Design for Six Sigma and Lean Product Development
The Asian Journal on Quality / Vol. 8, No. 3
23
Design for Six Sigma and Lean Product Development : Differences, Similarities and Links
Jean‐Baptiste Fouquet, MSc
†
Ida Gremyr, Ph.D. Assistant Professor At Quality Sciences, Chalmers University, Göteborg, Sweden E-mail: jb.fouquet@gmail.com, ida.gremyr@chalmers.se
Abstract1)
Many practitioners strive to increase the efficiency of their product development. In addition, smaller companies must satisfy customers’ expectations of their product development. These expectations can be e.g. use of specific methodologies such as Lean Product Development (LPD) and/or Design for Six Sigma (DFSS). This study attempts to identify differences and similarities between these methodologies and the connection between them. This comparison is of interest to practitioners that must choose a strategy for their product development as well as to researchers. The aim of both methodologies is to reduce waste and time of development and to raise the quality of a product at the very roots of the product: its development. LPD and DFSS help development managers to structure projects and focus as much as possible on customer expectations and satisfaction. Key Words: DFSS, Lean, LPD, Product Development, Six Sigma
1. Introduction
This research began with the initiation of a general discussion between customers, suppliers and scholars concerning the way product development (PD) should be carried out to be most efficient and how a supplier can best respond to customers’ expectations in PD. This strategic sector is under increasing pressure for efficiency since many companies have increased their production capability (Liker and Morgan, 2006). Two methodologies have helped manufacturing to reach satisfactory levels of competitiveness: Six Sigma and Lean Manufacturing (Womack, Jones and Roos, 1992, Harry and Schroeder, 2000). Six Sigma is an improvement methodology that guides companies toward achieving a six‐sigma level of
23
Design for Six Sigma and Lean Product Development : Differences, Similarities and Links
Jean‐Baptiste Fouquet, MSc
†
Ida Gremyr, Ph.D. Assistant Professor At Quality Sciences, Chalmers University, Göteborg, Sweden E-mail: jb.fouquet@gmail.com, ida.gremyr@chalmers.se
Abstract1)
Many practitioners strive to increase the efficiency of their product development. In addition, smaller companies must satisfy customers’ expectations of their product development. These expectations can be e.g. use of specific methodologies such as Lean Product Development (LPD) and/or Design for Six Sigma (DFSS). This study attempts to identify differences and similarities between these methodologies and the connection between them. This comparison is of interest to practitioners that must choose a strategy for their product development as well as to researchers. The aim of both methodologies is to reduce waste and time of development and to raise the quality of a product at the very roots of the product: its development. LPD and DFSS help development managers to structure projects and focus as much as possible on customer expectations and satisfaction. Key Words: DFSS, Lean, LPD, Product Development, Six Sigma
1. Introduction
This research began with the initiation of a general discussion between customers, suppliers and scholars concerning the way product development (PD) should be carried out to be most efficient and how a supplier can best respond to customers’ expectations in PD. This strategic sector is under increasing pressure for efficiency since many companies have increased their production capability (Liker and Morgan, 2006). Two methodologies have helped manufacturing to reach satisfactory levels of competitiveness: Six Sigma and Lean Manufacturing (Womack, Jones and Roos, 1992, Harry and Schroeder, 2000). Six Sigma is an improvement methodology that guides companies toward achieving a six‐sigma level of
References: 1. Bryman, Alan.(2004), Social Research Methods, Second Edition Oxford. 2. Bergman, Bo, Kroslid, Dag, Magnusson, Kjell.(2003), Six Sigma, The Pragmatic Approach, Second Edition, Studentlitteratur, Sweden. 3. Brown, Shona L., Eisenhardt M.(1995), Product Development: Past Research, Present Findings, And Future Directions, The Academic Management Review, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 343-375. 4. Clausing, Don.(1994), Total Quality Development, A Step by Step Guide to World‐Class Concurrent Engineering, ASME Press. New York. 5. Chowdhury, Subir.(2002), The Power of Design for Six Sigma, Dearborn Trade, Chicago. 34 Design for Six Sigma and Lean Product Development 6. Creveling, C. M., Slutsky, J. L., Antis, D. jr.(2003), Design for Six Sigma in Technology and Product Development, What to Do & When to Do It, Prentice Hall PTR, New Jersey. 7. Cronemyr, Peter.(2006), DMAIC DMADV, Differences, Similarities and Synergies. 8. Dean, James W., Bowen, David E.(1994), Management Theory and Total Quality: Improving Research and Practice through Theory Development, The Academic Review, Vol. 19, No. 3, Special Issue: Total Quality, pp. 392-418. 9. Gremyr, I.(2005), Exploring Design for Six Sigma From the Viewpoint of Robust Design Methodology, Journal of Six Sigma and Competitive Advantage, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp 295-305. 10. Harry, Mikel, Schroeder, Richard.(2000), Six Sigma, the Breakthrough, Management, Strategy, Revolutionizing the World’s Top Corporation, Currency, New York. 11. Karlsson, Christer, Ålhström, Pär.(1996), The Difficult Path to Lean Product Development, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 13, pp. 2830-295. 12. Kristofferson, A., Lindeberg, C.(2006), Lean Product Development in Swedish Industry, Master’s Thesis, Stockholm School of Economics. 13. Mascitelli, Ron.(2004), The Lean Design Guidebook-Everything Your Product Development Team Needs to Slash Manufacturing Costs, Technology Perspectives, Northridge. 14. Mehri, Darius.(2005), The Darker Side of Lean, an Insider’s Perspective on the Realities of the Toyota Production System, Cornell University Press. 15. Morgan, James M., Liker, Jeffrey K.(2997), The Toyota Product Development System, Integrating People, Process, and Technology, Productivity Press, New York. 16. Productivity Press Development Team(2005), Lean Supply Chain: Collected Practices & Cases, Productivity Press. 17. Reinertsen, Donald.(2005), Let It Flow, Industrial Engineering, pp. 41‐45. 18. Reinertsen, Donald.(2005), How Lean Product Development Sparked a Revolution, Institute of Industrial Engineers. 19. Sethi, Rajesh.(2000), New Product Quality and Product Development Teams, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 64, pp. 2. 20. Schein, E.(1992), Organisational Culture and Leadership, Jossey‐Bass, San Francisco. 21. Tennant, G.(2002), Design For Six Sigma, Launching Products and Services without Failure, Gower, Hampshire. 22. Urban, G. L., Hauser, J. R.(1993), Design and Marketing of New Product, Prentice Hall, New Jersey. 23. Wilson, G.(2005), Six Sigma, and the Product Development Cycle, Oxford, Oxford. 24. Womack, J. P., Jones, D. T., Roos, D.(1991), The Machine that Changed the World, Rawson Associates, New York. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.