See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235314534

Applying lean six sigma in a small

engineering company – a model for
change

Article in Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management · December 2008

DOI: 10.1108/17410380910925433

CITATIONS READS

117 2,650

3 authors, including:

Andrew J Thomas
Cardiff Metropolitan University
110 PUBLICATIONS 853 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

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

Renewable technology supply chains View project

Innovative production machines and systems View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Andrew J Thomas on 07 October 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1741-038X.htm

Lean six sigma

Applying lean six sigma in a small
engineering company – a model
for change
113
Andrew Thomas
Newport Business School, Newport, UK, and Received June 2007
Richard Barton and Chiamaka Chuke-Okafor Revised November 2007
Accepted May 2008
Logistics Systems Dynamics Group, Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University,
Cardiff, UK

Abstract
Purpose – Both lean and six sigma are key business process strategies which are employed by
companies to enhance their manufacturing performance. However, whilst there is significant research
information available on implementing these systems in a sequential manner, there is little information
available relating to the integration of these approaches to provide a single and highly effective
strategy for change in companies. The purpose of this paper is to develop and implement an integrated
lean six sigma (LSS) model for manufacturing industry.
Design/methodology/approach – Through the development of a case study approach, the paper
chronicles the design, development and implementation of an integrated LSS model. The work in this
paper builds upon the SME six sigma model that has been successfully implemented in a number of
SMEs. The model is subsequently evaluated for its effectiveness in the subject company.
Findings – This paper proposes an integrated approach to lean and six sigma model. Its
development, refinement and implementation has been achieved through working closely with a
subject company. The effectiveness of the approach is consequently evaluated highlighting the
benefits the host organization received through this new approach by measuring the effects of
implementation against internal company measures.
Practical implications – The design, development and implementation of a LSS model shown in
this paper provides a simple yet highly effective approach to achieving significant improvements in a
company’s product quality cost and delivery. The model combines contemporary lean and six sigma
strategies and offers practicing production/process/manufacturing managers and engineers with
a strategic framework for increasing productive efficiency and output. The paper provides a case
study that highlights the application of the model in a subject company and as such further provides
key implementation data for managers and engineers to adopt the model in a wide range of
manufacturing organisations.
Originality/value – The proposed LSS model contributes to the existing knowledge base on lean
and six sigma systems and subsequently disseminates this information in order to provide impetus,
guidance and support towards increasing the development companies in an attempt to move the UK
manufacturing sector towards world class manufacturing performance.
Keywords Six sigma, Lean production, Modelling, Small to medium-sized enterprises
Paper type Conceptual paper
Journal of Manufacturing Technology
Introduction Management
Vol. 20 No. 1, 2009
Six sigma can be considered both a business strategy and a science that has the aim of pp. 113-129
reducing manufacturing and service costs, and creating significant improvements in q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1741-038X
customer satisfaction and bottom-line savings through combining statistical and DOI 10.1108/17410380910925433
JMTM business process methodologies into an integrated model of process, product and
20,1 service improvement. In six sigma, customer focus becomes the top priority and any
improvements are defined by their impact on customer satisfaction and value (Pande
and Holpp, 2002). From an internal perspective, six sigma provides a way of improving
processes so that the company can more efficiently and predictably produce
world-class products and services. Traditionally under the six sigma approach a
114 five-phased DMAIC methodology is applied which tackle specific problems to reach six
sigma levels of performance (Breyfogle, 1999). These phases are:
(1) (D)efine. Who are the customers and what are their priorities? Where are their
problems? Which do we tackle first?
(2) (M)easure. How is the process measured and how is it performing? What is its
current state of performance?
(3) (A)nalyse. What are the most important causes of performance failure?
(4) (I)mprove. How do we remove the causes of poor performance?
(5) (C)ontrol. How can we embed and maintain the improvements made?

The “lean” concept has often successfully allowed companies to deliver bottom-line
savings in production through improves process efficiency. Lean is aimed at reducing
waste and adding value to production systems so that systems performance is
significantly improved and a company “does more with less”. A typical example is
applying TPM techniques to poorly maintained machinery. This provides for
value-added inputs by way of ensuring machinery remains in productive operation for
longer periods of time (Jostes and Helms, 1994). Maintenance procedures and systems
are designed so that they are easier to accomplish and this is achieved through
machine redesign and modifications in order to facilitate this process.
The basic lean philosophy relies on a five phase approach. This is:
(1) Identify value (from the point of the customer).
(2) Measure the value stream.
(3) Pull on customer demand.
(4) Create flow.
(5) Achieve perfection.

Employing therefore a standard operational framework for implementing both lean

and six sigma approaches is seen as an obvious and necessary step for companies to
achieve simultaneous benefits from the both strategies (George, 2002). To this end the
DMAIC process is used as the main functional system for the implementation of lean
six sigma (LSS) approach. Figure 1 shows the conceptual development of the LSS
framework. The main phases of the integrated LSS approach are:
(1) Define – what is the problem? Does it exist?
(2) Measure – how is the process measured? How is it performing?
(3) Analyse – what are the most important causes of defects?
(4) Improve – how do we remove the causes of the defects?
(5) Control – how can we maintain the improvements?
 Lean six sigma

Create Identify
Perfection Value

115
Define

Control Measure
Lean
Sigma
Pull on Cycle Measure
Demand Value
Stream

Improve Analyse

Create
Flow
Figure 1.
Outline approach to LSS

(6) Implement 5S technique.

(7) Application of value stream mapping (VSM).
(8) Redesign to remove waste and improve value stream.
(9) Redesign manufacturing system to achieve single unit flow (SUF).
(10) Apply total productive maintenance (TPM) to support manufacturing
functions.

At the heart of the six sigma approach is the application of DOE techniques. However,
it is important to note that whilst DOE is a powerful approach which assists engineers
and managers to identify key factors and to subsequently adjust these factors in order
to achieve sustainable performance improvements, they are by no means the only
techniques that can be and should be used when applying six sigma/lean sigma.
Strategic- and process-based tools and techniques such as quality function deployment
(QFD), statistical process control (SPC) and process capability studies, etc. also provide
a powerful route to problem identification and resolution. However, in this instance,
this paper concentrates upon the DOE technique. It is the complexity of these DOE
techniques that are often cited by companies as to the reason why they are unable to
employ six sigma. A short overview of the DOE techniques is now covered.
JMTM Background to DOE techniques
20,1 The statistical approach to design of experiments and the analysis of variance
technique was developed by Fisher (1935) back in the 1930s. The technique provides a
very powerful and economical method to determining significant factors and factor
interactions that affect variability within a product. This classical approach to the
design of experiments was further developed in the late 1980s when Genichi Taguchi
116 developed his own form of statistical design of experiments. The Taguchi (1987)
method suggested that the design process consisted of three phases namely; system
design, parameter design and tolerance design. The latter two being based on
statistical design of experiments.
Both approaches provide a very powerful means to understanding the process
behaviour and hence the key factors that influence the performance of any system or
process. Whilst the work of both Fisher and Taguchi is relatively well known in
modern manufacturing industry, the work of Dorian Shainin receives less acclaim but
his non-academic statistical technique is gaining greater prominence. The Shainin
DOE technique (Shainin and Shainin, 1988; Antony, 1999; Bohte, 2000) permits the
luxury of selecting as many variables as can be identified. The subsequent grouping of
these variables into “families” and identifying the most influential variables based on
statistical significance as opposed to assumptions provides a greater chance of
identifying the major factors of variance (Bhote, 1991). Shainin identifies and
categorises the major factors contributing to variance as Red X, Pink X and Pale Pink
X (Goodman and Wyld, 2001). Red X being the major factor causing variance, Pink X
being the second factor and Pale Pink X being the third.
This paper develops a DOE-based LSS experimentation programme by conducting
experiments on identifying the influencing variables that affect the critical to quality
(CTQ) issue identified by Company A. The DOE techniques are applied through using
the LSS approach and are shown the following sections of this paper.

The requirement for a combined lean-six sigma methodology

There is much debate as to whether formal process and quality enhancement
approaches can be effectively implemented and subsequently utilised by SMEs.
Thomas and Webb (2003) in their work on analysing process improvement systems
implementation in SMEs highlight the lack of intellectual and financial capacity within
small companies as being the primary issues that lead to poor systems implementation.
They go on to state that the uniqueness and complexity of SMEs manufacturing
operations often hinder the implantation process. Husband (1997), in studies with
Australian SMEs, identifies similar problems and goes on to identify a series of issues
that affect the ability of an SME to implement formalised quality enhancement
techniques. The main issue is one of developing a rigorous model that is both
suitable to the wide range of SMEs but is not so generic that it fails to provide adequate
direction and guidance to the company. In order to do this, a series of objectives need to
be identified so as to allow for the development of a suitable strategic framework for
implementing a LSS into SMEs. These are:
.
A cost-effective approach that aligns itself with the specific SME issues and will
have relevance and purpose for all types of SME.
.
A system to allow integration of the model into the strategic and operational
frameworks of SMEs.
 .
A model that can adopt specific quality methods and techniques that best suit Lean six sigma
SMEs and which directly attack critical to quality (CTQ) problems.

Husband and Mandal (1999) also identify the uniqueness of an SME’s manufacturing
operations as being a limiting factor to quality enhancement implementation and
provide a series of dimensions that are unique to SMEs. These dimensions include
amongst others: SME core dimensions, structural dimensions, fundamental 117
dimensions, sustainability dimensions, integrative dimensions and external
dimensions. They suggest that if these dimensions are not integrated into the
model then an SMEs ability to achieve significant outputs from the application of the
model will be compromised.
Furthermore, Deleryd et al. (1999) identify that SMEs need to make decisions and
improve their processes based on accurate and timely information relating to the
performance of their manufacturing process. To manufacturing companies this is
crucial not least within the design and production areas. This means that a deeper
understanding of the concept of variation, identification of causes of variation and
handling of these causes are important factors within SMEs. It therefore follows that
the development of process control theory, experimental design concepts and issues
relating to product reliability cannot solely remain in the domain of the larger
industries in which resources are available to train the workforce to apply these
concepts. These statistical concepts have a major part to play in SMEs and the
application of such principles must come from continued training and development of
the company’s workforce.
The resulting problem shows the lack of application of statistical theory to identify
and solve problems within a manufacturing context. There are several reasons for the
relatively low application of statistical methods in SMEs. Management in small
companies, in general, do not have the sufficient theoretical knowledge to see the
potential of using statistical tools. In many cases they, and their employees, even
become frightened when statistical tools are discussed.
Small companies also lack resources in the form of time and personnel. These
organisations tend to have a lean organisation and therefore they find it difficult to
appoint a facilitator or co-ordinator for the implementation process. In addition, they
also have limited resources to provide internal training. Lack of resources in
these aspects leads to a need for a careful analysis of which strategy to use when
implementing statistical methods in order to succeed (Six Sigma Qualtec, 2002).
Having an array of specific tools and techniques available to the SME can allow the
company to develop what can be termed the “process quality enhancement” issues
relating to systems- and product-based quality. These issues are essential to the
company’s continued development and include amongst other things; problem solving,
benchmarking, continuous improvement, etc. These techniques prove to be far more
effective when backed by statistical data and can achieve greater success when
implemented within a systems approach that is designed to suit SMEs.
The primary focus for any SME therefore that intends to adopt a combined LSS
methodology is to undertake the project in the most cost effective manner and, to be
able to recoup the initial project costs quickly after the completion of the project. At the
heart of this cost-effectiveness is the need to undertake the LSS project in-house with
the minimum of costly consultancy support. This therefore calls for a simple LSS
JMTM approach that utilizes powerful yet simple statistical and DOE tools to aid in the
20,1 process.

Developing an SME-based LSS model

It is clear from the above literature search that LSS has varied levels of success both in
its ability to provide performance enhancements to companies and also in its ease of
118 implementation into companies especially SMEs.
In order to assist SMEs in the development of LSS, this paper will propose a LSS
implementation model. Its aim will be to create a single purposeful framework to allow
manufacturing-based SMEs to implement the process effectively and to experience the
benefits that LSS undoubtedly brings.
At an operational level, the LSS model will aim at clarifying a process towards
identifying opportunities to improve quality, increase manufacturing performance and
reduce variability and waste in a product and/or process through the effective use of
statistical tools (especially the integration of the DOE process throughout the model)
and contemporary manufacturing improvement approaches. One of the objectives of
the model will therefore be to defeat the traditional “excuses” cited by SMEs that LSS is
not feasible in an operational environment, including; high costs and complexity of
implementation, etc. by extending the scope and effect of the work, emphasising the
“doing” elements and by simplifying the DOE exercise (most complex aspect) by
rationalising the variables using the knowledge within the company.
In addition, the model will assist in breaking down so many of the barriers that
stand in the way of individuals using statistical and/or unfamiliar problem solving
methods by acting as a step-by-step guide. Figure 2 shows the development of the
proposed model.
This model is an adaptation and extension of the SMEs-based six sigma model that
was developed by the authors previously (Thomas and Barton, 2007). The generic six
sigma model has since been successfully implemented into a number of SMEs where it
has served to provide a culture towards creating sustainable six sigma development
projects within these companies. By extending this generic model to create a more
specific LSS approach, the authors are able to identify and consolidate the critical
success factors that enabled the SME SS model to become successful and to ensure that
these CSFs remain as key and integral elements of this LSS model. The authors have
then extended the model to include a series of key lean implementation methods that
when applied alongside the six sigma process, will lead to significant benefits for
companies wishing to apply both lean and six sigma simultaneously.
The model clearly shows the major stages in the process. It shows initially the
sequential nature of the stages whereby the LSS elements are used to accurately input
to the DOE stage of the main factors and interactions that have a major impact on the
performance of the system being modelled. Integration of various stages of the model
comes by way of ensuring that the objectives of the experiment are agreed upon in the
form of targets such as KPIs, e.g. process output, or business MOPs, e.g. scrap
reduction.
The next section of this paper will describe through the use of a case study how the
model was implemented into a subject company. The major stages of the model’s
implementation are highlighted and the effectiveness of the model is evaluated at
the end.
 Start Process by Measure the problem via Confirm the objective, and Lean six sigma
identifying suitable value Pareto analysis to identify specific target result of
streams for Six Sigma CTQ issues experiment
and Lean
implementation
Identify the key process, Identification of correct
its factors and orthogonal array and
constraints interactions
Apply 5S process to clean
and standardise operating
119
practices Identify problem causes, Conduct experiment
through brainstorming,
C+E. If applicable, use
Undertake VSM to Obtain factor data from DOE
Shainin’s CST as filter
identify areas for waste system with all interaction data
reduction and
performance
Identify noise and control Carry out ANOVA on main
improvement
factors and reduce to effects and interactions to
manageable level identify statistical significance
Undertake initial system
redesign study for SUF
and waste reduction. Define DMAIC stages Verification tests to test
Identify areas that Six clearly with team, plan the prediction with actual result
Sigma DOE cansolve development of the DMAIC
especially on quality process including initial
improvement program costs and
estimated benefits
No Yes

Do values provide a close match

actual performance requirements?

Undertake detailed design

of system in line with Solution Found – control measures, & continued
improvements seen via Six monitoring to be evaluated each month SPC etc
Sigma approach and
conceptual study
Implement solution, change procedures, drawings
and documentation to record change and use as
new baseline measurement
Undertake TPM study and
continually identify
performance problems and
Evaluate effectiveness of
quality issues. Use TPM to
actions. Repeat cycle or
feed Six Sigma process via Figure 2.
stop depending upon
assessment of Six Big
success of project
Integrated lean/six sigma
Losses and OEE model

Introduction to Company A
Company A[1] is a market leader in the research, development, manufacture and
service of specialist seating systems for the automotive and aerospace industries. The
company was set up in 1964 in a small industrial unit employing 15 people and
following a management buy-out in 1990 the company has grown continually to
employ over 150 people with an annual turnover of £15 m. It remains fiercely
independent and is proud of its position and growth profile which has been developed
JMTM without the assistance of large multi-national organizational input. This unique
20,1 position has been achieved due to an unstinting attention to quality, cost and delivery
and through ensuring total customer satisfaction.
Company growth has in part been achieved by the ability of the organization to
continually innovate by means of new product introduction and development,
developing highly responsive outsourcing and local supply chain system strategies as
120 well as attention to continually developing their manufacturing processes through the
introduction of new and advanced manufacturing technologies to support their
operations. It is company policy to reinvest heavily in advanced design and
manufacturing technologies and at present reinvests in the order to 20 per cent of its
profits back into long-term development plans.
The company manufactures its products to a world wide market. Over the years the
company has experienced increasing competition from low-labour cost countries
primarily from the far-east. This has brought about major changes to the company
operations and has raised the need for the company to become leaner and more
responsive to customers if they are to remain as serious competitors in their market.
This has included primarily the need to systematically reduce quality problems
brought about through processing errors and to increase productive capacity by
ensuring that machine availability and performance was as high as possible.
The move towards lean and six sigma was instigated through a need to directly
tackle customer concerns much earlier in the process. The use of business process
consultants in the early days of company development (1990s onwards) proved to be
ineffective and as such a policy decision was taken to invest in the employment of
process engineers to create in-house expertise for future process systems development.
With increasing pressure from far eastern countries, the company realized that their
product portfolio had to shift to the higher value market sectors. This has proved to be
highly successful financially but has necessitated a major shift in manufacturing
strategy from a long, lean approach to a shorter more flexible agile manufacturing
system.
On moving into the high-value markets the company was able to make more
profit by manufacturing less products but to a much higher standard of quality and
much tighter delivery requirements. This meant that its current lean systems did
not have the necessary responsiveness and flexibility to react effectively to a more
erratic demand profile. Likewise, the maintenance management approach adopted
primarily tackled major machine breakdown problems and did not identify and
subsequently resolve the impact that poorly maintained machines had on the
resulting quality of the finished product and its serious impact on delivery times.
Integrating lean with the six sigma concept was therefore adopted in order to tackle
customer CTQ issues immediately before relationships suffered and customers were
attracted elsewhere.
The company is highly sensitive to customer quality issues and reacts quickly to
problems they consider to be CTQ. This allows them to keep ahead of the competition
however, until the introduction of the LSS strategy, the company attended to quality
problems in an often ad hoc and unstructured manner. The following section shows
how the company developed an integrated LSS methodology in an attempt to provide a
structured approach to solving CTQ problems within the company and to achieve
enhanced customer satisfaction and internal financial benefits.
 The company invested in training the co-author in the principles of six sigma to Lean six sigma
Blackbelt level and lean operations management. On completion of the training
programme, the engineer was given a small process enhancement team in order to
apply the LSS methodology to highly sensitive, high-value product lines. The following
work provides a case study of one particular project undertaken.

Applying DMAIC in the company 121

The six sigma process concentrates on a simple five phase methodology called DMAIC.
DMAIC identifies the major steps within the methodology namely define, measure,
analyse, improve, control.
The company followed this approach and each stage is explained in detail in the
following section of the paper.

Phase 1. Define
As part of the manufacturing process the company manufactures foam for the seat
bases and chair backs using a dedicated manufacturing facility. The manufacture of
the foam parts is controlled to tight specifications since the foam varies significantly in
the firmness depending on a number of key manufacturing variables. The rejection
of these foam parts is both costly and time consuming since it takes between one and
two hours before foam firmness can be assessed after manufacture. Recently, the issue
of low-foam firmness had been identified and confirmed as a serious CTQ problem. A
Pareto analysis was undertaken (Figure 3) that confirmed the failure as being the major
CTQ problem for the company thus warranting immediate action. Changes in the
variables on an individual basis did not seem to correct the problem and so a DOE
approach via six sigma was initiated.
A multi disciplinary engineering team was set up at Company A to fully investigate
the nature of the problem and to subsequently provide a cost effective solution to the
foam firmness issue. The design criterion for the seat foam is an internal standard set
by the company and requires to foam deflect by 10 mm (þ 1-0 mm). This deflection is

Pareto analysis of year to date quality related

50 140
120 120
40
No. of occurances

100
% of total

30 80 80

20 42 60

28 40
10 28
18 20
10 10 12 8 7
4 5 6
3 3 2 2
0 0
failure (screw)

Other
Wrong spec.
prematurely
Mechanism

Frame fault
adjustment
Delivery
failure

Upholstery
Foam

damage
G64 2D arm

Back

Figure 3.
parts

Pareto chart showing

Nature of fault
service work to date
JMTM measured from the centre of the foam using a 1 kN load. The team had identified that
20,1 the firmness in the seat measured a 12 mm deflection thus indicating a seriously low
firmness value.

Phase 2. Measure
In order for the company to measure the extent of the problem, it was considered
122 appropriate that testing would be undertaken at the company premises on ten foams
drawn at random from the production line. A test jig was constructed that simulated
the typical movement that would be experienced under normal operating conditions.
The test jig applied a 1 kN vertical force at the centre of the foam. The force was
applied for five seconds and a digital dial test indicator was used to measure the
deflection of the foam. Of the ten chairs drawn randomly from the production line.
Totally six out of ten chairs failed the test procedure thus confirming that the fault
identified was real.

Phase 3. Analyse
A brainstorming exercise was undertaken by an interdisciplinary team of engineers at
the company in order to identify potential factors that could influence foam firmness
integrity. Figure 4 shows a cause and effect diagram indicating that 12 factors were
identified ranging from humidity levels to shot volume. The team assessed all factors
and finally reduced them to five key factors. The main factors are shown in Table I.

Phase 4. Improve
Now that the factors had been identified, a Taguchi DOE experiment was conducted in
order to identify the key factors and the interactions that may exist between them. As
stated previously, whilst this paper concentrates upon the application of the Taguchi
DOE technique for supporting the “improve” stage, it is by no means the only
technique which can be used. Whilst DOE has been used as the technique of choice for

Men Methods
Mix settings
Shot Volume
Mixing Time
Mould Temperature
Carousel rotation
speed
Humidity levels
Knowledge base of
worker Foam
Firmness
Injection Chemical Types
Speed
Cooling rate

Figure 4. Application environment

Mould Elevation
C þ E diagram of the (heat / vibration / other)
possible factors
influencing joint strength
Machines Materials
many six sigma applications, other statistical tools and methods can be used to create Lean six sigma
significant business improvements. Shainin’s VSM technique has proven to be an
effective alternative to the traditional DOE approach (Thomas and Antony, 2004)
whilst key process control tools and techniques such as the application of overall
equipment effectiveness (OEE), SPC and QFD (Department of Trade and Industry,
2005) can prove to be equally effective in monitoring, controlling and improving
systems effectiveness as part of the six sigma/lean sigma strategy. In this instance the 123
DOE technique was employed since a clear set of process variables were identified and
an account of the DOE experimentation is now given.
Control factors and interactions. Five main control factors at two levels each were
considered for the experiment. Table I shows the control factors and levels used.
Interactions A £ B, and A £ E were also of interest. There are five degrees of
freedom associated with the control factor effects, and two DOFs associated with the
two interactions. It was therefore decided to use a Taguchi L8 Orthogonal Array
(OA)[2] for this experiment (Taguchi, 1987).
Experimental layout. The foam units were manufactured using standard company
operating procedures and the testing procedure was conducted following the
company’s standard test procedures (Table II).
Statistical analysis. Having obtained the response values using an L8 OA the
following steps were used to analyse and interpret the results from the analysis.
Samples of five tests were conducted at each experimental point. Since the resolution of
the design was III (Montgomery, 1992) (i.e. main effects are confounded with two-factor
interactions), for this study, all the main effects, and the two, two-factor interaction
affects A £ B, and A £ E, were calculated.

Coded
Name Abbrev. Units Uncoded level level

Chemical mix A Percentage of mix 40/60 60/40 1 2

Mould elevation B Seconds 10 20 1 2
Chemical temperature C Celsius 15 20 1 2 Table I.
Mould temperature D Celsius 35 40 1 2 Factors and levels used
Time in mould E Seconds 180 200 1 2 in analysis

A B C D E
Std order Run No. Percentage Seconds Celsius Celsius Seconds Deflection (mm)

1 2 40/60 5 15 35 180 12
2 5 40/60 5 20 40 200 14
3 8 40/60 6 15 35 200 10
4 6 40/60 6 20 40 180 11
5 7 60/40 5 15 40 200 9
6 1 60/40 5 20 35 180 9.5 Table II.
7 3 60/40 6 15 40 180 16 Experimental layout used
8 4 60/40 6 20 35 200 20 for the experiment
JMTM Analysis of the mean response was performed to identify the factors and their
20,1 interactions that influenced the mean response (~y). An ANOVA was undertaken and
showed that all the main factor effects and the AB interaction were judged to be
statistically significant at both 95 and 99 per cent levels of significance. For this study,
the objective was to bring back the foam firmness to within tolerance and so the
“nominal is better” quality characteristic was chosen in order to identify the correct
124 factor settings for the foam. The final selection of optimal operational factor settings
was based on the responses obtained from the statistical study.
The result of the experimentation showed that a 2, 2, 1, 1, 2 setting provided the
optimum parameter settings.

Phase 5. Control
Verification tests were carried out on the new settings of 2, 2, 1, 1, 2. An SPC chart was
set up and samples of five foam units were taken from the production line every hour
for ten consecutive hours. A short run SPC chart was set up to measure the outputs and
it was seen that all foam samples passed the firmness test. An average firmness value
of 15.8 mm (process average) was calculated. Product tracking through further SPC
monitoring showed that since the factors changed, there were no recorded instances of
product failure.

Application of lean
Phase 6. 5S implementation
The initial approach was to undertake a value steam map of the foam plant however
due to the nature of the plant it was decided to initially implement the 5S system in
order to clean and standardize the methods for working within the plant. The company
initiated a cleaning day and standardized methods of working and operating. Once the
5S approach had been implemented it now made the process of VSM far easier to
visualize and assess.

Phase 7. Value stream mapping VSM

The company undertook a VSM of the foam plant using a standard process flow chart
approach. The times of each operation/function were assessed and placed on the chart.
The VSM identified a 12 per cent value stream under current operating methods. The
major non-value added activities were identified as; transportation 23 per cent, queuing
40 per cent, trimming 15 per cent, others 10 per cent. The main observations made to
support the statistics included a lack of pull on customer demand and the strategy of
using batch and queue methods significantly added to the transportation and queuing
times.
Owing to the size of the machinery and the operating constraints within the plant
the team realized that major systems reconfiguration was not achievable and that they
had to design ways to improve flow and reduce waste within the current system
configuration.

Phase 8. Systems redesign to reduce waste

The team undertook a series of simple yet effective cost reduction projects within the
plant. The company had already achieved improvements in efficiency through
the application of the 5S approach where removing clutter and unwanted items from
the plant actually improved flow and work practices. The use of racks and point of use Lean six sigma
tool and parts stores reduced walking distances, etc.
The factor settings identified from the six sigma study allowed the company to
preset the machinery which reduced significant time in setting up and actually reduced
reject foam on start-up. Modest savings were also made in energy consumption as a
result of the new parameter settings from the six sigma project.
125
Phase 9. Systems redesign to achieve SUF
The production control department was requested to provide a requirements list to the
foam plant one day before the parts were required thus giving the plant an opportunity
to undertake some advanced production planning and allowing them to make to order.
Reconfiguration of the plant by moving the trimming section to link up between the
two foam manufacturing machines allowed for SUF to be achieved and removed the
need for the trimming plant to operate on a batch and stack approach. Installation of
conveyor systems that were synchronized between the foam machines and the
trimming section allowed the foams to cool on the conveyor and removed the need for a
separate section that allowed the foams to cool as a batch.

Phase 10. Application of TPM

Once the changes had been implemented following the six sigma and lean studies the
company decided to initiate a TPM approach that would embed a standard cleaning
and inspection regime into the operators working schedule. The aim of the TPM
program is to ensure that the machinery and equipment support the production
system. The company adopted OEE as a measure of plant performance. The results of
the TPM program are shown below.

Cost savings realised through using the lean sigma process

The company is still in their initial stages of lean sigma implementation and a series of
new initiatives are planned to capitalize on the savings already made within the foam
plant. The following savings have been identified to date:
.
Reject rate reduction on the pilot line of 55 per cent indicating a potential saving
over the year of £29,000. Cost of rejects before LSS ¼ £69,000, cost of rejects
after LSS ¼ £36,000.
.
Cell OEE increased from 34 to 55 per cent.
.
A 31 per cent increase in parts per hour from the production system. Throughput
before LSS ¼ 15 pph, throughput after LSS ¼ 22 pph. Equating to 2,800
additional parts per annum.
.
Energy usage reduction of 12 per cent per annum. From 23,000 to 21,500 KWh.
.
In conjunction with the OEE performance increase, the TPM program reduced
equipment downtime to 2 per cent from 5 per cent. Based upon nominal operating
hours of 2,000 per annum. Hours downtime before LSS ¼ 100 hours ¼ 5 per cent.
Hours downtime after LSS ¼ 40 hours ¼ 2 per cent.

The project proved to be highly successful primarily through the substantial

improvement made in foam production but also through the cost benefit ratio achieved
JMTM (outlay of £4,800 compared to the total savings made of over £40,000 in the first three
20,1 months of implementation).
Extending the application of the model
The model has provided an effective yet simple framework for a company to
simultaneously improve its manufacturing operations as well as its product
126 capabilities. The model concentrates upon DOE as a major analysis tool and as such
is somewhat conceptually limiting to more advanced companies wishing to develop
different or more specific statistical tools and techniques to develop its manufacturing
operations. However, the paper provides an effective road map to any small
manufacturing company which wishes to embark on the development of an integrated
LSS approach. Company A has a highly capable design team and therefore the
application of the design for six sigma (DFSS) applied to the company’s new products
will be important and plans are afoot to investigate the effectiveness of DFSS on the
company’s product range with the development of an associated roadmap for
integrating the existing LSS approach with DFSS.

Managerial aspects of using the integrated model

There are many benefits of such an integrated method, but the feedback-based nature
is particularly important to Company A. It means that the many opportunities already
known at Company A can be prioritised by a multi-disciplinary team considering their
individual targets, the company’s goals and the effects of the expected improvement.
This in turn means that the iterative nature of the model can be used to achieve
optimisation and/or continuous improvement of a system, in an almost continuous
systematic approach, and hence help manage the entire business process of the
company.
As a result of the above, the model also enables the company to help identify the
need to have a multi-disciplinary team working strategically, early in the product
planning stage (Kolarik, 1995; de Mast, 2004; Thomas and Antony, 2004). Especially,
relevant to Company A due to the size of the company which means that there is a
particularly good return on the time spent by the team; well managed, cost-oriented
implementation without disruption and far-reaching implications on new and existing
product specification.
Two issues emerged here:
(1) The introduction of process engineers early in the design stage provided
valuable inputs into how the cutting specification could be changed so that
quality variation could be reduced.
(2) The introduction of quality and service engineers at this stage made them an
integral part of the design function providing test data to verify the changes in
the cutting process design. This made the quality department more pro-active
in the design function and less reactive as they were traditionally used.

Conclusions
.
An experimental study was undertaken in order to identify the optimum
parameter settings and predicted settings for the arm rest problem. The results
of the experimental study enabled a change to be made to the parameter settings
that resulted in a 99 per cent quality level attainment for the product.
 .
This relatively simple application of Taguchi’s experimental design technique Lean six sigma
should allow for increased use of the methodology for tackling many process
quality problems. Likewise, the results can also provide the stimulus for the
wider application of the technique to create process improvements at relatively
lower costs.
.
The application of the LSS approach to the core quality problem at Company A
achieved savings in excess of £35,000 for an initial outlay of less than £5,000 in 127
experimental and project costs.
.
The development of a LSS model developed a culture towards continuous
improvement and the systematic implementation of the approach throughout the
organisation.
.
The application of the LSS approach allowed the company to develop advanced
statistical techniques and to become generally more “technical” in their approach
to problem solving.
.
A lean pilot study was undertaken in order to improve the quality, cost and
delivery measures of the company. In all measures, the lean project achieved
significant improvements.
.
This relatively simple application of lean using a structured DMAIC technique
should allow for increased use of the methodology for tackling many
maintenance issues. Likewise, the results can also provide the stimulus for the
wider application of the technique to create process improvements at relatively
lower costs.
.
The development of the lean approach developed a culture towards continuous
improvement and the systematic implementation of the system throughout the
organisation (Jens et al., 1997).
. The application of the TPM approach within the lean strategy allowed the
company to develop more advanced maintenance analysis techniques and to
become generally more “technical” in their approach to maintenance problem
solving (Raouf and Ben-Daya, 1995).

Notes
1. The company has requested confidentiality with regards to the issue of their name for this
paper, the authors respect this request and have not used the company name at any stage in
the writing of this paper.
2. OA are a special set of Latin squares, constructed by Taguchi to lay out the experimental
design. An L8 array indicates that eight experimental trials can be undertaken with up to
seven process variables being tested at any one time.

References
Antony, J. (1999), “Spotting the key variables using Shainin’s variables search technique”,
Journal of Logistics and Information Management, Vol. 12 No. 4.
Bhote, K.R. (1991), World Class Quality, American Management Association, New York, NY.
Bohte, F. (2000), World Class Quality: Using Design of Experiments to Make It Happen, Amacom,
Boston, MA.
JMTM Breyfogle, F.W. (1999), Implementing Lean Six Sigma, Smarter Solutions – Using Statistical
Methods, Wiley, New York, NY.
20,1
de Mast, J. (2004), “A methodological comparison of three strategies for quality improvement”,
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 198-213.
Deleryd, M., Garvare, R. and Klefsjo, B. (1999), “Experiences of implementing statistical methods
in small enterprises”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 11 No. 5.
128
Department of Trade and Industry (2005), Achieving Best Practice in Your Business – QCD
Measuring Manufacturing Performance, DTi Publication, available at: www.dti.gov.uk
Fisher, R.A. (1935), The Design of Experiments, Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.
George, M.L. (2002), Lean Six Sigma – Combining Six Sigma Quality with Lean Speed,
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Goodman, J. and Wyld, D.C. (2001), “The hunt for the Red X: a case study in the use of Shainin
design of Experiment (DOE) in an industrial honing operation”, Management Research
News, Vol. 24 No. 7/8.
Husband, S.G. (1997), Innovation in Advanced Professional Practice: Doctor of Technology
(Report No. 2), Faculty of Science and Technology, Deakin University, Geelong.
Husband, S. and Mandal, P. (1999), “A conceptual model for quality integrated management in
small and medium size enterprises”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, Vol. 16 No. 7, pp. 699-713.
Jens, O., Riis, J., Luxhøj, T. and Thorsteinsson, U. (1997), “A situational maintenance model”,
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 14 No. 4.
Jostes, R.S. and Helms, M.M. (1994), “Total productive maintenance and its link to total quality
management”, Work Study Journal, Vol. 43 No. 7.
Kolarik, W.J. (1995), Creating Quality: Concepts, Systems, Strategies and Tools, McGraw-Hill,
Maidenhead.
Montgomery, D.C. (1992), “The use of statistical process control and design of experiments in
product and process improvement”, IIE Transactions, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 4-17.
Pande, P. and Holpp, L. (2002), What is Lean Six Sigma?, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Raouf, A. and Ben-Daya, M. (1995), “Total maintenance management: a systematic approach”,
Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 1.
Shainin, D. and Shainin, P. (1988), “Better than Taguchi orthogonal tables”, Quality & Reliability
Engineering International, Vol. 4, pp. 143-9.
Six Sigma Qualtec (2002), “The great balancing act”, Lean Six Sigma Qualtec, available at: www.
ssqi.com/library/whitepapers
Taguchi, G. (1987), System of Experimental Design, Vol. 1/2, ASI, Dearborn, MI.
Thomas, A.J. and Antony, J. (2004), “Applying Shainin’s variable search methodology in
aerospace applications”, Journal of Assembly Automation, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 184-91.
Thomas, A.J. and Barton, R. (2007), “Developing an SME based six sigma strategy”, Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 417-34, 490-512.
Thomas, A.J. and Webb, D. (2003), “Quality systems implementation in Welsh small- to
medium-sized enterprises: a global comparison and a model for change”, Proceedings of
the I MECH E Journal of Engineering Manufacture, Vol. 217 No. 4, pp. 573-9.
Further reading Lean six sigma
Antony, J. and Kaye, M. (1995), “Experimental quality”, Journal of Manufacturing Engineer,
Vol. 74 No. 4, pp. 178-81.
Blanchard, B.S. (1997), “An enhanced approach for implementing total productive maintenance
in the manufacturing environment”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 3
No. 2.
Phadke, M.S. (1989), Quality Engineering Using Robust Design, Prentice-Hall International, 129
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

About the authors

Andrew Thomas is an Associate Dean (Research and Enterprise) at Newport Business School.
He entered academia having followed an industrial career in production engineering. He is a
Chartered Engineer and obtained his BE in Mechanical Engineering, MSc in Manufacturing and
a Doctor of Engineering Degree in Manufacturing Systems. He is a six sigma Blackbelt and his
main research interests include manufacturing systems design and analysis, manufacturing
fitness, design process development and six sigma. He has developed close links with industry,
conducting numerous large-scale engineering projects in the areas of systems engineering and
has published a series of international journal and conference papers in the area of
manufacturing systems design and analysis. Andrew Thomas is the corresponding author and
can be contacted at: Andrew.Thomas@newport.ac.uk
Richard Barton is a Research Fellow with the Manufacturing Engineering Centre at Cardiff
University. He obtained his BE degree in Mechanical Engineering and an MPhil in
Manufacturing Management. Upon leaving university he has pursued an industrial career in
production engineering before returning to academia to undertake research into systems
improvement and process re-engineering. He is a six sigma Blackbelt and his main research
interests include manufacturing systems design and analysis, lean and agile systems
development and six sigma development.
Chiamaka Chuke-Okafor is a Research Assistant at the Lean Enterprise Research Centre at
Cardiff University. She has BSc and MSc degrees in Systems Engineering and her main research
interests include manufacturing systems design and analysis, lean, agile and fit manufacturing
systems, six sigma development in industry and survey analysis.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

View publication stats