See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/327348775

Implementing Lean Six Sigma in Supply Chain Management: Combining Lean

Six Sigma with Process Improvement

Chapter · January 2019

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-99034-7_6

CITATIONS READS

0 662

2 authors:

Souraj Salah Abdur Rahim

University of New Brunswick University of New Brunswick
23 PUBLICATIONS   195 CITATIONS    133 PUBLICATIONS   2,674 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Pricing of Perishable products View project

Fault Detection, Isolation and Prognosis View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Souraj Salah on 02 December 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Int. J. Transitions and Innovation Systems, Vol. X, No. Y, xxxx 1

Implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) in supply

chain management (SCM): an integrated management
philosophy

Souraj Salah*
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of New Brunswick,
P.O. Box 4400, Fredericton, NB E3B 5A3, Canada
Fax: 1-506-453-5025
E-mail: sourajs@yahoo.com
*Corresponding author

Abdur Rahim
Faculty of Business Administration,
University of New Brunswick,
P.O. Box 4400, Fredericton, NB E3B 5A3, Canada
and
Department of Systems Engineering,
King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals,
Dhahran 31261, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Fax: 1-506-453-3561
E-mail: Rahim@unb.ca

Juan A. Carretero
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of New Brunswick,
P.O. Box 4400, Fredericton, NB E3B 5A3, Canada
Fax: 1-506-453-5025
E-mail: Juan.Carretero@unb.ca

Abstract: Supply chain management (SCM) is essential for any company to

survive the increasing pressures of global competition. There have been
continuous changes in global manufacturing and service markets, causing
supply chain (SC) members to reassess their effectiveness individually and as a
whole. A new evolution in quality management (QM) is Lean Six Sigma (LSS),
which is a continuous improvement (CI) methodology that aims at customer
satisfaction and system waste reduction. SCM can utilise the QM concepts as
well as the LSS tools and CI principles to achieve high levels of customer
satisfaction regarding cost, quality and delivery. Researchers have considered
the integration of Lean and Six Sigma with SCM. This research extends the
previous works and proposes the implementation of LSS in SCM. A case study
provides an example of how LSS, utilising value stream mapping (VSM), can
be used to improve an SC.

Copyright © 200x Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

2 S. Salah et al.

Keywords: supply chain management; SCM; quality management; QM;

just-in-time; JIT; continuous improvement; CI; Lean Six Sigma; LSS; value
stream mapping; VSM.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Salah, S., Rahim, A.

and Carretero, J.A. (xxxx) ‘Implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS)
in supply chain management (SCM): an integrated management philosophy’,
Int. J. Transitions and Innovation Systems, Vol. X, No. Y, pp.000–000.

Biographical notes: Souraj Salah is a PhD graduate from the Department of

Mechanical Engineering at the University of New Brunswick, Canada. He is
also a Certified Master Black Belt.

Abdur Rahim is a Professor of Quantitative Methods, Quality Control,

Inventory Control, Reliability, Production Management, Operations
Management and Total Quality Management at the Faculty of Business
Administration at the University of New Brunswick, Canada.

Juan A. Carretero is an Associate Professor of Simulation, Optimisation, and

Robotics at the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of
New Brunswick, Canada.

1 Introduction

Lean and Six Sigma are developments in continuous improvement (CI) methodology.
Lean Six Sigma (LSS) is an approach that combines Lean and Six Sigma tools and
philosophies to focus on improving quality, reducing process variation, and eliminating
non-value added activities. Its goal is to improve quality by first identifying waste within
the organisation; systematically eliminate this waste, and then reduce process variation. A
quality programme that the entire organisation can engage in is created, by combining the
two methodologies, as each builds upon the other’s strengths (Salah et al., 2010a).
In today’s supply chain management (SCM) system, because of increasing
competition, the supplier is demanded to offer a high quality product with minimum cost
to the market.
Despite LSS being around for over 25 years now, a significant number of companies
still do not really know what it is. LSS uses the define-measure-analyse-improve-control
(DMAIC) process of define, measure, analysis, improve and control to solve problems.
The methodology is data centric with excellent tools that are powerful because they offer
statistical validity.
However, benefits depend highly upon effective implementation of LSS in SCM,
which is often problematic. Hendricks and Singhal (1996) studied the performances of
3,000 firms; many of which use LSS effectively. They compared the LSS firms to similar
companies without formal LSS. They found LSS firms were significantly stronger in
terms of profitability, return on assets and stock performance. The findings of Hendricks
and Singhal (1996) provided an evaluation of the implementation of an integrated
approach.
There is a direct relationship between CI and SCM (Salah et al., 2010b). The
understanding of supply chain (SC) dynamics or relationships is a key driver of business
performance. There is a relationship between total quality management (TQM), SCM and
 Implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) in supply chain management (SCM) 3

just-in-time (JIT) at the strategic level (Kannan and Tan, 2005). Also, focusing on SC and
JIT characteristics can help improve product quality (Tan et al., 2002). The key issue of
how SCM is integrated with other operational performance initiatives, such as Lean
manufacturing and TQM is still being explored and developed (Ballou et al., 2000;
Miller, 2002). This also applies to Six Sigma and LSS.
SCM can utilise the JIT and LSS principles such as focusing on adding value to
customers, reducing defectives, streamlining value flow to customers, pulling instead of
pushing, choosing few best strategic suppliers, reducing inventory, waste and improving
on time delivery, more frequent deliveries of less quantities and delivery to point of use.
SCM brings all trade partners together and focuses on an inter-organisational perspective
to achieve optimisation and efficiency (Cooper et al., 1997; Lamber and Cooper, 2000).
This matches with Taguchi’s principle of the minimum loss to the society.
Improving SCM includes the focus on inventory, transportation costs and the SC
partners. A trade off needs to exist between the interrelated inventory and transportation
costs in order to achieve a higher reduction in total logistics costs (Blumenfeld et al.,
1987). A study of the US food industry indicated that an annual waste of $30 billion
resulted from the poor coordination among SC partners (Fisher, 1997). One of the
observations by Tan et al. (2002) indicated that a realistic approach to SCM is to focus on
immediate suppliers and customers. For example, locating next to suppliers has a positive
impact on market share. Also, the quality level is more important than product price in
the supplier evaluation process. Juran’s trilogy consists of quality planning, quality
control and quality improvement which all apply to the supplier relations (Baston and
McGough, 2007).
The next few sections of this paper aim at introducing SCM and LSS. This is then
followed by a discussion of SCM and quality management (QM), and a discussion of
LSS and SCM. This research extends the previous works and proposes the
implementation of LSS in SCM. Finally, a case study is provided to illustrate how LSS
can be utilised to improve an SC.

2 Supply chain management

LSS is a combination of two popular CI methodologies: Lean and Six Sigma. Lean and
Six Sigma focus typically on improving the production and transactional processes of an
organisation. Although each uses different methodologies and principles to effect the
improvement, both have complementary effects (O’Rourke, 2005).
Each of these methodologies has been individually popularised by successful
implementations at companies such as Toyota and General Electric. However, these
implementations were not without some difficulty. The experiences of the first
implementations of Lean and Six Sigma methodologies are unique based on leadership
and culture. Subsequent implementations of Lean and Six Sigma have benefited from the
literature and experiences produced by these pioneering companies (O’Rourke, 2005).
Nevertheless there is not much research in the literature describing the status of Six
Sigma applications in SC including its focus, tools and techniques utilised, benefits and
limitation. It is important to describe the status of Six Sigma implementation in the SC to
help companies as a benchmarking exercise including tools and techniques, fundamental
metrics, potential savings and reasons for potential failures among others (Raj and Attri,
2010).
4 S. Salah et al.

An SC is the entire network of activities of a firm which link suppliers, warehouses,

factories, stores and customers. These activities not only include material flow, but also,
services, information and funds (Nahmias, 2009). SCM is about integrating the processes
and optimising the efforts of all members of the chain to improve quality, responsiveness,
pricing, material flow, add more value to customers, and reduce materials costs (Kannan
and Tan, 2005; Chan and Chan, 2006). SCM is a new management philosophy viewed as
an initiative focusing on the coordination of the manufacturing, logistics, materials,
distribution, and transportation as well as on how companies utilise their suppliers’
capabilities to improve competitive advantage. It is the chain that links processes of
different organisations from raw materials to the end user, which can be extended to the
after-sale services and recycling (Tan et al., 2002). Other examples of researchers who
studied SCM include Bowersox and Closs (1996), Lalonde and Pohlen (1996), and
Mentzer et al. (2001).
Also, SCM is a set of approaches used to achieve the efficient integration of the SC
entities in order to produce and distribute the right quantities, at the right time, to the right
place, so that system-wide costs are minimised without sacrificing service requirements
(Simchi-Levi et al., 2003). The objectives of the SCM are productivity improvement,
inventory reduction and cycle time reduction in the short-term and the improvement of
customer satisfaction, profit across the whole SC and market share in the long-term (Tan
et al., 1998). The SC business entities as well as its main stages and their indices are
shown in Figure 1. The SC is also referred to as the logistics network (see Figure 2).

Figure 1 Integrated SC entities and stages

Source: Adapted from Antony et al. (2006)

Figure 2 A generic example of an SC

 Implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) in supply chain management (SCM) 5

The term SCM emerged from Procter and Gamble in the early 1980’s as they tracked the
flow of goods in the distribution channel. The focus in organisations has been shifting to
the cost opportunities in the SC since the traditional focus of firms, i.e., manufacturing,
has become relatively efficient. The primary trade-off in SCM is between cost and time
to respond (Nahmias, 2009). In addition to being fast and cost-effective, a superior SC is
agile, adaptable and aligning all of its partners’ interests to satisfy customers (Lee, 2004).
The concept of SCM has grown from inventory management to overall operations
management (Yang et al., 2007). SCM is about the efficient performance of activities
such as handling products, partnerships, new product development, promotions, etc. It
does not only focus on products flow, but also on life cycle from the process, product and
SC design, through promoting and merchandising to fulfilling demand (Kopczak and
Johnson, 2003). The literature revealed that SCM either focuses on the transportation and
logistics function, the purchasing and supply function, or the integrated material
management function which includes the previous two functions (Tan et al., 2002).

Figure 3 SC strategic planning process

Source: Adapted from Foster (2007)

Deliveries to all intermediate points in the SC, which is a dynamic discrete event system,
have to be controlled with low variability (synchronised) to make the SC efficient
(Antony et al., 2006). This is important to achieve lower levels of inventory through on
time delivery of more frequent and smaller batches of products. An effective SCM
requires a strategic planning process as in Figure 3. This process greatly resembles
Deming’s plan-do-check-act (PDCA) cycle. To achieve its full impact, SCM needs to be
fully implanted in the business strategy and considered throughout the product life cycle
(Kopczak and Johnson, 2003).
The initial step in formulating an effective SC strategy is to understand the demand of
supplied products, which can be classified into functional (which requires an efficient SC
to supply the predictable demand) or innovative (which requires a responsive SC to
supply the unpredictable demand) (Fisher, 1997). To build an effective SC, firms must
shift from being functionally based to business process-focused, internally and across the
SC. This has lead to the development of frameworks to link strategy, SC processes and
proper performance metrics across organisations (Amer et al., 2007). SCM practices
include (Tan et al., 2002; Kannan and Tan, 2005):
6 S. Salah et al.

• integration of activities across the SC and becoming more responsiveness

• establishing a communication system and frequent contacts with all SC members
• communicating future strategic needs to all SC members
• the use of cross-organisational teams
• building trust among SC members and involving them in planning of marketing
• identifying additional markets (the SC can extend beyond immediate members)
• participating in the market efforts of own customers
• participating in the suppliers’ sourcing decisions and involving them in the product
and process design as well as production planning
• partnering with the few best suppliers to improve their management
• outsourcing non-strategic activities in order to focus on the core ones internally
• determining customer future needs and contacting customers for feedback
• locating close to customer and requiring supplier to locate close to own business
• increasing on time delivery and JIT abilities of own firm and of partners.
SCM activities encompass the strategic levels (including decisions of long-lasting effects
on the system), tactical levels (including decisions updated regularly) and operational
levels (including daily decisions). SCM includes decisions related to issues such as
distribution network configuration, inventory control, supply contracts, distribution
strategies, SC integration and strategic partnering, outsourcing and procurement, product
design, information technology and decision-support systems, and customer value
(Simchi-Levi et al., 2003; Manzini et al., 2008). Operational SCM key performance
indicators (KPIs) include cycle time, utilisation rate, forecasting accuracy and lead-time,
whereas financial KPIs include sales, material, transportation and inventory (Yang et al.,
2007).
SCM has caused six main shifts in business focus from: cross-functional to
cross-enterprise integration, physical efficiency (producing and distributing) to market
mediation (matching supply with demand while remaining efficient), improving supply
processes to coupling that with getting earlier demand information and affecting demand
(using or eliminating promotions, synchronising planning cycles, sharing information,
streamlining replenishment using vendor-managed inventory as an example),
single-company product design to a collaborative and concurrent design of product,
process and SC (i.e., design for SCM), cost reduction to breakthrough business models,
and, mass-market supply to tailored offerings by integrating the company’s SCM,
customer relationship management (CRM) and enterprise resource planning (ERP)
systems, to increase the customer’s loyalty (Kopczak and Johnson, 2003).
SCM implementation is complex and difficult. Difficulties in SCM are due to the
challenge of designing and operating an SC, while minimising the total system-wide
costs (global optimisation arising from the complexity of the SC network, the conflicting
objectives of the different elements of the SC, the continuous change in the elements of
SC, and the variations in demand and costs) as well as maintaining the total system-wide
service levels and the uncertainty in customer demand forecast (arising from the
 Implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) in supply chain management (SCM) 7

challenge of matching supply and demand, the considerable variation in inventory and
back-order levels across the SC, inaccuracy of forecasting, and the additional sources of
uncertainty to the demand, such as delivery lead times and manufacturing defects)
(Simchi-Levi et al., 2003).
The value chain is a tool, which disaggregates a company into its core activities to
reduce costs and find sources of competitiveness (see Figure 4). The value system is
composed of a group of value chains. One of the significant aspects of the value chain is
the connection between a chain of suppliers and consumers. The SCM concept extends
the value chain economic concept and provides a more realistic view of it (Foster, 2007).

Figure 4 Michael Porter’s value chain

Source: Adapted from Foster (2007)

SC considerations add a third dimension to concurrent engineering (Nahmias, 2009). An
example of an SCM model that utilises software is the supply chain operations reference
(SCOR) model (Dasgupta, 2003) which is considered as an extension of business process
reengineering (BPR). It is based on five levels: plan, source, make, deliver, and return.
However, it lacks analytical tools for problem solving and may not provide the flexibility
to adapt to SC variability (Amer et al., 2007).

3 Lean Six Sigma management

The integration of Lean and Six Sigma overcomes the shortcomings of both; they
compliment each other. Integration can help an organisation achieve results faster and
more efficiency. An important goal of production processes and SCs is reducing the
order-to-cash cycle. Lean is a CI methodology that has as its goals to improve quality,
eliminate waste, reduce lead-time, and reduce total cost of a process. Ohno derived the
Lean Methodology from the Toyota Production System. He stated, “The most important
objective of the Toyota system has been to increase production efficiency by consistently
and thoroughly eliminating waste”, which emphasised the link with improved business
results (Ohno, 1988). The focus of Lean is on the removal of non-value added steps in an
effort to increase process speed and to give the customer what they value. In practice, this
8 S. Salah et al.

typically involves identifying value, defining the value stream, determining flow,
defining pull, and improving the process.
Six Sigma is defined as a statistic, a philosophy, and a CI methodology (O’Rourke,
2005). It focuses on reducing variation, with Sigma representing the measurement of
standard deviation from the mean of a process. As a quality statistic, Six Sigma allows
3.4 defects per one million opportunities and is related to the cost of quality. The
philosophy of Six Sigma is the use of data and statistical analysis tools for systematic
processes improvement. O’Rourke (2005) provided a detailed explanation of the Six
Sigma methodology as a five-phase, disciplined approach to CI. The five-phases are
define, measure, analyse, improve, and control. These phases are referred to as DMAIC.
During the define phase, projects are organised, improvement goals are set, and the
overall value of the project is determined. During the measure phase the process is
mapped and relevant data are collected. The analyse phase is then used to apply statistical
tools to the collected data to determine process capability and sources of variation. The
improve phase uses the knowledge gained from the measure and analyse phases to
generate possible solutions. The project then moves into the control phase. During that
phase the improved process is validated and handed over to the process owner.
Six Sigma focuses on eliminating the variation within the process and assumes that
once the variation is minimised the process is improved. To eliminate the variation, Six
Sigma uses advanced statistical analysis tools to investigate and isolate the sources of
variation.
Lean is concerned with improved process flow, whereas Six Sigma is concerned with
reduced process variation. Their approach to waste differs in that in Lean if something
does not add-value it is considered to be waste, whereas in Six Sigma variation is waste.
In the practice of ‘Lean’, the focus is on breaking down processes to the ‘bare bone
essentials. Six Sigma is a ‘problem focused’ methodology, and the primary toolsets are
Math and Statistics.
Six Sigma and Lean go together hand in hand, although they often are differentiated.
Despite any distinctions, the two go very well together and complement one another. As
Lean is used to achieve improved process flow, a deeper understanding of the process is
developed. If more work is needed, Six Sigma can be used to reduce process variation.
They can be effectively deployed together.
Six Sigma is a structured approach used to achieve lower-levels of variability. Lean is
a methodology that is used to eliminate waste, variation (any activity that deviates from a
target or a standard causing defects), and work imbalance. The integration of the
industrial engineering tools of Lean with the statistical tools of Six Sigma (which
complement each other) into LSS provides an operational excellence methodology and
represents a new wave of the QM evolution (Basu, 2004), which started in the 2000’s
(Byrne et al., 2007). The integration of key improvement activities in an organisation
such as Lean and Six Sigma into the strategic goals is a key foundation to achieve CI
(Kaye and Anderson, 1999). The integration of Lean and Six Sigma achieves a full fusion
of the Lean philosophy of waste elimination with the Six Sigma mentality of perfection at
all times. TQM and LSS are similar in many aspects and compatible with each other.
They share numerous values and aims and can benefit from the advantages that each can
provide. TQM can be the holistic umbrella that reaches to all stakeholders and LSS can
be the extension that provides a strong structure for achieving greater and faster process
improvements. George (2002) defines LSS as a methodology that helps companies
achieve better cost, quality, speed, customer satisfaction and rates of improvement. LSS
 Implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) in supply chain management (SCM) 9

can also be described as a methodology that focuses on the elimination of waste and
variation. It follows the effective DMAIC structure to achieve customer satisfaction with
regards to quality, delivery and cost. After starting a LSS project, it may evolve to use
more Six Sigma or Lean tools or a mix of both as suitable to the nature of the project
where all tools are LSS tools (Hendricks and Kelbaugh, 1998).
The LSS approach starts with the identification of the need for an improvement
initiative. In the define phase, the problem and the goal of the project are chartered and an
analysis is performed to quantify its cost-of-poor-quality (COPQ), wasteful activities and
the expected financial savings. Value stream mapping (VSM) is a lean manufacturing
technique to analyse the flow of materials and information currently required to bring a
product or service to the customer. The baseline performance is studied in the measure
phase using LSS metrics and VSM of current chain. Also, brainstorming is performed to
identify the list of the potential inputs, which are investigated in the analyse phase to
verify the critical few negatively affecting the outputs such as product quality and flow.
VSM is drawn for the future state. In the improve phase, the critical inputs are studied to
determine the solutions, which are implemented through Kaizen events for example.
Lastly, in the control phase, the focus is on monitoring the inputs and/or outputs of the
improved processes on a day-to-day basis to ensure that the anticipated gains are
maintained.
The development of Six Sigma did not eliminate the use of TQM or SPC, but its
popularity has established it as an organisational methodology to deliver CI (O’Rourke,
2005). Unlike the development of Six Sigma, LSS consolidates two major CI
methodologies into a single holistic approach. Although Lean and Six Sigma focus on
different improvement goals, the reduction of waste and process variation, a thorough
analysis of each method shows that the methods complement each other. “In a system
that combines the two philosophies, Lean creates the standard and Six Sigma investigates
and resolves any variation from the standard” (Breyfogle et al., 2001).
Table 1 Differences between Lean and Six Sigma

Issues problems objectives Six Sigma Lean

Focuses on customer value stream N Y
Focuses on creating a visual workplace N Y
Creates standard work sheets N Y
Attacks work-in-progress (WIP) inventory N Y
Focuses on good house keeping N Y
Process control planning and monitoring Y N
Focuses on reducing variation and achieve uniform process outputs Y N
Focuses heavily on the application of statistical tools and techniques Y N
Employs a structured, rigorous and well planned problem-solving Y N
methodology
Attacks waste due to waiting, over processing, motion, over N Y
production, etc.
Source: Adapted from Antony et al. (2003)
10 S. Salah et al.

Table 2 Comparison of Lean and Six Sigma methodologies

Programme Lean Six Sigma

Theory Remove waste Reduce variation
Application 1 Identify value 1 Define
guidelines 2 Identify value stream 2 Measure
3 Flow 3 Analyse
4 Pull 4 Improve
5 Perfection 5 Control
Focus Flow focused Problem focused
Assumptions Waste removal will improve business A problem exists.
performance.
Many small improvements are better Figures and numbers are valued.
than systems analysis.
System output improves if variation
in all processes is reduced.
Primary effect Reduced flow time Uniform process output
Secondary Less variation Less waste
effects Uniform output Fast throughput
Less inventory Less inventory
New accounting system Fluctuation-performance measures for
managers
Flow-performance measure for Improved quality
managers
Improved quality
Criticisms Statistical or system analysis not valued System interaction not considered
Processes improved independently
Source: Nave (2002)
The theories guiding Lean and Six Sigma methodologies are different but
complementary. Both seek to improve the process. Lean assumes that waste removal will
speed up the process thereby improving business performance. Six Sigma assumes that
process variations cause process problems and that reducing process variation will
improve business performance. The key to comparing the two improvement methods is
not only the focus of each, but also on the secondary effects (O’Rourke, 2005). As
highlighted in Tables 1 and 2, the secondary effects of each methodology mirror the
primary focus of the other method. The use of Lean tools within a Six Sigma project
approach allows for focus on managing and controlling inventory and work in progress.
This allows for a team to begin realising improvements within a process even during the
Measure phase of the project. Conversely, is using VSM to identify improvements within
a value stream, root cause analysis and brainstorming may identify opportunities better
suited for Six Sigma projects. The integrated approach allows organisations to achieve
results at all project levels and sizes, from point improvements on the shop floor, to
complex projects requiring significant analysis.
 Implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) in supply chain management (SCM) 11

4 Supply chain management and quality management

QM involves flows of material, information, funds, etc., through an SC. The SC

encourages the expansion of the vision of processes, including upstream and downstream
processes. It involves the integration of different functions, processes, and quality
dimensions, which can be seen in Table 3. Across the SC process, there are different
perceptions of quality, which are important to understand in order to communicate
properly and resolve differences. The QM-related activities, which are part of SCM, can
be classified into (Foster, 2007):
• upstream activities, which include supplier qualification (using grading approaches,
such as International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) 9000: 2000 and
acceptance sampling), supplier development (including the use of electronic data
interchange (EDI) to link customer purchasing systems to supplier ERP systems)
• core process activities including CI and VSM activities
• downstream activities, which include logistics, customer support and after-sale.
Kanji (1998) proposed a business excellence model to satisfy the organisations’ need for
a comprehensive and flexible framework to measure business excellence. Utilising that
model, Kanji and Wong (1999) proposed a structured model for SCM that is based on
TQM principles. The next section discusses how LSS, which can be considered as a QM
and CI methodology, can be integrated with SCM.
Table 3 Product and service quality dimensions

Garvin’s product quality dimensions Service quality dimension

Performance Tangibles
Features Empathy
Reliability Service reliability
Conformance Assurance
Durability Responsiveness
Serviceability Availability
Aesthetics Professionalism
Perceived quality Timeliness
Completeness
Source: Adapted from Foster (2007)

5 SCM and LSS management

SCM lacks analytical tools for problem solving and may not provide the flexibility to
adapt to SC complexity and variability that lies in the changing market segments and
demand (Amer et al., 2007). Some of the key goals for a successful organisation and its
suppliers are to digitalise the transactional processes, to enhance the EDI capabilities, and
to eliminate wasteful activities and reduce the total SCM costs by using CI
methodologies and modern electronic systems (Dasgupta, 2003). In what follows, a
discussion is presented of how different researchers considered the integration of Lean
and Six Sigma with SCM, respectively.
12 S. Salah et al.

One of the important concepts of Lean, which is stressed in the enterprise VSM
exercises used to improve SC processes (Foster, 2007), is seeing things from the
perspective of the whole enterprise SC and not the individual process or entity. For
example, rewarding a business entity or process for producing more than what the next
business entity in the SC requires (as a customer of the former entity) does not generate
any benefit for the SC from the whole SC perspective. On the contrary, this creates more
staged inventory and waste. LSS implementation in SCM embraces the principles of JIT.
Products need to be delivered on time, with the right quality, the right quantity and at low
cost. JIT delivery, which heavily depends on suppliers, is important for the success of JIT
production. The Lean approach to SCM can also be described as the Lean logistics
approach aiming at reduction of inventories, wastes and lead times (Foster, 2007).
Parveen and Rao (2009) indicated that there is a need for an integrated approach to
Lean manufacturing from the perspective of the Lean SC to achieve total leanness across
the SC. The nature of the market sector has a direct impact on the Lean approach for any
SC. Lean tends to increase demand stability by simplifying, optimising and streamlining
the SC. To quickly react to demand variations, it is important to integrate sales and
marketing with manufacturing to ensure effective communication, and to design a
flexible manufacturing system (Cochran et al., 2000). In order to overcome the conflict
between Lean and highly variable demand, Reichhart and Holweg (2007) recommended
the use of market-segmentation to benefit from the stability of some customer segments
or products. Bicheno et al. (2001) indicated that the inconsistent performance of the SC
they studied was caused by demand variations, batching (which should be minimised
according to Lean and JIT principles), process instability and delivery performance. It is
recommended by Parveen and Rao (2009) for Lean SC to consider the following:
• a collaboration between producers and retailers for setting maximum-profit prices
• an optimal integrated JIT inventory policy which takes into account CI, setup cost
reduction and lead time reduction
• an optimal cycle length and an optimal number of inspections using a time-varying
lot-size (or batch-size) approach in imperfect production processes and considering
CI and setup cost reduction
• an optimal raw material ordering quantity, optimal finished product
batch-size and optimal number of Kanbans (for a multistage production system) for
production-delivery situations considering process inspection, restoration and rework
• an SC coordination for pricing, order quantity and investment decisions
• the economic production quantity (EPQ) models analysis
• the analysis of rework and the number of shipments in a production system.
The Lean SC makes it economic to produce small amounts and consequently allows
producers to reduce inventory costs, reduce production costs and satisfy customer
demands (Vonderembse et al., 2006).
Next, a discussion is presented of how different researchers considered the integration
of Six Sigma with SCM. Integrating Six Sigma with SCM can bring benefits such as the
DMAIC project discipline, sustainability of results, a well-established human resources
framework using the belt-system, and a quantitative analysis strength (Yang et al., 2007).
Three of the motivating reasons toward the integration of Six Sigma and SCM are: the
 Implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) in supply chain management (SCM) 13

versatility of the robust Six Sigma metrics in performance measurement, the similarities
between Six Sigma and SCM (such as both being process approaches), and the research
results indicating that SCM can benefit from the implementation of QM principles
(Dasgupta, 2003).
Sanders and Hild (2000) warned against using Six Sigma metrics indiscriminately
since there is a disadvantage in transforming the notion of Six Sigma process from a
management philosophy to numerical targets for individual processes. This contradicts
with Deming’s (1993) philosophy of eliminating numerical targets and slogans.
Managers need to spread the knowledge of Six Sigma in the right perspective to ensure
that metrics are perceived as motivational opportunities for improvement, not hard-core
numerical targets (Dasgupta, 2003). Also, metrics should encourage the system
perspective emphasised by SCM and VSM, not the process perspective.
Dasgupta (2003) claimed that it is difficult to measure, monitor and improve the
performance of an SC and its entities, only with the traditional strategic criteria such as
cycle times, lead times, delivery performance, total SCM costs, inventory levels, rolled
throughput yield, etc. Thus, Dasgupta presented a structured methodology that uses Six
Sigma metrics, which provide a common scale, such as defects per unit or Sigma-level.
After being dissatisfied with its Six Sigma and SCM efforts, Samsung used both Six
Sigma and SCM to enhance its operation and improve its efficiency (Samsung, 2007).
Six Sigma was used to organise the approach to SCM projects and ensure that enough
people were fully trained in SCM and quantitative data analysis. To adapt the approach to
support SCM, Samsung have modified define-measure-analyse-design-verify (DMADV)
into define-measure-analyse-enable-verify (DMAEV). Samsung (2007) stressed the
organisational perspective for improvements as opposed to the local perspective, using
KPIs to monitor improvements and using a systematic approach. Training is an essential
factor for succeeding in the integration of Six Sigma and SCM as it helps establish an
educated and committed workforce that is willing to change and embrace the quality
strategy.
Amer et al. (2007) proposed expanding design for Six Sigma (DFSS), which provides
means of creating specific target metrics and a methodology for isolating where CI
efforts should be spent, to SC design. Their approach focused on using cross-functional
teams to understand the voice-of-the-customer (VOC) and the critical customer
requirements (CCR) including demand management. Other research proposing and
examining Six Sigma as an SCM tool include Christopher and Rutherford (2004), Kelfsjo
et al. (2001), and Antony et al. (2003).
In sum, different researchers considered the integration of Lean and Six Sigma with
SCM. However, this research extends the previous works and proposes the
implementation of LSS in SCM. Within LSS, Six Sigma tools ensure that products are of
high quality resulting from capable processes, and Lean tools including VSM ensure the
efficient flow through the SCM including inventories, schedules, demand quantities, etc.
LSS tools in general aim at reducing costs, wastes, non-value-adding activities and
satisfying all customers across the SC. LSS encourages good relationships with
customers and suppliers including partnership and problem solving.
14 S. Salah et al.

6 Similarities and differences between TQM and LSS

LSS is not significantly different than TQM. LSS overlaps TQM significantly and TQM
is a major component of most LSS initiatives. The TQM process orientation eventually
leads to the same result as LSS. TQM starts with quality, which may not be in the most
critical issue of LSS (Andersson et al., 2006).
Traditionally, quality control in manufacturing was mainly the responsibility of a
separate department and was conducted at the end of the production process. Rejected
products were reworked, sold as seconds or scrapped. After each machine changeover the
initial output would be checked, but because WIP cycles tended to be measured in weeks,
it was difficult to determine the root cause of quality problems.
As compared to TQM, Six Sigma is a relatively new concept. It was not intended as a
replacement, but the two have many similarities and are compatible in both
manufacturing and service environments. It is also complementary to statistical process
control (SPC), which uses statistical methods for monitoring and controlling business
processes. Both TQM and SPC often reach a stage after which no further quality
improvements can be reached. Six Sigma though has the potential to deliver better
results. Six Sigma takes quality improvement processes to the next level, by focusing on
CI in an effort to achieve a defect level of less than 3.4 per million.
Organisational systems for various business processes often use TQM concepts
during development, deployment and maintenance. Focusing on maintaining existing
quality standards, while making incremental improvements, it is a strategic approach. It
also focuses on improving overall quality, by establishing a culture of collaboration
among various functional departments.
The basic difference between Six Sigma and TQM is the approach. While TQM
views quality as conformance to internal requirements, Six Sigma focuses on improving
quality by reducing the number of defects. The end result may be the same in both the
concepts (i.e., producing better quality products). Six Sigma helps organisations in
reducing operational costs by focusing on defect reduction, cycle time reduction, and cost
savings. It is different from conventional cost cutting measures that may reduce value and
quality. It focuses on identifying and eliminating costs that provide no value to customers
such as costs incurred due to waste.
TQM initiatives focus on improving individual operations within unrelated business
processes whereas Six Sigma programmes focus on improving all the operations within a
single business process. Six Sigma projects require the skills of professionals that are
certified as ‘black belts’ whereas TQM initiatives are usually a part-time activity that can
be managed by non-dedicated managers (Andersson et al., 2006).
Six Sigma initiatives are based on a pre-planned project charter that outlines the scale
of a project, financial targets, anticipated benefits and milestones. In comparison,
organisations that have implemented TQM, work without fully knowing what the
financial gains might be. Six Sigma is based on DMAIC that helps in making precise
measurement, identifying exact problems, and providing solutions that can be measured
(Revere, 2003).
 Implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) in supply chain management (SCM) 15

7 Case study: LSS DMAIC applied to SCM

The case study described in this paper is an example of how LSS (including VSM as a
key tool) can be used to improve an SC. It is about Company A, which is a retailer of
manufactured products. It provides more than 50,000 products and serves mainly the
North American market. It employs about 80 people at its main distribution centre (DC).
This company started the implementation of Lean, including VSM and JIT, in 2006. Prior
to that, the company had a few Six Sigma projects implemented. This study includes the
application of VSM to the main DC of this company. This case study is undertaken with
the objective of demonstrating the improvements in the function of the DC, due to the
implementation of LSS. Factors chosen are: the receiving period, filling rate of orders
from retail stores, picking rate, and lead time, which are used to measure the performance
of the DC. The data required for the case study was obtained from the company records
over a period of about two years. Data was collected from sources that included
purchasing, receiving, sales and accounting records. The description of the DMAIC
approach below is based on the authors’ knowledge and experience in LSS.

7.1 Define
• project: improvement of the distribution of products
• problem: the logistics operations at the DC are not efficient enough to meet the
needs of the business in driving more volumes of products through the SC in less
time
• goal: to improve the efficiency of the distribution system, increase the volume driven
through the SC, reduce costs, reduce the average inventory, increase the inventory
turn-over, reduce the lead time, and efficiently supply the stores with their orders
(JIT)
• team members: champion, manager, buyers’ representatives, suppliers’
representatives, stores representatives, LSS black belt, process owner, inventory
control specialists, DC employees and financial analyst
• benefits: a direct impact on the total margin and the cash flow
• COPQ and baseline performance:
a 2006 receiving period (current base-line) = two weeks late
b 2007 receiving period (target) = one day late
c 2006 filling rate of orders from retailers (current base-line) = 80 %
d 2007 filling rate of orders from retailers (target) = 90 %
e 2006 picking rate (current base-line) = 39 line picks/operator/hour
f 2007 picking rate (target) = 60 line picks/operator/hour.
16 S. Salah et al.

Figure 5 Current-state VSM exercise (see online version for colours)

Notes: Bill of lading (BOL), cycle time (CT), distribution centre (DC), employees (EE),
end of day report (EOD), error rate (ER), inventory (I), not applicable (N/A),
process time (PT), purchase order (PO), radio frequency (RF), reprinted (RPT),
stock keeping unit (SKU), universal product code (UPC), and up-time (UT).

7.2 Measure
To view and to understand the current process, a current state VSM was used to
identify waste and improve it. The map assisted the team in identifying improvement
opportunities (see Figure 5). Quick hits included several Kaizen events for implementing
visual workplace across the DC so that any sign for abnormal condition becomes evident.

7.3 Analyse
An analysis was performed on the current state VSM. This included an analysis of the
unnecessary steps and ways to minimise waste within and between steps, an analysis of
the flow of products and information, and an analysis of the lead-time, cycle times, down
time, changeover time and rework. Then a future state VSM was created to maximise the
value-added content and eliminate waste (see Figure 6).
 Implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) in supply chain management (SCM) 17

Figure 6 Future-state VSM exercise (see online version for colours)

Note: First-in-first-out (FIFO) and visual board (V).

7.4 Improve
An improvement implementation action plan was built to start the implementation of the
recognised improvements (see Table 4). Kaizen events were used to implement most
improvements. Kaizen events varied in durations from one day to 90 days for a Kaizen
project. An example of the actions listed in a Kaizen event is given in Table 5.

7.5 Control
The results were validated and a control plan was designed using mistake-proofing
approach. At the end of the project, the team succeeded to improve the receiving period
to a state of same day receiving using a visual process of a penalty box, the filling rate of
orders from retailers to 94%, and the picking rate to about 70 line picks/operator/hour.
The additional SKUs of new material added during the project made it very difficult to
estimate the improvements in lead time, inventory turns, inventory level and estimated
savings, since they varied tremendously. Also, the manager of the DC stressed that one
great benefit of the project was the increase in the employees’ engagement level.
18 S. Salah et al.

Table 4 Implementation action plan

 Implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) in supply chain management (SCM) 19

Table 4 Implementation action plan (continued)

20 S. Salah et al.

Table 5 Re-buying Kaizen list

Priority Actions
3 To have the quantity sold by stores to drop into the reportable quantity daily
3 Only the products sold at retail price should be downloaded into the reportable
quantity to avoid excess from bulk-buys (‘end-caps’, clearance items, flyers,
seasonal, sale, contractors, etc.)
3 Visual KPI code for downloaded stores sales by SKU in the reported quantity
2 Safety stock should be 1.25 lead time demands (a little bit more for ‘A’ and ‘B’
products) and 1.00 lead time for ‘E’ products
3 Special order codes in the SCM software for orders issued at the store
1 Quarterly ‘end-caps’ and ‘stack-outs’ (seasons) planning meeting for buyers and
marketing teams to identify bulk-buys and quantity to be bought in advance
2 Costumer representation at the DC for store inquiries or better communication
with stores (a lot time is spent on the phone to answer redundant questions)
2 Report of non-moving products to enable reaction (once a period)
2 To divide the report by class or section and send it to purchasing
1 Variance reports from the SCM and tracking software must be up-to-date
1 Standardisation for use of activity codes
1 Purchasing team to follow-up the purchase orders (POs) initiated centrally
1 Provide a new computer to run reports
1 Provide a scanner for the DC

Lean and Six Sigma data can be used to identify improvement opportunities, benchmark
with peer companies and objectively monitor and assess a company’s performance. The
manufacturing organisations need to improve quality, while reducing cost and increasing
productivity with limited resources. Successful implementation of the programme needs
longer time duration. The results of the case study indicated substantial cost savings due
to implementation of LSS.

8 Conclusions

TQM is a philosophy that delivers long-term benefits in terms of profitability,

customer satisfaction and quality of products. Different organisations work for TQM
implementation and utilise their resources to achieve the anticipated benefits. However, it
is generally experienced that TQM implementation is a hard and very painful process.
There are certain barriers that inhibit the successful implementation of TQM (Raj and
Attri, 2010).
LSS and SCM share common grounds in terms of focusing on processes and solving
customer problems to achieve customer satisfaction. They also complete each other and
can be integrated together. This work extended the previous works regarding these
approaches and proposed the implementation of LSS DMAIC to improve SCM using
tools such as VSM and COPQ.
LSS tools which include VSM ensure the efficient flow through the SCM including
inventories, schedules, demand quantities, etc. SCM can utilise the LSS principles, such
as focusing on adding value to customers, reducing defectives and wastes, streamlining
 Implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) in supply chain management (SCM) 21

value flow, and improving on time delivery. The suitability of these tools and methods in
general depends on understanding the methods and the application environment.
The implementation, management and performance improvement of an SC are not
easy tasks. However, SCM can utilise the QM concepts, CI principles and LSS tools in
order to achieve high levels of customer satisfaction regarding cost, quality and delivery.
The case study provided an example of LSS implementation (including VSM as a key
tool) to improve an SC. It validated the implementation and provided a description for all
of the DMAIC phases. It showed how SCM could utilise LSS in order to achieve high
levels of customer satisfaction regarding cost, quality and delivery.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the project team at Company A for their help. The
financial assistance of NSERC is greatly appreciated. The editorial assistance of Kim
Wilson is also greatly acknowledged. We would also like to thank the editor and
reviewers for their valuable suggestions and comments.

References
Amer, Y., Luong, L., Lee, S-H., Wang, W.Y.C., Ashraf, M.A. and Qureshi, Z. (2007)
‘Implementing design for Six Sigma to supply chain design’, Paper presented at IEEE IEEM,
2–5 December 2007, Singapore, pp.1517–1521.
Andersson, R., Eriksson, H. and Torstensson, H. (2006) ‘Similarities and differences between
TQM, Six Sigma and Lean’, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp.282–296.
Antony, J., Escamilla, J.L. and Caine, P. (2003) ‘Lean Sigma’, Manufacturing Engineer, Vol. 82,
No. 2, pp.40–42.
Antony, J., Swarnkar, R., Kumar, M. and Tiwari, M.K. (2006) ‘Design of synchronised supply
chain: a genetic algorithm based Six Sigma constrained approach’, International Journal of
Logistics Systems and Management, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp.120–141.
Ballou, R.H., Gillbert, S.M. and Mukherjee, A. (2000) ‘New managerial challenges from supply
chain opportunities’, IEEE Engineering Management Review, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp.7–16.
Baston, R.G. and McGough, K.D. (2007) ‘A new direction in quality engineering: supply chain
quality modelling’, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 45, No. 23,
pp.5455–5464.
Basu, R. (2004) ‘Six-Sigma to operational excellence: role of tools and techniques’, International
Journal of Six Sigma and Competitive Advantage, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.44–64.
Bicheno, J., Holweg, M. and Niessmann, J. (2001) ‘Constraint batch sizing in a lean environment’,
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 73, No. 1, pp.41–49.
Blumenfeld, D.E., Burns, L.D., Daganzo, C.F., Frick, M.C. and Hall, R.W. (1987) ‘Reducing
logistics costs at General Motors’, Interfaces, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp.26–47.
Bowersox, D.J. and Closs, D.L. (1996) Logistical Management: The Integrated Supply Chain
Process, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Breyfogle, F.W., Cupello, J.M. and Meadows, B. (2001) Managing Six Sigma: A Practical Guide
to Understanding, Assessing, and Implementing the Strategy that Yields Bottom-Line Success,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York, NY.
Byrne, G., Lubowe, D. and Blitz, A. (2007) ‘Using a Lean Six Sigma approach to drive
innovation’, Strategy and Leadership, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp.5–10.
22 S. Salah et al.

Chan, F.T.S. and Chan, H.K. (2006) ‘A simulation study with quantity flexibility in a supply chain
subjected to uncertainties’, International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing,
Vol. 19, No. 2, pp.148–160.
Christopher, M. and Rutherford, C. (2004) ‘Creating supply chain resilience through agile Six
Sigma’, Critical Eye, June–August, pp.24–28.
Cochran, D.S., Eversheim, W., Kubin, G. and Sesterhenn, M.L. (2000) ‘The application of
axiomatic design and Lean management principles in the scope of production system
segmentation’, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 38, No. 6, pp.1377–1396.
Cooper, M.C., Lambert, D.M. and Paugh, J.D. (1997) ‘Supply chain management: more than just
another name for logistics’, International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 8, No. 1,
pp.1–14.
Dasgupta, T. (2003) ‘Using the Six Sigma metric to measure and improve the performance of a
supply chain’, Total Quality Management, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp.355–366.
Deming, W.E. (1993) Out of the Crisis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Fisher, M.L. (1997) ‘What is the right supply chain for your product?’, Harvard Business Review,
March–April, pp.105–116.
Foster, S.T. (2007) Managing Quality: Integrating the Supply Chain, Pearson Education, Inc.,
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
George, M.L. (2002) Lean Six Sigma: Combining Six Sigma Quality with Lean Speed, The
McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc, New York.
Hendricks, C.A. and Kelbaugh, R.L. (1998) ‘Implementing Six Sigma at GE’, Journal for Quality
and Participation, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp.48–53.
Hendricks, K.B. and Singhal, V.R. (1996) ‘Quality awards and the market value of the firm: an
empirical investigation’, Management Science, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp.415–436.
Kanji, G.K. (1998) ‘Measurement of business excellence’, Total Quality Management, Vol. 9,
No. 7, pp.633–643.
Kanji, G.K. and Wong, A. (1999) ‘Business excellence model for supply chain management’, Total
Quality Management, Vol. 10, No. 8, pp.1147–1168.
Kannan, V.R. and Tan, K.C. (2005) ‘Just in time, total quality management, and supply chain
management: understanding their linkages and impact on business performance’, The
International Journal of Management Science, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp.153–162, Omega.
Kaye, M. and Anderson, R. (1999) ‘Continuous improvement: the ten essential criteria’,
International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 16, No. 5, pp.485–506.
Kelfsjo, B., Wiklund, H. and Edgeman, R.L. (2001) ‘Six Sigma seen as a methodology for total
quality management’, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 31–35.
Kopczak, L.R. and Johnson, M.E. (2003) ‘The supply chain management effect’, MIT Sloan
Management Review, April, pp.27–34.
Lalonde, B.J. and Pohlen, T.L. (1996) ‘Issues in supply chain costing’, International Journal of
Logistics Management, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp.1–12.
Lamber, D.M. and Cooper, M.C. (2000) ‘Issues in supply chain management’, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp.65–83.
Lee, H.L. (2004) ‘The triple-A supply chain’, Harvard Business Review, October, pp.102–112.
Manzini, R., Gamberi, M., Gebennini, E. and Regattieri, A. (2008) ‘An integrated approach to the
design and management of a supply chain system’, International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 37, Nos. 5/6, pp.625–640.
Mentzer, J.T., DeWitt, W., Keebler, J.S., Min, S., Nix, N.W., Smith, C.D. and Zachariah, Z.G.
(2001) ‘Defining supply chain management’, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 22, No. 2,
pp.1–24.
Miller, C.R. (2002) ‘Competing through supply chains: the rise of integrated supply chain
management’, Journal of Reliability Analysis Centre, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp.1–4.
 Implementation of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) in supply chain management (SCM) 23

Nahmias, S. (2009) Production and Operations Analysis, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, The McGraw-Hill

Companies, Inc., Boston, MA.
Nave, D. (2002) ‘How to compare Six Sigma, Lean and the theory of constraints’, Quality
Progress, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp.73–78.
O’Rourke, P.M. (2005) ‘A multiple-case analysis of Lean Six Sigma deployment and
implementation strategies’, MSc thesis, Department of Logistics Management, Air Force
Institute of Technology, Air University, Ohio, USA.
Ohno, T. (1988) Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-scale Production, Productivity Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Parveen, M. and Rao, T.V.V.L.N. (2009) ‘An integrated approach to design and analysis of Lean
manufacturing system: a perspective of Lean supply chain’, International Journal of Services
and Operations Management, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp.175–208.
Raj, T. and Attri, R. (2010) ‘Quantifying barriers to implementing total quality management
(TQM)’, European Journal of Industrial Engineering, Vol. 4, No. 3. pp.380–397.
Reichhart, A. and Holweg, M. (2007) ‘Lean distribution: concepts, contributions, conflicts’,
International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 45, No. 16, pp.3699–3722.
Revere, L. (2003) ‘Integrating Six Sigma with total quality management: a case example for
measuring medication errors’, Journal of Healthcare Management, Vol. 48, No. 6,
pp.377–391.
Salah, S., Carretero, J.A. and Rahim, A. (2010b) ‘The integration of quality management and
continuous improvement methodologies with management systems’, International Journal of
Productivity and Quality Management, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp.269–288.
Salah, S., Rahim, A. and Carretero, J.A. (2010a) ‘The integration of Six Sigma and Lean
management’, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp.249–274.
Samsung (2007) ‘Samsung does Six Sigma: a case study on supply chain management’, Strategic
Direction, Vol. 23, No. 9, pp.15–17.
Sanders, D. and Hild, C.R. (2000) ‘Common myths about Six Sigma’, Quality Engineering,
Vol. 13, No. 2, pp.269–276.
Simchi-Levi, D., Kaminsky, P. and Simchi-Levi, E. (2003) Designing and Managing the Supply
Chain: Concepts, Strategies and Case Studies, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, The McGraw-Hill
Companies, Inc., Boston, MA.
Tan, K.C., Kannan, V.R. and Handfield, R.B. (1998) ‘Supply chain management: supplier
performance and firm performance’, International Journal of Purchasing Material, Manage,
Vol. 34, No. 3, pp.2–9.
Tan, K.C., Lyman, S.B. and Wisner, J.D. (2002) ‘Supply chain management: a strategic
perspective’, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 22,
No. 6, pp.614–631.
Vonderembse, M.A., Uppal, M., Huang, S.H. and Dismukes, J.P. (2006) ‘Designing supply chains:
towards theory development’, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 100,
No. 2, pp.223–238.
Yang, H.M., Choi, B.S., Park, H.F., Suh, M.S. and Chae, B. (2007) ‘Supply chain management Six
Sigma: a management innovation methodology at the Samsung Group’, Supply Chain
Management: An International Journal, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp.88–95.
 24 S. Salah et al.

Abbreviations
Bill of lading (BOL)
Business process reengineering (BPR)
Continuous improvement (CI)
Cost-of-poor-quality (COPQ)
Critical customer requirements (CCR)
Customer relationship management (CRM)
Cycle time (CT)
Define-measure-analyse-design-verify (DMADV)
Define-measure-analyse-enable-verify (DMAEV)
Define-measure-analyse-improve-control (DMAIC)
Design for Six Sigma (DFSS)
Distribution centre (DC)
Economic production quantity (EPQ)
Electronic data interchange (EDI)
Employees (EE)
End of day report (EOD)
Enterprise resource planning (ERP)
Error rate (ER)
First-in-first-out (FIFO)
Inventory (I)
International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO)
Just-in-time (JIT)
Key performance indicator (KPI)
Lean Six Sigma (LSS)
Not applicable (N/A)
Plan-do-check-act (PDCA)
Process time (PT)
Purchase order (PO)
Quality management (QM)
Radio frequency (RF)
Reprinted (RPT)
Stock keeping unit (SKU)
Supply chain (SC)
Supply chain management (SCM)
Supply chain operations reference (SCOR)
Total quality management (TQM)
Universal product code (UPC)
Up-time (UT)
Value stream mapping (VSM)
Voice-of-the-customer (VOC)
Visual board (V)

View publication stats