The question is asked under what conditions Lean Manufacturing or Six Sigma should be applied. Examining the strategy of the two methodologies might help with answering this question. Lean strategies focus on elimination of waste by using tools such as KANBAN, 5S, Kaizen and Total Productive Maintenance. The roots of lean are footed in the Toyota Production System. Meanwhile Six Sigma strategies are targeted for the elimination of variation within processes. Six Sigma focuses on a structured system of Master Black Belts, Black Belts, Green Belts armed with tools such as SPC, Capability Analysis, Process Mapping and Quality Function Deployment. In their article “Lean Sigma”, Antony, Escamilla and Caine (2003) suggest companies today are seeking to identify what strategy fits the culture of their organizations the best. In some cases the authors suggested a blended or mixed approach would be beneficial.
There are cultural differences between the two methodologies that suggest one might choose Lean vs. Six Sigma or vice versa. In “Where Lean Meets Six Sigma”, Drickhamer (2002) indicates lean programs are firmly rooted in a teamwork centered culture while Six Sigma has an “elitist” factor utilizing highly trained black belts and specialist working on long projects in distant offices from the factory floor. The author also suggests benefits from a blended or mixed approach.
The proper sequence to apply a blended approach might be with Lean first and then bringing in Six Sigma tools as needed. This approach is suggested in a Works Management article (Anonymous, 2003). The statement is made that “the key lean principles generally offer the broader base from which to assess current performance…and will be the best starting place”. Six Sigma can be a final pillar for a Lean program.
Finally, there is no clear answer to the question about when to apply lean and when to apply Six Sigma. Recent literature is recommending a blended or mixed approach to gain greater benefits by using the best elements of each approach.
References
Anonymous (2003), Does Six Mix?, Works Management, 56(6), p14-16
Antony, J., Escamilla, J.L., and Caine, P. (2002), Lean Sigma, Manufacturing Engineer, 82(2), p40.
Drickhamer D.,(2002) Where Lean Meets Six Sigma, Industry Week, 51(4), p55.
4 comments:
This is just a really great post! The best concise clarification I have seen of the difference between Lean and Six Sigma, as well as the way to optimize the benefits of both.
I believe this is a shallow definition of lean. Lean is actually first and foremost about problem solving, and variation is one form of waste. To imply that lean isn't focused on variation reduction is to stay limited to a few books that like to talk just about the 7 wastes and kaizen events. Even the tools you mentioned like SPC and process mapping were used in lean before six sigma was even created.
So, lean is about problem solving, but that doesn't mean it excludes six sigma. Six sigma is a structured methodology for solving problems - it (except for the common practice of elitism) is very consistent with lean thinking.
I think the whole lean vs. six sigma thing doesn't make any sense. Use them together. Putting tools into bins inherently focuses people on the tools and not the thinking behind the tools. True transformation happens at the thinking level, not the tool level. I've never seen an organization fail because they lacked the right continuous improvement tool.
Jamie Flinchbaugh - jamieflinchbaugh.com
I agree with you. The article is intended to differentiate the key differences between the methodologies and clearly points to the trend that Lean and Six Sigma can be blended to a single approach.
I think six sigma seems to create more radical change while lean seems to focus on continuous change. This depends on corporate culture.
Post a Comment