six sigma sebuah jurnal

8/18/2019 six sigma sebuah jurnal

1/11

Examining the implementation ofSix Sigma training and its

relationships with job satisfactionand employee morale

Jung Lang Cheng Department of Engineering and Management, Cheng Shiu University,

Kaohsiung City, Taiwan

Abstract

Purpose – The aim of this paper is to examine the impact of implementing Six Sigma system on jobsatisfaction and employee morale, and how job satisfaction, employee morale and Six Sigma

implementation are to support each other.Design/methodology/approach – The paper builds a research framework which includes thevariables of Six Sigma, job satisfaction, and employee morale. The research methodology is the use of a field survey questionnaire of a Taiwanese company.Findings – The paper finds that the method of Six Sigma implementation in Taiwanese company wasby a top-down approach, where is the managers received the training and then were expected to passon the relevant knowledge to their subordinates. It also reveals that one key issue in Six Sigmaimplementation is which organizational departments should first receive the Six Sigma training. thefield study found that the first departments related to logistics management, and then onto productionline departments. Implementing Six Sigma training has impact on organizational job satisfactionand employee morale. The performance of Six Sigma training was able to achieve job satisfaction andemployee morale, but the employees who participated in Six Sigma training were more positive withregard to job satisfaction and employee morale.Originality/value – Every organization has their special characteristics in relation to the Six Sigmasystem, job satisfaction and employee morale. The organization should aim to better understand therelationship and content of job satisfaction and employee morale with regard to successful Six Sigmaimplementation.

Keywords Six Sigma, Job satisfaction, Employee morale, Taiwan

Paper type Research paper

1. IntroductionThe Six Sigma approach has now been applied to many businesses around the world,and its implementation can lead to improvements in quality and productivity andreductions in cost and waste (Harry and Schroeder, 2000). Six Sigma quality of experiential learning, during which teams worked with businesses to affect significantcost-savings, provides proof of its value and highlights pros and cons of an “hands-on”teaching approach (Box, 2006). A Six Sigma approach can ensure an accurate jobmatch of the right jobs to the right people, improve succession planning, provide highlevels of job satisfaction, and correctly identify training needs (Stevens, 2008).

While the Six Sigma methodology provides a number of improvement approachesto increase organizational performance, little work has been done into examining itseffects of on either job satisfaction or the employee morale within firms. The aim of thisresearch is to study the relationships in the Six Sigma system between job satisfactionand employee morale. Six Sigma is becoming more widely applied in Taiwan, and thuspaper explores this issue by undertaking a field survey of one company. The paper first

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1598-2688.htm

Asian Journal on Quality

Vol. 13 No. 1, 2012

pp. 100-110

r Emerald Group Publishing Limited

1598-2688

DOI 10.1108/15982681211237851

100

AJQ13,1


2/11

aims to understand the Six Sigma implementation and its interactions between jobsatisfaction and employee morale using an empirical study of a Taiwan enterprise.Consequently, the purposes of this paper are as follows:

(1) to review the literature pertaining to the main features of Six Sigma and thekey characteristics of its related job satisfaction and employee morale, and todevelop an exploratory framework;

(2) to explore the factors relationship between the employees who participated ordid not participate in Six Sigma training with job satisfaction and employeemorale, via a questionnaire survey and multiple regressions analyses; and

(3) to find out the key principal factors of Six Sigma, job satisfaction and employeemorale using the factor analysis approach and scree plot criteria.

2. Literature reviewThe author will review the Six Sigma literature relationship with quality management

(QM) and cultural changes (CC). The QM factors are about the employees’understanding of what Six Sigma really is. The CC factors will explore therequirements needed to implement Six Sigma successfully.

2.1 Factors of QM Zu et al. (2006) stated that “quality management programs have been extensively appliedaround the world, as companies seek to attain and sustain a competitive advantage. SixSigma is the newest QM program which helps companies increase both customersatisfaction and financial benefits.” To make Six Sigma operationally efficient andstrategically effective, three factors as a methodology for QM are as follows (Figure 1):

(1) Implementing Six Sigma training : Six Sigma training should provideemployees with tools and mechanisms, and the concepts such asreengineering, lean manufacturing, just-in-time, statistical process control,and operations enhancement (Bigelow, 2002). Sutton (2006) analyzed thatputting employees through problem-solving training may provide anunderstanding of the concepts involved, asking the right questions in theproper sequence is a disciplined skill. Training is the communication process inwhich the employees ensure that they apply and implement the Six Sigmatechniques effectively (Kwak and Anbari, 2006).

(2) Teach Six Sigma by example: teaching Six Sigma by example so that everyperson in the organization understands customer requirements, and has ageneral idea of how the process will assist in satisfying the customer. Theexample may transfer to the Six Sigma documentation, which is process flow

diagrams, product performance, appearance, finished products, and customerrequirements (Oke, 2007).

Implementing sixsigma training

Teach six sigmaby example

Six sigma learningin different ways

Figure The process of cultu

change facto

10

Six Sigmtrainin


3/11

(3) Six Sigma learning in different ways: Six Sigma learning in different waysinvolves many variations based on a concentrated classroom approach whereinstructor and student interact in real time (Breyfogle, 2008). A well-developedSix Sigma learning program can ease this transition and address the “what”

and “how” of the new work arrangement (Schultz, 2008).

2.2 Factors of CC Sousa-Poza et al. (2001) argued that for an organization to realize the value of implementing quality practices, it must have a culture that is capable of fullysupporting their implementation. Six Sigma as a methodology for CC must havesuccessful programs that become cultural revolutions which involve every member of the organization. Three factors as a methodology for CC are as follows (Figure 2):

(1) Customer-focussed : being customer-focussed is the major requirement inapplying Six Sigma, which is highly sensitive to requirements for customersatisfaction. The principle of Six Sigma is a customer-focussed, quality-improvement initiative that enables organizations to make rapid decisions

based on accurate information (Rylander and Provost, 2006).

(2) Management commitment : the Six Sigma approach requires more directionand leadership from top management (Foster, 2007; Treichler et al., 2002). Topmanagement must commit to providing opportunities and incentives forthe involvement of employees (Jeffery, 2005). Once Six Sigma has beendeployed in an organization, top management needs to decide it is time toaddress the problem as a DMAIC project to improve customer satisfaction(Mukherjee, 2008).

(3) Project selection: the key ingredient for successful Six Sigma implementationis project prioritization and selection (Pande et al., 2000; Bañuelas and Antony,2002). Project selection is the process of evaluating individual projects or

groups of projects, and then choosing to implement a set of them so that theobjectives of the organization will be achieved (Meredith and Mantel, 2003).

2.3 Impact on job satisfaction and employee morale Job satisfaction refers to a positive affective reaction by individuals to their jobs.Bounds (1995) advocated the empowering of employees with increased authorityand responsibility, thus allowing them to be innovative in implementing their ownsolutions to problems, and fostering a heightened recognition of the need forcooperation, communication, and teamwork. A Six Sigma approach can ensure anaccurate job match of the right jobs to the right people, improve succession planning,provide high levels of job satisfaction, and correctly identify training needs (Stevens,2008).

Six Sigma practices can create a culture that encourages employees to worktogether across the company, improve personal responsibility, and enhance a sense of accomplishment in job tasks. TQM requires maximum participation of employees at all

Project selection

Cultural changes

Management

commitmentCustomer-focussed

Figure 2.Research framework

102

AJQ13,1


4/11

levels, and employees who have a greater variety of tasks and who deal with a greatervariety of people at work feel more involved in their jobs (Sila and Ebrahimpour,2002). TQM practices are an important aspect of successfully involving employees inprocesses that lead to improvement in company performance (Mohrman et al., 1996).

High levels of job involvement (JI) enhance job satisfaction, career satisfaction, andorganizational commitment (OC) (Udo et al., 1997).

3. Research frameworkFigure 3 displays the research framework. The items to measure the quality practicesassociated with Six Sigma implementation were adapted from prior empirical researchon evaluating quality practices (Douglas and Judge, 2001; Flynn et al., 1994; Kaynak,2003) and practitioner publications about Six Sigma (Breyfogle et al., 2001; George,2003). The measures of Six Sigma variables are divided into two main factors: QMand CC. Each factor is explored using three objectively formulated questions(presented in Figure 1). Finally, job satisfaction and employee morale refers to theextent that a company achieves Six Sigma as a measure of the Six Sigma

implementation organizational cultural performances.QM factors are made up of the following items: teach Six Sigma by example – the

degree to which the organization has Six Sigma practical teachings; Six Sigmalearning in different ways – the degree to which the Six Sigma learning is effective and

1. Sex

2. Age

3. Level of education

4. Tenure in company

5. Department6. Management position

7. Participated in six sigma training or did not participate in

six sigma training

1. Teach six sigma by example

2. Six sigma learning in different ways

3. Implementing six sigma training

1. Customer-focussed

2. Management commitment

3. Project selection

Job satisfaction Employee morale

Quality management factors Cultural change factors

1. Intrinsic satisfaction

2. Extrinsic satisfaction

3. General satisfaction

1. Organizational commitment

2. Job involvement

3. Team work

Demographic factors

Six sigma variables

Organizational performance

Figure The process of qual

management facto

10

Six Sigmtrainin


5/11

efficient; implementing Six Sigma training – the degree to which the Six Sigmatraining has been effective and efficient.

The elements that need to be evaluated for the CC are follows: customer-focussed – the ways that employee within the organization focus on customer satisfaction;

management commitment – an evaluation based on how well the Six Sigma leadershipshapes the strategic elements of Six Sigma; project selection – the effectiveness of Six Sigma project management.

This study used a discrete, five-point Likert scale with end points of “stronglydisagree ( ¼ 1)” and “strongly agree ( ¼ 5)” to measure the constructs. Using SPSS 17.0statistical software, the statistical approaches included sample descriptions, reliabilityanalysis, t -test, regression analysis, and factors analysis. The research approaches areas follows.

3.1 Sample and data collectionThe data collection process will use the cross-table skills of descriptive statistics toexplore the relationship management position and organizational department with

Six Sigma training.

3.2 Regression analysisThe regression analysis approach uses the model to formulate the relationshipbetween response variables (the employees who participated or did not participate inSix Sigma training) with job satisfaction and employee morale.

3.3 Factors analysisThe aim of factor analysis is to analyze the interrelationships among a large number of variables and to explain these variables in terms of their common underlyingdimensions (factors).

4. A field study in TaiwanGloria Material Technology Corporation (GMTC) is the first specialty steelmanufacturer in Taiwan to engage in the manufacture of special alloy materials.Founded in 1988, is located in the south of Taiwan. Gloria has set up a continuousproduction process with melting, LD refining, electro slag remolding, forging, rolling,quenching-tempering factories, and finishing facilities. GMTC provides high-qualitymaterial worldwide such as Ti-alloy, tool steel, high-speed steel, P/M high-speed steel,stainless steel, quenched-tempered steel and various ESR materials, etc.

GMTC gains business performance and competitiveness after implementing SixSigma system from 2000 years. However, although the implementation of Six Sigmahas achieved improved business performance in GMTC, its impact on job satisfactionand employee morale must be explored. Specifically, does implement Six Sigma have a

positive relationship with job satisfaction and employee morale? This question is of some interest, as if Six Sigma has a positive impact on business performance, but havea negative results on job satisfaction and employee morale, then it must be consideredsome specific characteristics in QM system.

5. Research results and findingsThe investigation used Cronbach’s a value to weight the parameter consistency, and aCronbach’s a lying between 0.9135 and 0.9476 indicates acceptable reliability (Wortzeland Robert, 1979). Table II shows the results of basic data analysis. The GMTC had

104

AJQ13,1


6/11

200 workers in its plant, and we sought the respondents who were familiar withimplementation of QM programs in the workplace. The respondents included theoperation managers, quality managers, continuous improvement managers, Six SigmaMaster black belt, Six Sigma black belt, or the line workers. A total of 200

questionnaires were issued to employees, of which 153 were returned, and the finalnumber of usable responses was 119. Consequently, recovery rate for thequestionnaires was 76.5 percent (153 retrieved samples/200 total samples) and therate for usable questionnaires was 59.5 percent (119/200) (Tables I and II).

5.1 Sample and data collectionThe relationship between management position and Six Sigma training . Table III showsthat most employees in management positions such as managers (100 percent),assistant managers (75 percent), and assistants (100 percent), participated in Six Sigmatraining. In contrast, a lower percentage of line operators received Six Sigma training(56.3 percent). These data indicate that Six Sigma training at GMTC adopted a top-down approach, based on the belief that if the middle and top management

understands the Six Sigma system, they will transfer it to their subordinates.The relationship between organizational department and Six Sigma training . The

rankings of the organizational departments that received the most Six Sigma trainingare as follows: the information management department (70.6 percent), engineeringimprovement department (67 percent), R&D center department (66.7 percent), andproduction management department (60 percent). The data show that the maindepartments to receive Six Sigma training are those related to logistics andmanagement (the departments such as information management, engineeringimprovement, and so on), and then those related to the production line controldepartment (such as forging and steel-making).

5.2 Regression analysis

The procedure fits a model relating response variables of Six Sigma training tomultiple predictor variables such as QM, CC, intrinsic satisfaction (IS), extrinsicsatisfaction (ES), general satisfaction (GS), OC, to JI, and team work (TW). There arefour models of regression analysis, which are discussed below:

The employees who participated in Six Sigma training . Model 1¼ ( 0.073)QMþ( 0.078)CCþ ( 0.184) ISþ 0.026ESþ 0.734GSþ ( 0.067)OCþ ( 0.025) JIþ ( 0.228)TW.

The multiple correlation coefficients ( R ) is 0.555, i.e. the multiple determinationcoefficient ( R 2 ) is 0.308. If we integrate the variables of job satisfaction (IS, ES, and GS)and employee morale (OC, JI, and TW):

Model 2¼ 0.052QMþ ( 0.155)CCþ (0.248) JSþ ( 0.206)EM, the R is0.192, and the R 2 is 0.037.

The employees who did not participated in Six Sigma training . Model 3¼( 0.130) ISþ ( 0.183)XSþ 0.851GSþ 0.138OCþ ( 0.361) JIþ 0.127TW.

Six Sigma Job satisfaction Employee morale

a 0.9135 0.9476 0.9328

TableCronbach’s

10

Six Sigmtrainin


7/11

The R will be 0.730, i.e. the R 2 is 0.533. If we extract the variables of QM and CC, thenthe standardized regression is:

Model 4¼ 0.060 JSþ 0.062EM, the R is 0.115 and the R 2 is 0.013.

5.3 Factors analysis KMO and Bartlett’s test . We use the type of principal component analysis and tovarimax rotation. Table IV gives the results of the KMO and Bartlett’s test of the Six

Basic data Items Samples Percent

1. Six Sigma training 1: None 62 522: Yes 57 48

2. Sex 1: Male 77 652: Female 42 35

3. Age 1: Below 20 years old 0 02: 21-25 years old 8 73: 26-30 years old 50 424: 31-35 years old 28 245: 36-40 years old 17 146: 41-50 years old 16 137: Over 51 years old 0 0

4. Level of education 1: High school 8 72: Colleges 24 203: University 54 454: Masters 33 28

5. Tenure in company 1: Below 3 years 60 512: 3-6 years 18 153: 6-9 years 5 44: 9-12 years 10 85: 12-15 years 14 126: 5-19 years 12 10

6. Department 1: Human resources 6 52: Engineering improvement 3 33: Quality assurance 15 134: Information management 17 135: Production management 15 136: Business planning 3 37: R&D center 3 38: R&D 13 11

9: Purchasing 2 210: Marketing 19 1511: Steel-making 7 612: General affairs 1 113: Forging 4 314: Finishing 11 9

7. Management position 1: Technician 10 82: Technical personnel 16 133: Technical expert 0 04: Line operator 72 615: Staff 14 126: Assistant manager 4 37: Manager 3 3

Table II.Basic data analysis

106

AJQ13,1


8/11

Sigma. The KMO value of Six Sigma, job satisfaction, and employee morale is 0.848,0.922, and 0.923, respectively, which means that the research framework in Figure 1 issuited for factor analysis (i.e. the value is over 0.5).

Scree plot . We next to applied scree plot criteria of which the value of the cumulative

percentage of variance is over 60.069. The author applied to two principal factors of Six Sigma variables and the cumulative percentage of variance is 61.974 (Table V),three factors of job satisfaction variables and the cumulative percentage of variance is

Six Sigma trainingNo (%) Yes (%) Total

Management position Manager 0 (0%) 3 (100%) 3Assistant manager 1 (25%) 3 (75%) 4Assistant 0 (0%) 14 (100%) 14Line operator 45 (62.5%) 27 (37.5%) 72Technical personnel 7 (43.8%) 9 (56.3%) 16

Technician 9 (90%) 1 (10%) 10Total 62 (52.1%) 57 (47.9%) 119

Table ICross-analysis

management position aSix Sigma traini

VariablesSix

Sigma Job

satisfactionEmployee

morale

Kaiser-Meyer-Olk in measure of sampling adequacy 0.848 0.922 0.923Bartlett’s test of sphericity Approximate w2 389.128 1,569.272 1,189.049

Degree of freedom 66 190 120Significance 0.000 0.000 0.000

Table IKMO and Bartlett’s te

Factors Items Component Eigenvalue(%) of

varianceCumulative (%)

of variance

Trainingprocess

Periodical training

0.772 3.972 52.514 52.514Continuous improvement 0.738Consensus of corporate value 0.726Continuous education and training 0.712Meet the customer’s requirements 0.643Learning from practice process 0.638Management participate 0.548

Trainingapproach

Training in diversification

0.875 3.465 9.460 61.974Matched with project requirements 0.823Improvement of processesrequirements 0.724Fit the requirements of organizational situation 0.653Different approaches to thetraining course 0.495

Table Principal factor analy

of Six Sigm

10

Six Sigmtrainin


9/11

63.992, three factors of employee morale variables and the cumulative percentage of variance is 60.849.

6. Conclusions and management implications

6.1 Conclusions. Six Sigma training is a top-down approach. Six Sigma training is an important

factor with regard to implementing a Six Sigma system, and may take a top-down or bottom-up approach. The case of our field study shows that themethodology of Six Sigma implementation at GMTC was a top-down approach(Table III), in that managers received the training and then were expected to passon the relevant knowledge to their subordinates.

. The main departments for Six Sigma training are related to logistics management .One key issue in Six Sigma implementation is which organizational departmentsshould first receive the Six Sigma training. Our field study found that at GMTCthis was first the departments related to logistics management (such as

information management, engineering improvement, and so on), and then ontoproduction line departments (such as forging and steel-making). This is becausethe logistics management related departments are responsible for businessstrategy and development, and thus their Six Sigma performances are moretangible to the organization.

. The performance of Six Sigma training was able to achieve job satisfaction and employee morale. Model 3 has the best accumulated multiple determination value( R 2¼ 0.533). This value means that the employees who did not participate in SixSigma training had 0.533 accumulated variables to predict job satisfaction andemployee morale, i.e. employees who did not participate in Six Sigma trainingwere still able to attain job satisfaction and employee morale.

.

Job satisfaction and employee morale have different meanings for the organizationand employees. Model 1 ( R 2 value¼ 0.308) has better accumulated multipledetermination value than better Model 2 ( R 2 value¼ 0.037). If we want to explorehow Six Sigma implementation influences job satisfaction and employee morale,we need to understand what the contents of these two items are. Job satisfactionand employee morale have different meanings for the organization and employees,and in order to upgrade the performance of Six Sigma implementation, we mustthus first define job satisfaction and employee morale (Table VI).

. Six Sigma training is a key successful factor to Six Sigma implementation. It isnecessary to understand the key successful factor for implementing Six Sigmasuccessfully. Table V displays training process (how the Six Sigma trainingprocess is) and training approach (what the Six Sigma approaches are), whichare two successful factors via factor analytic techniques. The Six Sigma trainingprocess must meet the customer’s requirements to attain organizationalperformance, and the Six Sigma training approach emphasis must fit therequirements of the organizational situation to root Six Sigma qualities.

6.2 Managerial implicationsSix Sigma has a positive impact on employee morale, inspiring change in theworkplace culture because teams see the results of their efforts put to work almostimmediately. The employees who did not participate in Six Sigma training were still

108

AJQ13,1


10/11

able to attain job satisfaction and employee morale, but the employees who participate

in Six Sigma training will have better value to predict job satisfaction and employeemorale.

References

Bañuelas, R. and Antony, J. (2002), “Critical success factors for the successful implementation of six sigma projects in organizations”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 92-9.

Bigelow, M. (2002), “How to achieve operational excellence”, Quality Progress, Vol. 35 No. 10,pp. 70-6.

Bounds, G.M. (1995), Management: A Total Quality Perspective, South Western CollegePublishing, Cincinnati, OH.

Box, T.M. (2006), “Six sigma quality: experiential learning”, S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal , Vol. 71 No. 1, pp. 20-5.

Breyfogle, F.W. III (2008), “The inside track on six sigma training”, Quality, Vol. 47 No. 2,pp. 46-53.

Breyfogle, F.W. III, Cupello, J.M. and Meadows, B. (2001), Managing Six Sigma, John Wiley &Sons Inc, New York, NY.

Douglas, T.J. and Judge, W.Q. Jr (2001), “Total quality management implementation andcompetitive advantage: the role of structural control and exploration”, Academy of

Management Journal , Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 158-69.

Flynn, B.B., Schroeder, R.G. and Sakakibara, S. (1994), “A framework for quality managementresearch and an associated measurement instrument”, Journal of Operations Management ,Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 339-66.

Foster, S.T. Jr (2007), “Quality survival guide: leadership”, Quality Progress, Vol. 40 No. 7,

pp. 25-35.George, M.L. (2003), Lean Six Sigma for Service, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Harry, M. and Schroeder, R. (2000), Six Sigma: The Breakthrough Management Strategy Revolutionizing the World’s Top Corporations, Doubleday Currency, New York, NY.

Jeffery, A.B. (2005), “Integrating organization development and six sigma: six sigma as a processimprovement intervention in action research”, Organization Development Journal , Vol. 23No. 4, pp. 20-32.

Kaynak, H. (2003), “The relationship between total quality management practices and theireffects on firm performance”, Journal of Operations Management , Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 405-35.

Six Sigma trainingYes No

Standardized coefficient\variable Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4

QM 0.073 0.52CC 0.078 0.155

JS IS 0.184 0.248 0.130 0.060ES 0.026 0.183GS 0.734 0.851

EM OC 0.067 0.206 0.138 0.062 JI 0.025 0.361TW 0.228 0.127

R 0.555 0.192 0.730 0.115 R 2 0.308 0.037 0.533 0.013

Table VStandardized coefficie

of mod

10

Six Sigmtrainin


11/11

Kwak, Y.H. and Anbari, F.T. (2006), “Benefits, obstacles and future of six sigma approach”,Technovation, Vol. 26 Nos 5/6, pp. 708-15.

Meredith, J. and Mantel, S. (2003), Project Management: A Managerial Approach, Wiley,New York, NY.

Mohrman, S.A., Lawler, E.E. III and Ledford, G.E. Jr (1996), “Do employee involvement and TQMprograms work”, The Journal for Quality and Participation, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 6-10.

Mukherjee, S. (2008), “A dose of DMAIC,” false”, Quality Progress, Vol. 41 No. 8, pp. 44-51.

Oke, S.A. (2007), “Six sigma: a literature reviews”, South African Journal of Industrial Engineering , Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 109-30.

Pande, P., Neuman, R. and Cavanagh, R. (2000), The Six Sigma Way: How GE, Motorola and Other Top Companies are Honing their Performance , McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Rylander, D.H. and Provost, T. (2006), “Improving the odds: combining six sigma and onlinemarket research for better customer service”, S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal ,Vol. 71 No. 1, pp. 13-21.

Schultz, J.R. (2008), “Helping ease the transition”, Quality Progress, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 53-9.

Sila, I. and Ebrahimpour, M. (2002), “An investigation of the total quality management surveybased on research published between 1989 and 2000”, International Journal of Quality and

Reliability International , Vol. 19 Nos 6/7, pp. 902-70.

Sousa-Poza, A., Nystrom, H. and Wiebe, H. (2001), “A cross-cultural study of the differing effectsof corporate culture on TQM in three countries”, International Journal of Quality &

Reliability Management , Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 744-61.

Stevens, H.P. (2008), “Total quality management now applies to managing talent”, The Journal for Quality and Participation, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 15-21.

Sutton, C. (2006), “Get the most out of six sigma”, Quality, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 6-49.

Treichler, D., Carmichael, R., Kusmanoff, A., Lewis, J. and Berthiez, G. (2002), “Design for SixSigma: 15 lessons learned”, Quality Progress, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 33-43.

Udo, G.J., Guimaraes, T. and Igbaria, M. (1997), “An investigation of the antecedents of turnoverintention for manufacturing plant managers”, International Journal of Operations &

Production Management , Vol. 17 No. 9, pp. 912-30.

Wortzel, L. and Robert, M.L. (1979), “New life-style determinants of women’s food shoppingbehavior”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 28-48.

Zu, X., Robbins, T.L. and Fredendall, L.D. (2006), “Organizational culture and quality practices insix sigma”, The 2006 Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Georgia.

Corresponding author Jung-Lang Cheng can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

110

AJQ13,1

six sigma sebuah jurnal

Documents

Transcript of six sigma sebuah jurnal