IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijpqma/v4y2009i2p178-198.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The analysis and evaluation of a quality system using the Six Sigma benchmark: evidence for the robustness of Six Sigma processes

Author

Listed:
  • Eisenhower C. Etienne

Abstract

This paper shows how Six Sigma methods can be used to analyse the quality system of a company based on a case study. It broadens Six Sigma analysis by first comparing the qualitative characteristics of a company's quality system to benchmark Six Sigma practices. Second, it computes the company's Six Sigma metrics and compares these with the Six Sigma benchmark. It investigates how well the company's quality system performs when subjected to process drift and tightened customer requirements compared with the Six Sigma benchmark. The analysis provides richer sigma metrics than those found in published Six Sigma tables. The quantitative results provide evidence that Six Sigma processes are robust. They show that divergence of the qualitative characteristics of a company's quality system from Six Sigma practices mirrors the deviation of the performance of its process quality from quantitative Six Sigma metrics.

Suggested Citation

  • Eisenhower C. Etienne, 2009. "The analysis and evaluation of a quality system using the Six Sigma benchmark: evidence for the robustness of Six Sigma processes," International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 4(2), pages 178-198.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijpqma:v:4:y:2009:i:2:p:178-198
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=23186
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijpqma:v:4:y:2009:i:2:p:178-198. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=177 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.