaction by

innovations and development of excellent

products. These kinds of projects naturally require

high standards and costs (Pyzdek, 2001).

This has also to be considered in the

determination of the project duration. Because of

the fact that a systematic maximisation of

customer satisfaction can only be reached by

complex and long-term development projects, it is

necessary to have a “long breath” for the

assessment of the results (Tennant, 2002; Schurr,

2002).

The success of improvement projects is based,

on the one hand, on the reduction of failures and,

on the other hand, on a large increase of process

efficiency and productivity by reducing reactive

performance. Furthermore it is aspired to reach a

higher customer satisfaction in development

projects by increasing the fulfilment of customer

requirements (Pyzdek, 2001; George, 2002).

When using standards for defining and

evaluating projects, it has to be taken into

consideration, that it is not possible to evaluate all

projects considering monetary measures with a

maintainable effort. For instance, purchase

decisions are not only influenced by the fulfilment

of customer requirements, but also by many other

external factors, which are difficult to estimate

(Homburg and Bruhn, 1998).

Furthermore the sigma level can only be

acquired for the determination and evaluation of

operational process objectives, if failures can

explicitly be displayed and the empirical database

is big enough for a random sample. This is, for

instance, often not the case in external market

surveys used for determining customer

satisfaction.

However, the strategic objective of six sigma

– the achievement of high quality levels – is not

questioned by this restriction in any way. It is much

more important to find optimal standards that

allow the project success evaluation in a realistic

and efficient way.

For example, approaches of total quality

management like the EFQM model or of quality

controlling such as the Balanced Scorecard,

support the determination of the objectives, which

are essential for organisations. They further

support the assessment of the achievement of

objectives. The Balanced Scorecard provides a

balanced consideration of monetary and non-

monetary objectives. The objectives can be linked

with each other by using Cause and Impact

Chains, which support deducing objectives from

the management to the operational level (Kaplan

and Norton, 1997).

Because of the fact that six sigma only focuses

on a determined quality strategy and a continuous

improvement process, it is useful to integrate other

already existing approaches of an enterprise, resp.

to implement them simultaneously, i.e. EFQM

Model and Balanced Scorecard for the definition

of objectives (Schmutte, 2003). A survey

documents, that the integration of six sigma in

existing management systems, is one of the most

important success factors for German enterprises

(Schmieder, 2003).

QMS belong to the most disseminated

approaches. For the implementation of such

systems it is necessary to identify the business

processes at the beginning. Six sigma also requires

the creation of a process model previous to the

beginning of a project and provides for this

purpose an approach called SIPOC (supplier-

input-process-output-customer). This model is

used to visualise and optimise processes (Hammer,

2002).

Before the potential for an effective integration

of both approaches is discussed, the quality

management system approach will be described in

the next section.

Aspects and success factors of qualitymanagement systems

Quality management systems help to enhance

product quality, providing organisations with

means to achieve higher quality processes. As a

direct consequence of this, customer satisfaction

will be improved (Pfeifer, 2002a).

The development of QMS should be supported

by the use of standards. Standards do not describe

a QMS, but formulate requirements which have to

be fulfilled by the processes (Pfeifer, 2002a).

By far the most popular and world-wide known

standards of QMS are the standards of the ISO

9000 family. By the end of 2001, at least 510,616

ISO certificates had been awarded in 161 countries

(International Organization for Standardization,

2002). One of the reasons for this dissemination is

that ISO 9000 standards apply uniformly to

organisations of any size or description.

The ISO 9000 family of standards, published

originally in 1987, was revised in 1994 and last

time in December 2000. The revised ISO

Integrating six sigma with quality management systems

Tilo Pfeifer, Wolf Reissiger and Claudia Canales

The TQM Magazine

Volume 16 · Number 4 · 2004 · 241-249

243

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F Q

UE

EN

SLA

ND

At 0

0:43

15

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

9000:2000 is based on eight quality management

principles (ISO 9000, 2000; International

Organization for Standardization, 2002; Topfer

and Gunther, 2003b; Dey, 2002), which will be

described next.

Principle 1: customer focus

The new version of the ISO 9000 family attributes

much importance to customer satisfaction as a

relevant aspect for organisation’s success. In order

to achieve customer satisfaction, organisations

have to identify the customer requirements. Both

aspects are explicitly displayed in the process

model of the new version.

The term “customers” is not only to be

understood as the buyers of the products, but also

includes additional interested parties such as own

employees, suppliers, the society, etc. In the six

sigma approach the customer focus is also

considered as a prerequisite for organisation’s

success.

Principle 2: leadership

On the one hand, leadership is responsible for the

proper definition and communication of the

organisation’s objectives. Further approaches are

not given by the standards, but instead,

instruments such as the already mentioned

Balanced Scorecard can be used.

On the other hand, leadership has to create and

maintain an internal environment, in which people

can develop further. For this purpose the six sigma

organisational structure can be applied.

Principle 3: involvement of people

The standards recognise that appropriate

employee qualification, as well as their motivation

are indispensable for the organisation’s success.

However the standards does not specify in detail

how this can be done.

A major benefit of ISO 9000 is that the

processes and procedures required by the standard

are developed internally by those who are

implementing them (Poksinska et al., 2002).

Principle 4: process approach

Due to the process focus, processes are

systematically described, inputs and outputs are

defined and several responsibilities throughout the

processes are determined.

This aspect represents almost the largest

difference between the 1994 and the 2000

versions. The 1994 version placed emphasis only

on the elements of the organisational structure. A

quality management system, according to this

version, is often function-oriented.

In contrast to the old version, the objective of

the 2000 version is to describe a process-based

quality management system, which is applicable to

organisations of all types and sizes. The basis for an

implementation is provided by a process model,

which represents and structures all relevant

elements of a quality management system. This

model describes a control loop, which aims at the

enhancement of customer satisfaction. Starting

from the customer requirements, the top

management (“management responsibility”) has

to ensure that the required resources (“resource

management”) for the “product realization” are

available. Finally, the organisation’s output

(product or services) will be evaluated and, if

necessary, actions for continuous improvement

will be deduced (Pfeifer, 2002a).

This process model of ISO 9000:2000 is used as

a basis in many branch-specific standards as, e.g.

ISO/TS 16949:2002 in the automotive industry or

TL 9001 for telecommunications.

The process documentation and the

deployment of regulations, which help to steer and

improve the processes, encourage the transparency

of the organisation’s activities.

For the illustration of business processes,

process maps can be used. They graphically

represent the interrelation between different

business processes. Processes can be classified into

management, core and support processes in this

context (Pfeifer, 2002a).

A systematic process definition is not defined in

the standards, therefore approaches of process

oriented quality management describe detailed

proceedings (Pfeifer, 2002a). Six sigma also offers

such a process definition approach called SIPOC

(supplier-input-process-output-customer).

The standards require that appropriate

indicators should be formulated for all processes.

These have to be measured and evaluated

periodically (“measurement, analysis and

improvement”).

The methodology known as Deming cycle or

PDCA (plan-do-check-act), which has been

mentioned before, can be applied to all processes

(ISO 9000, 2000).

Principle 5: system approach to management

The structured description of processes as an

entire system helps management to understand

their interrelation and to steer them adequately.

According to this, QMS can be used as a

management instrument to support decision

making.

Principle 6: continual improvement

Organisations are requested to measure and

analyse the quality of their products and processes

Integrating six sigma with quality management systems

Tilo Pfeifer, Wolf Reissiger and Claudia Canales

The TQM Magazine

Volume 16 · Number 4 · 2004 · 241-249

244

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F Q

UE

EN

SLA

ND

At 0

0:43

15

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

as well as customer satisfaction and if necessary to

improve them.

A possibility to detect improvement potentials

and to check the implemented actions is offered by

the audits described in the standard.

System audits assess the effectiveness of QMS

and should be conducted annually at least. Process

audits are applied to verify the effectiveness of

processes. They should take place regularly, but

there aren’t defined any specifications about the

timeframe. The interval should be selected

considering the importance and the failure-

proneness of the processes.

Principle 7: factual approach to decision

making

The management needs relevant information to

make decisions. This information has to be

available and prepared in an appropriate form. For

this purpose, controlling attempts can be applied.

Principle 8: mutually beneficial supplier

relationships

The trust in suppliers can be supported through

their quality activities and objectives which are

described and structured in their QMS.

Certified QMS serve as an evidence for stable

and capable processes in customer-supplier

relationships. This evidence supersedes extensive

supplier audits done by customers.

In addition, the fulfilment of due diligence can

be attested by a certified quality management

system. This offers a discharge in context of the

European product liability law.

Limitations of quality managementsystems

As already described, QMS especially encourage a

systematic analysis and mapping of processes. This

facilitates the comprehensibility of organisational

structures. Thus potentials for an optimisation and

corresponding quality objectives can be deduced.

However, not all quality relevant problems can be

solved using QMS.

A survey from Fraunhofer-Institute for

Production Technology (IPT) (Pfeifer, 2002b)

dealt with the quality by German manufacturers.

In total, 423 enterprises took part in the enquiry.

An analysis of “disadvantages” of quality

management systems shows the following points:. high documentation and administration

effort;. costs;. time effort; and. fixed system.

Critics of the ISO 9000 were sure that it would

only create unnecessary paper work (Douglas et al.,

2003; Poksinska et al., 2002). The standard is

highly documentation-driven and requires that all

documentation be updated to reflect any system

change. These documentation requirements often

exceed the documentation practices prior to

certification (Poksinska et al., 2002; Dziwetzki,

2004).

The establishment and maintenance of a

documented QMS can be a costly and time-

consuming undertaking. There is scarcity of

empirical data on how much it actually costs to

both implement and maintain a QMS (Douglas

et al., 2003).

Quality management systems facilitate the

systematic analysis and the graphical

representation of processes and thus the

distinctness of organisational structures. But

processes are frequently only described without

looking for optimisation potentials. Besides, the

processes are described statically (Pfeifer, 2002b),

while they should adjust to changing conditions in

practice. This can lead to the situation that after a

while the described processes do not represent the

reality anymore and become obsolete, so that the

system does not bring any benefit for the

organisation.

Therefore a continuous process improvement is

necessary which cannot only be managed with

internal audits. Also the audits have some flaws.

There is a lack of available literature or standards

on the effectiveness of QMS audits. The ISO

19011 (2002) for QMS auditing does not even

explicitly mention “audit effectiveness” or “quality

assurance of audits” (Beckmerhagen et al.,

2004).The standard doesn’t provide any

proceedings on how to break down organisation

objectives to the operational level and how to

achieve management by objectives.

Customer focus has a higher significance in the

new version of the standard, but proceedings to

enhance customer satisfaction are also not

described.

The standard gives a good overview of all

processes that should be considered in an

organisation (horizontal process level). The

standard is kept generic and not industry-specific

(Douglas et al., 2003), so that it can be applied in

organisations of all types and sizes without

restricting them with too many guidelines. It

provides neither proceedings nor convenient

instruments for supporting operationally the

improvement of quality, as needed to optimise

single process steps in the vertical process level.

Summarising the last points, we can say that a

big flaw of the standard is the omission of

methodological assistance (Topfer and Gunther,

Integrating six sigma with quality management systems

Tilo Pfeifer, Wolf Reissiger and Claudia Canales

The TQM Magazine

Volume 16 · Number 4 · 2004 · 241-249

245

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F Q

UE

EN

SLA

ND

At 0

0:43

15

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

2003b). Methods like FMEA (Dziwetzki, 2004) or

statistical methods are only partially known and

rarely applied. Generally the standard doesn’t

explicitly mention any method. Six sigma offers for

the elimination of these deficiencies adequate

instruments and methods.

The differences between the approaches are

shown in Table I.

Systematic integration

In order to reach an effective integration of the six

sigma and quality management system approaches

(see Figure 1) it has to be determined:. which benefits QMS can provide as

information source; and. which benefits can be realised through the

documentation of six sigma approaches and

results.

Process analysis

Especially in the course of complex projects, all

relevant processes have first to be determined and

their interactions have to be analysed. Six sigma

demands therefore the SIPOC-model as described

before (Hammer, 2002).

In this context, previously documented business

processes in QMS often provide the required

input. The mentioned process maps offer an

analytic framework in order to show the

interactions of processes.

Identification of improvement areas

Six sigma offers an objective-oriented approach for

the identification of projects, which promise a high

financial success. On the other side, the

application of QMS process audits permits a

continuous and systematic search for all existing

improvement potentials in the organisation.

Thus, it makes sense to apply these two different

approaches simultaneously: the search for the most

profitable projects carried by the project officers

(black belts) and the continuous and systematic

determination of improvement potentials by the

process owners (green belts). The continuous

matching of the improvement areas detected with

both approaches supports the project definition and

helps to optimise project objectives. In keeping with

this, particular dates for the objective definition and

for the process audits in the related divisions have to

be arranged and scheduled together.

Conformance between project and process

objectives

In the “Define” phase of six sigma projects it has to

be aspired, that project and process concur in

objectives as much as possible. However this is

difficult to reach in large projects, because of

complex interactions between involved processes.

After identifying the involved processes using

process maps, the process objectives described in

QMS can be compared with the planned six sigma

project objectives. Thus the impact of

modifications in interrelated processes, i.e.

between production and logistic processes can be

Table I Comparison of six sigma and quality management systems

Six sigma Quality management systems

Objective Monetary benefit through customer satisfaction Customer satisfaction through high quality

products

Strategy High quality level/low failure rates in all business

processes

Arranging business processes according to

requirements of standards

Management Commitment and clear objectives for projects,

creating an organisational structure which pursues

the objectives

Listing of management responsibilities

Organisation Process owner (green belts); project officer (black

belts)

Process owner; management representative

(responsible for QMS)

Regarded resources Required resources for projects (basically human

resources)

Human resources, infrastructure and work

environment

Training In all areas of an organisation, different levels of

qualification dependant on the function in

processes

Required, but not specified

Project management DMAIC/DMADV (continuous improvement

approach)

PDCA (model for continuous improvement,

voluntary)

Process approach SIPOC (approach for describing single processes) Model of a process-based QMS

Methods Specified toolbox No specification

Documentation No specification Listing of requirements

Integrating six sigma with quality management systems

Tilo Pfeifer, Wolf Reissiger and Claudia Canales

The TQM Magazine

Volume 16 · Number 4 · 2004 · 241-249

246

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F Q

UE

EN

SLA

ND

At 0

0:43

15

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

clearly identified. The financial impact of

modifications can be forecasted for example by

applying process cost calculation.

As a rule, a total optimum has to be found which

fulfils all objectives as best as possible. This

represents an important requirement for the

acceptance and sustainable success of the six sigma

concept in the organisation.

Choice of project participants

The participants required for a six sigma project

have to be chosen by examining the related

processes. Departments involved, as well as their

functions and responsibilities in the processes, are

already specified in the QMS documentation. The

required knowledge, which individual participants

need to fulfil the demands of the project, can be

estimated by regarding the definitions in the

system as well as specific project tasks.

Comparing the required knowledge with

available qualification of different employees, the

most capable participants for accomplishing the

project tasks can be systematically acquired. For

the assortment of employees, tools such as a

qualification matrix can support the decision

making.

The decision for the implementation of a

project should be at an early stage. This provides

enough time for an objective-oriented qualification

of the project members and offers a great chance

for the organisation. The employees can be

optimally qualified for their tasks in six sigma

projects with a minimum of expenditures.

Planning of project resources

In order to assure the availability of organisational

preconditions for six sigma projects in all areas of the

organisation, a consistent proceeding for the planning

of resources should be defined. This affects primarily

the choice of employees and their advanced training.

Employees further have to be exempted (partially or

completely) from other operational tasks and thus

have time for the project execution. It should be

defined which position in the organisational structure

project members have during and after their

engagement in six sigma projects.

Standardisation of project evaluation

measures

A consistent proceeding for the definition of

project objectives and their controlling should be

established for the steering of the projects. This

enables the enterprise always to apply similar

standards for the evaluation of six sigma projects.

This concerns, on the one hand, the evaluation

of monetary results, where it has to be assured that

the financial impacts are considered in all

dependent processes. On the other hand, it has to

be defined how to handle results that can not or

only conditionally be evaluated in monetary scales,

such as changes in customer satisfaction or the

impact of complaints.

Further on a decision has to be made, about

under which conditions and which processes the

determination of the sigma level is suitable for the

definition of operational project objectives.

According to this, alternative proceedings have to

be defined.

A consistent proceeding for the definition of

objectives and their evaluation is particularly

important for the implementation phase of six

sigma programs, if enterprises have to decide

about the broad adoption and the extent of a

program. Where required, the results have to be

evaluated in relation to other quality initiatives

established in the organisation.

Documentation of results

The project results have to be systematically

documented in order to assure their availability in

Figure 1 Integration of six sigma and QMS

Integrating six sigma with quality management systems

Tilo Pfeifer, Wolf Reissiger and Claudia Canales

The TQM Magazine

Volume 16 · Number 4 · 2004 · 241-249

247

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F Q

UE

EN

SLA

ND

At 0

0:43

15

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

the whole organisation for further projects. QMS

offer well-structured facilities for the

documentation of process-related results. These

can be documented and visualised, i.e. as process

flowcharts, system procedures, working

instructions, systems of precepts or lessons learned

listings. This encourages also the acceptance of

QMS and its continuous updates because of its

rising importance for the operative work (Douglas

et al., 2003).

Chances of an objective-orientedqualification

A company-wide implementation of six sigma

often implies very cost intensive expenditures for

employee qualification. Therefore, it has to be

analysed, to which degree the personnel should be

qualified.

Due to the multitude and the complexity of

possible method combinations, the optimal choice

of six sigma methods requires a lot of experience.

The trainings should therefore focus on the

qualification of selected experts (black belts), who

guide the projects methodologically.

The comparison between different – also

traditional – training concepts shows that many

methods are already known in organisations. In the

training programs of the German Society for

Quality (DGQ) it is stated, that the scale of the

training and the contents of traditional concepts,

which are fitted to the requirements of

development engineers, correspond to 80 per cent

with the six sigma black belt training. There exists

also an overlapping between the quality

certification of the American Society for Quality

(ASQ) and six sigma designations of black belts

and master black belts (Munro, 2000). Thus it can

be assumed that experts are already available at

many organizations and their knowledge just has to

be complemented.

According to this, the qualification of the

process owners (green belts) could be maintained

as low as possible. As mentioned before, their

qualification should lay an emphasis on the

identification of improvement potentials during

process audits and basic skills for project

participation. The project realisation would

consequently take place under further instructions

of the project officers (black belts) according to the

principle “learning by doing”.

Against this background, it is essential to

identify the necessary qualifications in order to run

projects in different kinds of business processes.

The development of products and production

technologies requires extensive methods of

statistical analysis and design of experiments

(DoE). On the other hand, many support or

service processes can be improved by applying only

a few methodical approaches. These different

requirements should also be considered for the

qualification of black and green belts.

After specifying the tasks to be done in six sigma

projects, these tasks have to be assigned to the

functions in the related processes, which are

already documented in QMS. As mentioned

before, the chosen participants will be task-specific

qualified.

If the function-specific qualifications of

participants are described and actualized in the

QMS process documentation, the required

know-how has to be completed just before the

beginning of new projects.

By using these advantages of existing QMS

documentation, six sigma can also be implemented

successfully in small and medium enterprises with

limited personnel and financial resources.

Conclusion

In comparison with traditional approaches of

quality management, six sigma is the most effective

concept because of the interrelation between its

strategy, organisational structures, procedures,

tools and methods. Because of different maturity

and objectives of organisations, the concept has to

be adapted to the individual call for action. Main

challenges for a successful implementation of six

sigma are the smart integration in existing

management systems and an efficient qualification

program, particularly for small and medium

enterprises.

Quality management systems permit an entire

and coherent overview of the interaction of

processes within an organisation. In the scope of

six sigma projects, single process steps have to be

systematically analysed and improved.

Advantages of the systematic integration of both

approaches are:. an effective proceeding to identify the most

relevant improvement areas;. the assurance of conform project and process

objectives and thus the sustainability of six

sigma projects;. choice of the most capable project participants

and minimization of the qualification effort;. the fulfilment of all organisational

requirements for running projects using

standard procedures and measures; and. increased availability of project experiences

through well-structured documentation

facilities.

Integrating six sigma with quality management systems

Tilo Pfeifer, Wolf Reissiger and Claudia Canales

The TQM Magazine

Volume 16 · Number 4 · 2004 · 241-249

248

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F Q

UE

EN

SLA

ND

At 0

0:43

15

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

Thus the main challenges of six sigma will be

supported and the acceptance and benefits of

QMS will increase. The integrated approaches

support an implementation with limited efforts in

small and medium enterprises. The integration of

six sigma with quality management systems is a

further step towards TQM.

References

Beckmerhagen, I.A., Berg, H.P., Karapetrovic, S.V. andWillborn, W.O. (2004), “On the effectiveness of qualitymanagement system audits”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 16No. 1, pp. 14-25.

Breyfogle, F.W., Cupello, J.M. and Meadows, B. (2001),Managing Six Sigma: A Practical Guide to Understanding,Assessing and Implementing the Strategy That YieldsBottom-line Success, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.

Dey, P. (2002), “How to complement ISO 9001:2000 with sixsigma”, iSixSigma LLC, available at: http://isixsigma.com/library/content/c020211a.asp

Douglas, A., Coleman, S. and Oddy, R. (2003), “The case for ISO9000”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 316-24.

Dziwetzki, M.E. (2004), “Zertifizierungspraxis im europaischenAusland – Eine andere Welt”, Qualitat undZuverlassigkeit, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 25-6.

George, M. (2002), Lean Six sigma – Combining Six SigmaQuality with Lean Speed, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Hammer, M. (2002), “Process management and the future of sixsigma”, IEEE Engineering Management Review, No. 4,pp. 56-63.

Harry, M. and Schroder, R. (2000), Six Sigma: The BreakthroughManagement Strategy Revolutionizing the World’s TopCorporations, Currency/Doubleday, New York, NY.

Homburg, C. and Bruhn, M. (1998), “Kundenbindungs-management – Eine Einfuhrung in die theoretischen undpraktischen Problemstellungen”, in Bruhn, C. (Ed.),Handbuch Kundenbindungsmanagement: Grundlagen –Konzepte – Erfahrungen, Gable, Wiesbaden.

International Organization for Standardization (2002), The ISOSurvey of ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 Certificates. 11th Cycle:Up to and including 31 December 2001, available at:www.iso.ch/iso/en/iso9000-14000/iso9000/survey11thcycle.pdf

ISO 9000 (2000), Quality Management Systems – Fundamentalsand Vocabulary, International Organization forStandardization, Geneva.

Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1997), Balanced Scorecard,Schaffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart.

McElhiney, G. (2002), “Huben wie druben? – Six sigma solltenicht blind aus Amerika ubernommen werden”, Qualitat:und Zuverlassigkeit, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 300-2.

Magnusson, K., Kroslid, D. and Bergman, B. (2001), Six sigmaumsetzen – Die neue Qualitatsstrategie fur Unternehmen,Hanser, Munchen.

Munro, R.A. (2000), “Linking six sigma with QS 9000. Autoindustry adds new tool for quality improvement”, QualityProgress, No. 5, pp. 47-53.

Pande, P.S., Neuman, R.P. and Cavanagh, R.R. (2000), The SixSigma Way – How GE, Motorola and Other Top Companiesare Honing Their Performance, McGraw-Hill, New York,NY.

Pfeifer, T. (2002a), Quality Management – Strategies, Methods,Techniques, Hanser, Munchen.

Pfeifer, T. (2002b), “Qualitat in produzierenden Unternehmen2002 – Eine Untersuchung zum Zusammenhang zwischenUnternehmenserfolg und Qualitatsmanagement”,Fraunhofer Institut fur Produktionstechnologie, Aachen.

Poksinska, B., Dahlgaard, J.J. and Antoni, M. (2002), “The stateof ISO 9000 certification: a study of Swedishorganizations”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 14 No. 5,pp. 297-306.

Pyzdek, T. (2001), The Six Sigma Handbook – A Complete Guidefor Greenbelts, Blackbelts and Managers at All Levels,MGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Schmieder, M. (2003), “Vorsichtige Annaherung – Anwendungvon Six sigma in Deutschland”, Qualitat undZuverlassigkeit, Vol. 48 No. 7, pp. 689-700.

Schmutte, A. (2003), “Six sigma im Business Excellence Prozess– Wertorientierte Unternehmensfuhrung mit BalancedScorecard, EFQM und Six sigma bei Siemens”, in Topfer, A.(Ed.), Six Sigma – Konzeption und Erfolgsbeispiele,Springer, Berlin.

Schurr, S. (2002), “Magische 3,4 und mehr – Design for Six sigmaverwirklicht den integrierten Methodeneinsatz”, Qualitatund Zuverlassigkeit, Vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 246-7.

Tennant, G. (2002), Design for Six Sigma: Launching NewProducts and Services without Failure, Gower, Aldershot.

Topfer, A. (2002), “Ansatz und Nutzen von Six sigma”, inTopfer, A. (Ed.), Business Excellence. Wie SieWettbewerbsvorteile und Wertsteigerung erzielen,Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung GmbH, Frankfurt,pp. 319-33.

Topfer, A. and Gunther, S. (2003a), “Steigerung desUnternehmenswertes durch Null-Fehler-Qualitat”, inTopfer, A. (Ed.), Six sigma – Konzeption undErfolgsbeispiele, Springer, Berlin.

Topfer, A. and Gunther, S. (2003b), “Six Sigma imWirkungsverbund mit ISO 9000:2000”, in Topfer, A. (Ed.),Six Sigma – Konzeption und Erfolgsbeispiele, Springer,Berlin.

Weigang, F. (2003), “Optimierter profit – 3. Six sigma konferenzJanuar 2003 in Palm Springs”, Quality Engineering, No. 5,pp. 12-13.

Further reading

ISO 9000: 2001 (2001), Quality Management Principles,International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.

Integrating six sigma with quality management systems

Tilo Pfeifer, Wolf Reissiger and Claudia Canales

The TQM Magazine

Volume 16 · Number 4 · 2004 · 241-249

249

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F Q

UE

EN

SLA

ND

At 0

0:43

15

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)

This article has been cited by:

1. Alireza Shokri, David Oglethorpe, Farhad Nabhani. 2014. Evaluating Six Sigma methodology to improve logistical measures offood distribution SMEs. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 25:7, 998-1027. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

2. Maneesh Kumar, Khawaja Khurram Khurshid, Dianne Waddell. 2014. Status of Quality Management practices in manufacturingSMEs: a comparative study between Australia and the UK. International Journal of Production Research 1-14. [CrossRef]

3. S. Karthi, S. Devadasan, K. Selvaraju, C. G. Sreenivasa, N. M. Sivaram. 2014. Transforming into a Lean Six Sigma EnterpriseThrough ISO 9001 Standard-Based Quality Management System. Journal of Enterprise Transformation 4, 100-122. [CrossRef]

4. Paulo Augusto Cauchick Miguel, Marly Monteiro de Carvalho. 2014. Benchmarking Six Sigma implementation in servicescompanies operating in an emerging economy. Benchmarking: An International Journal 21:1, 62-76. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

5. M. Prasanna, Sekar Vinodh. 2013. Lean Six Sigma in SMEs: an exploration through literature review. Journal of Engineering,Design and Technology 11:3, 224-250. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

6. S. Karthi, S.R. Devadasan, K. Selvaraju, N.M. Sivaram, C.G. Sreenivasa. 2013. Implementation of Lean Six Sigma through ISO9001:2008 based QMS: a case study in a textile mill. Journal of the Textile Institute 104, 1089-1100. [CrossRef]

7. Pedro Marques, José Requeijo, Pedro Saraiva, Francisco Frazão‐Guerreiro. 2013. Integrating Six Sigma with ISO 9001.International Journal of Lean Six Sigma 4:1, 36-59. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

8. Paulo Augusto Cauchick Miguel, Eduardo Satolo, João Marcos Andrietta, Felipe Araújo Calarge. 2012. Benchmarking the useof tools and techniques in the Six Sigma programme based on a survey conducted in a developing country. Benchmarking: AnInternational Journal 19:6, 690-708. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

9. Sunil V. Deshmukh, Ashish Chavan. 2012. Six Sigma and SMEs: a critical review of literature. International Journal of Lean SixSigma 3:2, 157-167. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

10. S. Karthi, S. R. Devadasan, R. Murugesh, C. G. Sreenivasa, N. M. Sivaram. 2012. Global views on integrating Six Sigma andISO 9001 certification. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 23, 237-262. [CrossRef]

11. Professor Jiju Antony, Roger John Hilton, Amrik Sohal. 2012. A conceptual model for the successful deployment of Lean SixSigma. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 29:1, 54-70. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

12. Professor Jiju Antony, Roger John Hilton, Amrik Sohal. 2012. A conceptual model for the successful deployment of Lean SixSigma. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 29:1, 54-70. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

13. Professor Jiju Antony, Ashish Malik, Stephen Blumenfeld. 2012. Six Sigma, quality management systems and the developmentof organisational learning capability. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 29:1, 71-91. [Abstract] [FullText] [PDF]

14. S. Karthi, S.R. Devadasan, R. Murugesh. 2011. Integration of Lean Six‐Sigma with ISO 9001:2008 standard. InternationalJournal of Lean Six Sigma 2:4, 309-331. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

15. Florian Johannsen, Susanne Leist, Gregor Zellner. 2011. Six sigma as a business process management method in services: analysisof the key application problems. Information Systems and e-Business Management 9, 307-332. [CrossRef]

16. T.Y. Lee, W.K. Wong, K.W. Yeung. 2011. Developing a readiness self‐assessment model (RSM) for Six Sigma for Chinaenterprises. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 28:2, 169-194. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

17. Paulo Augusto Cauchick Miguel, João Marcos Andrietta. 2010. Outcomes from a descriptive survey of Six Sigma managementpractices in Brazil. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma 1:4, 358-377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

18. Mohamed Gamal Aboelmaged. 2010. Six Sigma quality: a structured review and implications for future research. InternationalJournal of Quality & Reliability Management 27:3, 268-317. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

19. Paulo Augusto Cauchick Miguel, João Marcos Andrietta. 2009. Benchmarking Six Sigma application in Brazil. Benchmarking:An International Journal 16:1, 124-134. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

20. Silvia Helena Boarin Pinto, Marly Monteiro de Carvalho, Linda Lee Ho. 2008. Main quality programs characteristics in largesize Brazilian companies. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 25:3, 276-291. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

21. Ziaul Huq. 2006. Six-Sigma implementation through Competency Based Perspective (CBP). Journal of Change Management 6,277-289. [CrossRef]

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F Q

UE

EN

SLA

ND

At 0

0:43

15

Oct

ober

201

4 (P

T)