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

www.emeraldinsight.com/2040-4166.htm

Lean Six Sigma

A conceptual framework implementation
for critical success factors
of lean Six Sigma
191
Implementation on the performance
of electronic manufacturing service industry
K. Jeyaraman
Graduate School of Business, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia, and
Leam Kee Teo
Plexus Manufacturing Sdn Bhd, Penang, Malaysia

Abstract
Purpose – The objective of this paper is to analyze the critical success factors (CSFs) for lean
Six Sigma (LSS) implementation and its impacts towards company performance in multinational
electronic manufacturing service (EMS) industries.
Design/methodology/approach – A pilot study has been conducted to identify the top ten CSFs
for LSS implementation. Based on these factors, a structured questionnaire has been constructed.
The questionnaire will be distributed to multi-sites of six EMS industries to obtain the data across
Malaysia and other sites globally. The target population is the LSS program implementer such as
master black belts, black belts and LSS champions in the EMS industries.
Findings – These EMS industries provide outsourcing platform for the original equipment
manufacturing (OEM) industries to outsource their products in order to reduce operational cost. With
the proposed LSS implementation success model, a practical guide of the LSS program has been
implemented. The practical guide helps the LSS practitioners to focus on certain CSFs and it prevents
the LSS execution from loosing momentum when faces roadblock.
Research limitations/implications – The paper is relevant to most EMS industries and provides
guidelines to small and medium enterprises in Malaysia through improving their competitiveness and
capability in the globalization market.
Originality/value – The EMS industries compete among themselves to gain more business from OEM
industries through implementation of many improvements via cost reduction activities. LSS program is
recognized among the EMS industries as one of the effective business strategy of cost reduction and to
improve company’s profitability and growth. The success of the LSS program in achieving the expected
gain and return relies on CSFs; henceforth it renders the undertaking of this paper.
Keywords Lean production, Six Sigma, Manufacturing industries, Electronics industry,
Critical success factors
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma have been marketed as new organizational change
and improvement method, particularly as a cost reduction mechanism (Achanga et al., International Journal of Lean Six
2006; Hoerl et al., 2004; Edward and John, 2005). Recently, there have been efforts to Sigma
Vol. 1 No. 3, 2010
promote lean Six Sigma (LSS) (George et al., 2003; Edward and John, 2005; Brett and pp. 191-215
Queen, 2005; Caldwell et al., 2005). LSS is the most effective business improvement q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
2040-4166
technique made available today (Spector, 2006). DOI 10.1108/20401461011075008
IJLSS The implementation of Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma initiatives is criticized
1,3 that it harbors enormous difficulties (Denton and Hodgson, 1997). Hayes (2000) has
stated that successful corporate initiatives like Lean Manufacturing should be properly
planned prior to its implementation. Holland and Light (1999) have asserted that in an
attempt to implement improvement in organizational productivity, businessmen
should have a clear vision and strategy in forecasting project’s possible costs incurred
192 and duration of such project. The identification of critical success factors (CSFs) will
also encourage consideration in developing an appropriate implementation plan (Mann
and Kehoe, 1995).

1.1 Research problem

Many companies implement LSS program to improve company performance but not all
companies are benefited from LSS program due to its unsuccessful execution. Although
Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma has become a popular technique on productivity and
quality improvement, however, electronic manufacturing service (EMS) industries are
uncertain of its cost of implementation and the likely tangible as well as intangible
benefits derived (Achanga et al., 2006). There is not much empirical research which has
been performed on CSFs for LSS program and also analysis of its impact on company
performance. The present study is to determine the CSFs for LSS implementation in
EMS companies and to evaluate its impacts on company performance.

1.2 Research questions

The study attempts to answer the following research questions:
RQ1. What are the CSFs for a successful LSS implementation of the EMS industries
in Malaysia?
RQ2. What are the impacts of the LSS CSFs on the company performance of the
EMS industries?
RQ3. Does organizational belief and culture moderate the relationship between
CSFs and company performance of EMS industries?
RQ4. What are the practical guides for the successful LSS implementation?

2. Critical success factors (CSFs)

Brotherton and Shaw (1996) define CSFs as the essential things that must be achieved
by the company to identify which areas will produce the greatest “competitive
leverages”. They emphasize that CSFs are not major objectives, but are the actions and
processes that can be controlled by the management to achieve the organization’s
goals. Boynton and Zmud (1984) define CSFs as “those few things that must go well to
ensure success”.
Spanyi and Wurtzel (2003) have identified the following elements for successful
launch of a Six Sigma initiative in a small and medium enterprises (SMEs) environment:
.
visible management commitment;
.
clear definition of customer requirements;
.
shared understanding of core business processes and their critical characteristics;
.
rewarding and recognizing the team members;
 .
communicating the success and failure stories; and Lean Six Sigma
.
selecting the right people and the right projects. implementation
Achanga et al. (2006) research investigation has realized four key main factors that are
fundamental, hence critical for the implementation of Lean Manufacturing within
SMEs. They include:
(1) leadership and management; 193
(2) finance;
(3) skills and expertise; and
(4) culture of the recipient organization.

Henderson and Evans (2000) claim that the major components for a successful
Six Sigma implementation are:
.
management involvement;
.
organizational infrastructure;
.
training; and
.
statistical tools.

Antony and Banuelas (2002a, b) have presented the key ingredients on the effective
introduction and implementation of Six Sigma program in UK organizations. The key
ingredients in descending order of importance are arranged in the following manner:
.
management commitment and involvement;
.
understanding of Six Sigma methodology, tools and techniques;
.
linking Six Sigma to business strategy;
.
linking Six Sigma to customers;
.
project selection, reviews and tracking;
.
organizational infrastructure;
.
cultural change;
.
project management skills;
.
linking Six Sigma to suppliers;
.
training; and
.
linking Six Sigma to employees (human resources).

Process quality associates (PQA), Six Sigma and quality engineering training and
consulting service provider, explains a practical framework for Six Sigma implementation
in SMEs (PQA, 2003). In order to make the framework more applicable and suitable in
SMEs environment, the company has developed a set of CSFs which have been integrated
into each phase of the Six Sigma methodology. These CSFs include:
.
top management leadership and commitment;
.
a well-implemented customer management system;
.
education and training system;
IJLSS .
a well-implemented process management system;
1,3 .
a well-developed strategic planning system;
.
a well-developed supplier management system; and
.
a well-developed human resource management system.

Waxer (2004) has suggested four major requirements for successful Six Sigma
194 implementation within any organization:
(1) management team buy-in and support;
(2) education and training;
(3) resource commitment; and
(4) link to compensation.

Näslund (2008) has provided the detailed comparison of CSFs on Lean and Six Sigma
from the existing literatures. A list of the CSFs selected in this study is based on the
research done by Achanga et al. (2006), Antony and Banuelas (2002a, b), Spanyi and
Wurtzel (2003), PQA (2003) and Waxer (2004). Table I summarizes the CSFs for LSS
implementation.

2.1 Pilot study to identify top ten CSFs for LSS implementation success
Twenty-five CSFs were identified from the existing literatures review and are
considered for the study. The list of CSFs has been sent to 25 LSS practitioners in EMS
industries to shortlist the top ten CSFs. Out of 25 respondents, 23 (92 percent) have
responded for pilot study. The outcome of the pilot study is shown in Figure 1. Based
on face validity, the top ten CSFs have been chosen and are discussed in detail in the
subsequent sections.
2.1.1 Management engagement and commitment. Any successful initiative like
Six Sigma requires top management involvement and provision of appropriate
resources and training (Halliday, 2001). Jack Welch, the CEO of General Electric (GE),
has strongly influenced and enabled the restructuring of the business organization and
changed the attitude of the employees towards Six Sigma (Henderson and Evans,
2000). Without the continuous support and commitment from top management, the true
importance of the initiative will be in doubt and the energy behind it will be weakened
(Pande et al., 2000). Some companies which have implemented LSS were not successful
due to poor management support.
2.1.2 Reward and recognition system. Some studies show that 61 percent of the top
performing companies link their rewards to their business strategies, while lower
performing companies create minimal linkage (Harry and Schroeder, 1999). Across all
GE businesses, no one will be promoted without the Six Sigma training and a
completed project. This, in itself is an impressive behavior driver (Hendricks and
Kelbaugh, 1998). Some EMS companies having monetary reward on the success LSS
projects drive the employees’ interest to work on continuous improvement projects.
Certain recognition and appropriate reward system will be a motivator to encourage
employees’ involvement in LSS culture cultivation. Reward and recognition system
should be properly initiated to align well within the LSS goals and objectives.
2.1.3 Competency of master black belt and black belt. Generally, companies implement
LSS program as operational strategy to drive for cost reduction and strive towards
 Key ingredients for the Elements for successful
CSFs for lean effective launch of a Six Sigma Practical framework Is Six Sigma just for
implementation implementation of Six initiative in an SME for implementation of large companies? What
Article within SMEs Sigma program environment Six Sigma in SMEs about small companies?

Authors Achanga et al. (2006) Antony and Banuelas Spanyi and Wurtzel PQA (2003) Waxer (2004)
(2002) (2003)
CSFs (ranking) Leadership and Management Visible management Top management Management team buy
management (1) commitment and commitment (1) leadership and in and support (1)
involvement (1) commitment (1)
Financial capabilities (2) Understanding of Clear definition of A well-implemented Education and
Six Sigma methodology, customer customer management training (2)
tools and techniques (2) requirements (2) system (2)
Skills and expertise (3) Linking Six Sigma to Shared understanding of Education and training Resource
business strategy (3) core business processes system (3) commitment (3)
and their critical
characteristics (3)
Organizational Linking Six Sigma Rewarding and A well-implemented Link to compensation (4)
culture (4) to customers (4) recognizing the team process management
members (4) system (4)
Project selection, Communicating the A well-developed
reviews and tracking (5) success and failure strategic planning
stories (5) system (5)
Organizational Selecting the right A well-developed
infrastructure (6) people and the right supplier management
projects (6) system (6)
Cultural change (7) A well-developed
Project management human resource
skills (8) management system (7)
Linking Six Sigma to
suppliers (9)
Training (10)
Linking Six Sigma to
employees (human
resources) (11)
implementation
Lean Six Sigma

implementation
CSFs for LSS
195

Table I.
IJLSS Pareto chart of critical success factors
1,3 25

20

15
Total

196 10

Frequent communication and assessment on Lean Six Sigma result

Shared understanding of core business processes and their critical characteristi

Management engagement and commitment

Project prioritization, selection, reviews and tracking

Reward and recognition system

Organizational belief and culture

Effective Lean Six Sigma training program

Project success stories and best practices sharing

Company financial capability

Established Lean Six Sigma dashboard

Competency of master Black Belt and black belt

Understanding of Lean Six Sigma methodology, tools and techniques

Project management (including project champion and teamwork and composition)

Linking Lean Six Sigma to business strategy

Monitoring and evaluation of performance measurements

Financial results measures

Promotional path for greenbelts and blackbelts

Sufficient time to solve problems

Lean Six Sigma organizational structure

Linking Lean Six Sigma to suppliers

Organizational infrastructure

Linking Lean Six Sigma to customers

Greenbelt and blackbelt selection process developed

Operational excellence department visibility to execute LSS program

Top management knowledge of the key processes

Critical success factors
Figure 1.
Pareto of CSFs for LSS Total 22 21 15 14 12 11 11 10 10 9 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 1
implementation Percent 10 9 7 6 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 0
Cum % 10 19 25 31 37 41 46 50 55 59 62 66 69 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 93 96 98 100 100

operational excellence as well as to survive among the competitive environment. As LSS is

a project-driven methodology, the black belt (BB) and master black belt (MBB) need to
have project management skills to meet the various milestones during the course of the
project (Antony and Banuelas, 2002). Most of the LSS projects fail due to poor project
management skills of the project leaders (Eckes, 2001). Some companies hired MBB and
BB with few years of experiences and lack of exposure to lead the LSS program. No
strategic planning is carried out by the inexperienced MBB/BB which causes LSS difficult
to be cultivated and no clear cut direction is set by the MBB/BB to achieve the goals of the
company. The competencies and commitment of MBB/BB vital in determining the success
of LSS program.
2.1.4 Company financial capability.
If quality is the number-one priority in your company, Six Sigma will be the appropriate tool
as long as you have management commitment and lots of cash flow for training (Paul, 1999).
Financial capacity is a crucial factor in the determination of any successful
project. This is due to the fact that finance covers the avenues through which other
useful provisions like consultancy and training can be made (Achanga et al., 2006).
The LSS needs some significant investment of company in developing resources, Lean Six Sigma
training materials, statistical software licensing purchase, seeking consultation advice, implementation
reward and recognition system and others in order to cultivate and sustain the culture.
Therefore, in order to facilitate a successful LSS implementation, company financial
capability is a vital factor in increasing the likelihood of LSS implementation success of
an organization.
2.1.5 Frequent communication and assessment on LSS results. LSS steering team 197
committee should be fostered up to have regular LSS meeting to review LSS progress
and results. The regular meeting and assessment will provide the platform to assess the
potential area for improvement and gap analysis as to bring out strategies to achieve the
objectives. Poor communication and assessment will cause the team to lose momentum
and interest for continuous improvement. Frequent communication and assessment on
LSS results will provide insight to the employees and to guide them through LSS journey
for continuous improvement. Project reviews must be conducted on a periodic basis to
drive the project’s completion and closure (Antony and Banuelas, 2002).
2.1.6 Project prioritization, selection, review and tracking. Proper criteria must be
drafted for the project selection and prioritization. Poorly selected and defined projects
lead to delayed result and also a great deal of frustration (Antony and Banuelas, 2002).
Pande et al. (2000) provide three generic categories of project selection criteria.
They are:
(1) Business benefits criteria:
.
impact on meeting external customer requirement;
.
financial impact; and
.
impact on core competencies.
(2) Feasibility criteria:
.
resources required;
. complexity; and
.
expertise available.
(3) Organizational impact criteria:
.
cross-functional benefits; and
.
learning benefits, i.e. new knowledge gained about the business, customers
and processes.

It is good practice to have a project tracking system to trace all projects which are
submitted for consideration, accepted for implementation, in progress and completed
(Antony and Banuelas, 2002). LSS program rely on plenty of projects execution to
improve company performance. Periodic project status tracking is essential to ensure
the projects are meeting the goals and objectives within the timeline. No follow up
on the projects will make the project leaders losing momentum and direction. When
the project is out of path, the project tends to fail. Project mentor such as MBB/BB
should have project review with project leaders as to track their status and provide
necessary guidelines to assist the project leader to overcome the roadblock. The LSS
projects should be captured into project status tracking database to monitor on the
current status quo.
IJLSS 2.1.7 Project success stories, best practices sharing and benchmarking. Spendolini
1,3 (1992) gives some reasons for benchmarking as strategic planning, forecasting,
producing new ideas, comparing products or processes and goal setting. Understanding
key success elements of the competition (Munro-Faure and Munro-Faure, 1993), meeting
customer requirements (Camp, 1989) and motivating employees to achieve what others
have achieved (Evans and Lindsay, 1993) have also been cited as benchmarking
198 advantages. The implementation of denominated high-performance work practices is
seen to be critical for obtaining high levels of organizational performance (Pfeffer, 1997).
Since, organizations strive for survival and apparently become more knowledge
intensive, the knowledge sharing is the best high-performance work practice. The
success story of LSS projects sharing is not only to recognize the contribution of
the project leaders but also to motivate the other employees to involve in LSS projects.
The project success stories, best practices sharing and benchmarking should be
communicated to the employees to improve the LSS visibility and its culture.
2.1.8 Effective LSS training program. Besides, hardware and software, the
“human-ware” is needed to make productivity work. In a forum on “Empowered
productivity” staged by GE and Microsoft, it was agreed that training is a cornerstone to
improve human input and is critical in the productivity equation (Henderson and Evans,
2000). It is critical to “communicate both the why and the how of LSS as early as possible,
and provide the opportunity for people to improve their comfort level through training
classes” (Hendricks and Kelbaugh, 1998), and unleash the employees into the world of
LSS. Throughout the time, companies need to look outside the Six Sigma discipline for
other methods and ideas that complement it (Pande et al., 2000), passing from a trained
organization to a learning organization. A comprehensive LSS training program
provides the necessary LSS tools, knowledge and methodology towards systematic
approach on problem solving. The effective LSS training program will provide the
platform to groom future leaders, equipped with comprehensive LSS knowledge.
The talented human resources of a company are important to ensure company growth
and success. The LSS training program should be explored in detail with appropriate
coverage and duration to ensure the key ingredient of LSS transformations.
2.1.9 Established LSS dashboard. Six Sigma cannot be treated as yet another
stand-alone activity. It requires adherence to a whole philosophy rather than just the
usage of a few tools and techniques of quality improvement (Dale, 2000). It needs to be
clear how Six Sigma projects and other activities link to customers, core processes and
competitiveness (Pande et al., 2000). Since, the goal of every organization is to make
profits, Six Sigma projects make business processes profitable while attacking
variability which leads to high scrap rate, high rework rate, low productivity, etc. In
every single project, the link between the project objectives and the business strategy
should be identified (Antony and Banuelas, 2002). The companies implementing LSS
program should have clear cut goals and targets in establishing LSS dashboard.
Simply driving a business towards LSS is not a one-time effort; it is about producing
products and services that continue to meet customer and market requirements.
This requires organizational agility and constant vigilance to changes in the
marketplace. Thus, the real challenge with LSS is getting to the point where one can
meaningfully measure a business’ current performance against dynamic customer
requirements while developing the internal organizational abilities to response to
changing marketplace conditions. The well defined LSS dashboard is important to Lean Six Sigma
ensure the success of the program. implementation
2.1.10 Organizational belief and culture. A successful introduction and
implementation of LSS requires adjustments to the culture of the organization and a
change in the attitudes of its employees (Antony and Banuelas, 2002). The success of an
organization in both the local and overseas markets depends heavily on the culture of
the particular organization (Sohal and Egglestone, 1994). LSS initiatives require the 199
right mindset and attitude of people working within the organization at all levels.
The people within the organization must be made aware of the needs for change
(Antony and Banuelas, 2002). With a true cultural revolution in an organization; two
basic fears on an individual level may arise: fear of change and fear of not achieving
the new standards. To overcome fear of change in any industrial environment, the
people involved must understand the need for change (Sohal and Egglestone, 1994).
It would be ideal to create a communication plan that would address why LSS is
important, and how the methodology of LSS works in organizations (Hendricks and
Kelbaugh, 1998). It is also essential to restructure the organization to drive the culture
change and make LSS a part of everyday’s life.

2.2 LSS implementation success

The interest on lean production is mostly based on the empirical evidence that it
improves the company’s competitiveness (Billesbach, 1994; Oliver, 1996; Lowe, 1997).
The primary goal to introduce any lean production program in a shop, factory or
company is to increase productivity, reduce lead times and costs, improve quality, etc.
(Sriparavastu and Gupta, 1997). Generally speaking, the primary measure of the
performance is defined as the degree to which an operation fulfills the performance
objectives, while to meet the needs of the customers form the secondary measures
(Slack et al., 2001). The current study is to establish the link between LSS practices,
operational performance and organizational performance of EMS industries.
Ramamurthy (1995), Beaumont et al. (2002), Brah et al. (2002) and Koh et al. (2007)
measured performance in two dimensions: operational performance and organizational
performance. Operational performance reflects the performance of internal operation
of the company in terms of cost and waste reduction, improving the quality of
products, improving flexibility, improving delivery performance, and productivity
improvement. These are considered as primary measures as they follow directly
from the actions taken during the implementation of LSS, while the organizational
performance is measured by the financial aspects, such as revenue growth, net profits,
profit to revenue ratio and return on assets, and non-financial aspects, such as
investments in research and development, capacity to develop a competitive
profile, new products development, market development and market orientation, are
considered as the secondary measures because they are the consequences of the LSS
implementation.

2.3 Theoretical framework

The study examines the relationship between the CSFs of LSS as the independent
variables and the LSS implementation success as a dependent variable with the effect of
an organizational belief, and culture is considered as a moderating variable (Figure 2).
IJLSS Moderating variable
1,3 Organizational belief
and culture

Independent variables
(Critical success factors)
Dependent variables
200 1. Management engagement (LSS implementation
and commitment success)
2. Reward and recognition - Operational performance
system - Organizational performance
3. Competency of master
Black belt/black belt
4. Company financial
capability
5. Frequent communication
and assessment on lean
Six Sigma results
6. Project prioritization,
selection, reviews and
tracking
7. Project success stories,
best practices sharing
and benchmarking
8. Effective lean Six Sigma
training program
Figure 2. 9. Established lean
Theoretical framework Six Sigma dashboard

In the context of LSS implementation, CSFs represent the essential ingredients without
which the initiative stands little chance of success.

2.4 Hypothesis development

2.4.1 The following hypotheses are derived based on the theoretical framework and
literature review:
H1. The better the management engagement and commitment, the higher the LSS
implementation success.
H2. The better the reward and recognition system, the higher the LSS
implementation success.
H3. The better the competencies of MBB/BB, the higher the LSS implementation
success.
H4. The better the company financial capability, the higher the LSS
implementation success.
H5. The better the communication and assessment on LSS result, the higher the
LSS implementation success.
H6. The better the project selection, prioritization, project status and tracking,
the higher the LSS implementation success.
 H7. The better the project success stories and best practices sharing, the higher Lean Six Sigma
the LSS implementation success. implementation
H8. The better the LSS training program, the higher the LSS implementation
success.
H9. The better the established LSS dashboards, the higher the LSS implementation
success. 201
H10. The organizational belief and culture mediates the relationship between the
independent variables and the dependent variables.

3. Research methodology
There are many ways in carrying out a research. Data collection methods include
interviews, questionnaire administration and observations. The study employed
quantitative survey with structured questionnaire in an effort to test the theory and
acquire new knowledge by utilizing the statistical methods to validate results.

3.1 Research design

The study is carried out using categorical survey with structured questionnaire.
A survey is defined as a method of gathering primary data based on communication
with a representative sample of individuals (Zikmund, 2003). The primary data are
gathered and compiled specifically for the research at hand. In addition, this study is a
cross-sectional study in which data from various segments of a population are gathered
at a single point of time.

3.2 Population
The population of this study will be the six multinational EMS companies which are
implementing LSS program and having multi-site operations in Malaysia and across
the world.

3.3 Unit of analysis

The unit of analysis for this study is LSS practitioners from selected EMS
manufacturing organizations. The sampling technique used for this study is purposive
convenience sampling. The researchers generally use convenience samples to obtain a
large number of completed questionnaires quickly and economically (Zikmund, 2003).
Four survey questionnaires are sent to each LSS manufacturing organization and
the respondents are LSS practitioners such as BB/MBB/LSS Champion within the
EMS organizations who are well aware of the LSS programs. The research is a
cross-sectional study where all the data are collected only at one point of time.
The questionnaires are sent to the respondents in the following format:
.
Some questionnaires are sent through e-mail to target respondents.
.
Personal enquiry with MBB, BB and LSS champions to seek their cooperation to
answer the questionnaire.
.
A portion of the questionnaires is distributed through friends.
The respondents are given one-month period to complete the questionnaire and weekly
follow-up action is taken by sending reminders.
IJLSS 3.4 Sample size
1,3 Sample sizes between 30 and 500 could be effective depending on the type of sampling
design used and the research question investigated as stated by Sekaran (2006) as a
rule of thumb. In this research, 65 sites from Asia, America and Europe region of the
selected six multinational EMS industries are chosen. Four questionnaires will be sent
out for each site in softcopy through e-mail to the listed sites of MBB/BBs and LS
202 Champions. As many as 260 questionnaires were sent to the respondents during the
survey process.

3.5 Variables and measurement

The questionnaire is designed to get the primary data from the respondents, which
will lead to the measurements of all the independent variables, moderating variable
and the dependent variables. The items in the questionnaire are constructed with
five-point Likert scale as the previous research article indicates that five-point scale is
just as good as any and that any increase from five to seven or nine points on a rating
scale does not improve the reliability of the ratings (Elmore and Beggs, 1975).
The respondents are asked to indicate the level of agreement or disagreement to
the CSFs that are imperative for the successful LSS implementation on a scale of 1-5
(1 – Strongly Disagree, 2 – Disagree, 3 – Neutral, 4 – Agree and 5 – Strongly Agree).
The questionnaire designed in this study has seven sections. Section 1 comprises of six
questions on the respondents’ personal information and company profile. Section 2
comprises of six questions on the respondents experience in LSS implementation.
Section 3 has the benefits of LSS implementation, which are adapted from Banocorsi
(2006). Section 4 measures the CSFs for LSS implementation success. Section 5 has the
impact of LSS implementation towards the operational performance and
organizational performance of the company. Section 6 contains the organizational
belief and culture as moderator effect. Finally, Section 7 identifies the perception norm
of the respondents.
3.5.1 Independent variables. Out of the top ten CSFs, nine CSFs form the set of
independent variables and the explanation of each CSF is elaborated in Table II.
The number of items in each domain of the questionnaire is provided in Table III.
3.5.2 Moderating variable. The organizational belief and culture is chosen as the
moderating variable in this study and its contents are provided in Table IV.
3.5.3 Dependent variables. The dimension of dependent variables is the impact of
LSS implementation towards company performance. The elements of dependent
variables are measured based on the operational performance and an organizational
performance as given in Table V.

3.6 Reliability and validity of questionnaires construct

The questionnaire is first sent to ten LSS experts for face validity and the ambiguity
in the questions is completely eliminated. In addition, the questionnaire is sent to
25 LSS practitioners in EMS industries to measure the reliability and validity of the
constructs. About 23 respondents reply the questionnaires. The Cronbach’s alpha for
all constructs is higher than a commonly used benchmark value of 0.7 as shown in
the Appendix. It suggests that the items in the construct measure the same domain
of the corresponding variables as shown in the Appendix.
CSFs
Management engagement and commitment (Domain 1)
Reward and recognition system (Domain 2)
Competency of MBB and BB (Domain 3)
Company financial capability (Domain 4)
Frequent communication and assessment on LSS result (Domain 5)
Project selection, prioritization, reviews and tracking (Domain 6)
Project success stories and best practices sharing (Domain 7)
Effective LSS training program (Domain 8)
Established LSS dashboard (Domain 9)
Explanation of CSFs
Table II.
Explanation
Management team should act as key driver in driving continuous
improvements, communicate to employees about organizational goals and
highly engage and lead by example and commit to drive into LSS culture
Reward and recognition system is essential to promote employee involvement
and recognize their contribution will make the LSS program more effective
Experienced and highly skilled BB and MBB will drive LSS program more
effective and deliver result accordingly
Implementing LSS program needs some investment. Company that having
positive financial performance will implement a well-defined LSS program
with all the LSS necessities being developed (Minitab software, sophisticated
training materials, BB, etc.); to ensure LSS program a success
Regular communication and assessment is important to convey the LSS
status to the team as to come out strategy to achieve the goals that will help to
sustain the aggressiveness of LSS program
A well-defined project selection, prioritization, review and project status
tracking should be designed to capture all the LSS projects and activities in
order to monitor the status and measuring the gain of the LSS projects
Success LSS projects should be published to promote motivation and
involvement for new projects as well as to share problem-solving
methodology; will drive LSS program into success
A well-defined training program and appropriate training duration will equip
the employees with quality-related knowledge and problem-solving skills that
will develop a success LSS program
Clear and specific LSS goals should be specified to align the LSS team
towards achieving mutual goals
implementation
Lean Six Sigma
203

Table III.
LSS implementation
List of items on CSFs for
CSFs
Management engagement
and commitment
(Domain 1)
Reward and recognition
system (Domain 2)
Competency of MBB
and BB (Domain 3)
Company financial
capability (Domain 4)
Frequent communication
and assessment on LSS
result (Domain 5)
Project selection,
prioritization,
reviews and tracking
(Domain 6)
1,3
204
IJLSS
Items Source
1. Top management assumes responsibilities for LSS performance Antony et a1.
2. Acceptance of responsibilities for LSS by department heads (2002)
3. Top management supports long-term LSS improvement process
4. Importance attached to LSS by the top management in relation to cost and schedule objectives
5. Degree to which the top management considers LSS improvement as a way to increase profits
6. Degree of comprehensiveness of the LSS plan within the company
7. Commitment of the top management to employee training
8. Effectiveness of performance measurement Siong (2006)
9. Fairness of individual or team-based performance measurement
10. Reward and recognition for actual performance improvement
11. Visibility of the MBB/BB in driving LSS program Saraph et al.
12. MBB/BB accesses to top management (1989)
13. Autonomy of the MBB/BB
14. Utilization of MBB/BB professionalism as a consulting resource
15. Effectiveness of the MBB/BB in improving company performance
16. Adequate budgeting or funding to support LSS projects Soja (2006)
17. Adequate budgeting or funding to set up IT infrastructure for data analysis using minitab
18. Adequate budgeting or funding to set up classroom training with computer facility
19. Adequate budgeting or funding to reward success project
20. Use of LSS problem-solving tools/techniques to solve problems Antony et al.
21. Good communications between different departments (2002)
22. Effective top-down and bottom-up communication
23. Clear, consistent communication of mission statement and objectives
24. Having project selection and prioritization on projects that improve company competitive Antony and
advantage, business profitability, process cycle time, throughput yield, etc. Banuelas (2002)
25. Periodic project review to ensure projects are proceeded according to schedule
26. Project tracking system to track the project status
(continued)
CSFs Items Source

Project success stories 27. Extent to which LSS data (cost of quality, defects, errors, scrap, etc.) are used as tools Antony et al.
and best practices to manage LSS performance (2002)
sharing (Domain 7) 28. Extent to which LSS project success stories and best practices are available to employees
29. Extent to which LSS project success stories and best practices are available to managers
and supervisors
30. Extent to which LSS project success stories and best practices are displayed at employee
work stations
Effective LSS training 31. Specific LSS training (yellow/green/BB training) given to employees throughout the company Antony et al.
program (Domain 8) 32. LSS awareness training among employees is ongoing (2002)
33. Training in problem identification and solving skills, quality improvement skills and waste
identification skills
34. Training in statistical techniques (such as histograms, control chart, design of experiments
and regression analysis)
35. Availability of resources for employee training in the company
36. Training in interactive skills (such as communication skills, effective meeting skills and
leadership skills)
Established LSS 37. Extent to which LSS results (yield improvement, cost reduction, scrap reduction, etc.) are used Antony et al.
dashboard (Domain 9) as tools to manage performance (2002)
38. Extent to which LSS dashboard is available to employees
39. Extent to which LSS dashboard is available to managers and supervisors
40. Specificity of LSS goals within the company
implementation
Lean Six Sigma

Table III.
205
IJLSS
Moderating variable Items Source
1,3
Organizational belief 1. A comprehensive culture exists to support and Lau and Idris (2001)
and culture (Domain 10) enhance effective people and team processes
2. A process is in place to help workers expand their
role to become team players, highly skilled,
206 knowledge resources, customer advocates,
trainers, problem solvers and decision makers.
This process includes training and follow-up
support
3. A process is in place to help supervisors, managers
and technical and support professionals modify
and expand their roles to become coaches,
facilitators, customer advocates, barrier busters,
motivators and leaders. This process includes
Table IV. training and follow-up support
Elements of moderating 4. Major achievements stemming from the
variable for LSS continuous improvement and empowerment
implementation efforts are formally celebrated

Dependent variables Elements Source

Operational performance Cost reduction Salaheldin (2008)

Waste elimination
Quality of products
Productivity
Flexibility
Delivery performance
Organizational performance Revenue growth
Net profits
Table V. Return on assets
Elements of dependent Competitive profile
variables for LSS New product development
implementation success Market development

3.7 Expected outcome

This study is worth undertaken to examine CSFs for LSS implementation and their
impact on company performance of EMS industries. The study is relevant to most of
the industries and provides guidelines to local SMEs that plan to implement LSS
program and to improve their competitiveness and capability towards globalized
market. The study reveals the CSFs for LSS implementation and its relationship on
company performance which drive the operations into operational excellence.

4. LSS success implementation model

Figure 3 shows the LSS implementation success model and is summarized into four
phases:
(1) LSS formation;
(2) LSS execution;
 Lean Six Sigma vision, Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma
objective, logo infrastructure steering team training materials
implementation
L L
e L Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma project Lean Six Sigma L e
a e yearly calendar prioritization and selection project activation e a
n a a n
n n
S
i S
Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma
S
S
i
207
x i gemba presentation project showcase promotion board i x
x x
S S
i S Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma S i
g i Lean standardization Lean monthly report Lean i g
m g g m
Six Sigma Six Sigma Six Sigma
a m m a
a promotion Lean Six Sigma sustention Lean Six Sigma promotion a
f gain and benefits steering meeting f
o e e o
r x x r
m e e m
Lean Six Sigma best Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma
a c c a
t u practices sharing competition certification ceremony u t
i t t i
o i i o
n o Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma o n
n project review project tracking dashboard n

Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma Lean Six Sigma Figure 3.
certification training room minitab software T-shirt project database LSS success
implementation model
Lean Six Sigma success implementation model

(3) LSS promotion; and

(4) LSS sustention.

The activities for each phase of LSS implementation may be grouped into ten CSFs for
LSS implementation success and is shown in Figure 4.

5. Conclusions
The present study identifies nine CSFs and one moderating factor which are
fundamental and critical for the implementation success of the LSS program within
EMS industry. A conceptual framework is presented to study the relationship between
the CSFs on the operational and an organizational performance of the companies. It is
interesting to identify whether the organizational belief and culture moderates the
relationship between CSFs and implementation success of the LSS program. The
empirical study is in progress and the results and findings are reserved for publication.
There are many CSFs in determining the LSS implementation success and each CSF is
interdependent of each other in order to make the LSS program a success. Although
some vital CSFs need to have more focus, the trivial CSFs cannot be ignored absolutely.
It is believed that the implementation of the LSS program harbors enormous
difficulties, in order to reap significant improvement on the company performance, it
should be properly planned in advance and to implement successfully. In this context,
the LSS success implementation model is developed and its functions are grouped
within the identified CSFs.
IJLSS
1,3 Organization belief Established LSS
and culture dashboards
-LSS steering meeting -LSS dashboard
-LSS Gemba presentation -LSS gain and benefits
-LSS competition -LSS standardization
Management -LSS certification ceremony
engagement Effective LSS
208 and commitment training program
- LSS Minitab software
-LSS steering team
-LSS training room
-LSS steering meeting
-LSS training materials
-LSS Gemba presentation
and duration
-LSS certification
ceremony
-LSS infrastructure
-LSS competition

Project success
Reward and stories, best practices
recognition sharing and benchmarking
system Critical success factors -LSS project showcase
-LSS certification of -LSS best practices sharing
ceremony -LSS gemba presentation
-LSSmonetary reward
lean Six Sigma implementation
-LSS promotion board
-LSS competition

Project prioritization,
selection, review and
Competency of MBB/BB
tracking
-LSS project review
-LSS project tracking -LSS Project prioritization
-LSS training materials and Selection
-LSS project execution -LSS Project tracking
Frequent
-LSS yearlycalendar Company financial communication
capability and assessment
-LSS Minitab software on LSS result
-LSS training room -LSS dash board
-LSS monetary reward -LSS promotion board
Figure 4. -LSS project database -LSS Gemba presentation
CSFs of LSS -LSS T-shirt -LSS project database
-LSS competition
implementation

References
Achanga, P., Shehab, E., Roy, R. and Nelder, G. (2006), “Critical success factors for lean
implementation within SMEs”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 17
No. 4, pp. 460-71.
Antony, J. and Banuelas, R. (2002a), “Critical success factors for the successful implementation of
Six Sigma projects”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 92-9.
Antony, J. and Banuelas, R. (2002b), “Key ingredients for the effective implementation of
Six Sigma program”, Journal of Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 20-7.
Antony, J., Leung, K. and Knowles, G. (2002), “Critical success factors of TQM implementation
in Hong Kong industries”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,
Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 551-66.
Banocorsi, S. (2006), “The benefits of lean Six Sigma”, available at: http://EzineArticles.com/
?expert¼Steven_Bonacorsi
Beaumont, N., Schroder, R. and Sohal, A. (2002), “Do foreign-owned firms manage advanced Lean Six Sigma
manufacturing technology better?”, International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, Vol. 22 No. 7, pp. 759-71. implementation
Billesbach, T. (1994), “Applying lean production principles to a process facility”, Production
& Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 40-4.
Boynton, A. and Zmud, R. (1984), “An assessment of critical success factors”, Sloan Management
Review, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 17-27. 209
Brah, S., Tee, S. and Rao, B. (2002), “Relationship between TQM and performance of Singapore
companies”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 19 No. 4,
pp. 356-79.
Brett, C. and Queen, P. (2005), “Streamlining enterprise records management with Lean
Six Sigma”, Information Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 6, pp. 58-62.
Brotherton, B. and Shaw, J. (1996), “Towards an identification and classification of critical
success factors in UK hotels plc”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 15
No. 2, pp. 113-35.
Caldwell, C., Brexler, J. and Tom Gillem, T. (2005), “Engaging physicians in lean Six Sigma”,
Quality Progress, Vol. 38 No. 11, pp. 42-6.
Camp, R.C. (1989), Benchmarking, the Search for Industry Best Practices that Lead to Superior
Performance, ASQC Quality Press, Milwaukee, WI.
Dale, B. (2000), “Marginalisation of quality: is there a case to answer?”, The TQM Magazine,
Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 266-74.
Denton, P.D. and Hodgson, A. (1997), “Implementing strategy-led BPR in a small manufacturing
company”, The 5th International Conference on FACTORY 2000 – The Technology
Exploitation Process Conference Publication, No. 435, pp. 1-8.
Eckes, G. (2001), Making Six Sigma Last: Managing Cultural and Technical Change, Wiley,
New York, NY.
Edward, D.A. and John, M. (2005), “The integration of lean management and Six Sigma”,
The TQM Magazine, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 5-18.
Elmore, P.E. and Beggs, D.L. (1975), “Salience of concepts and commitment to extreme
judgements in response pattern of teachers”, Education, Vol. 95 No. 4, pp. 325-34.
Evans, J. and Lindsay, W. (1993), The Management and Control of Quality, 2nd ed., West Publishing,
St Paul, MN.
George, M., Rowlands, D. and Kastle, B. (2003), What Is Lean Six Sigma?, McGraw-Hill
Companies, New York, NY.
Halliday, S. (2001), “So what exactly is Six Sigma?”, Works Management, Vol. 54 No. 1, p. 15.
Harry, M.J. and Schroeder, R. (1999), Six Sigma: The Breakthrough Management Strategy
Revolutionizing the World’s Top Corporations, Bantam Books Audio, New York, NY,
CD Audio Book.
Hayes, B.J. (2000), “Assessing for lean Six Sigma implementation and success”, Six Sigma
Advantage, available at: http://software.isixsigma.com/ (accessed October 10, 2009).
Henderson, K.M. and Evans, J.R. (2000), “Successful implementation of Six Sigma: benchmarking
general electric company”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 7 No. 4,
pp. 260-81.
Henderson, K.M. and Evans, J.M. (2000), “Training is a cornerstone in GE’s quality equation”,
Control Engineering, January.
IJLSS Hendricks, C.A. and Kelbaugh, R. (1998), “Implementing Six Sigma at GE”, The Journal of
Quality and Participation, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 48-53.
1,3
Hoerl, R., Snee, R., Czarniak, S. and Parr, W. (2004), “The future of Six Sigma”, ASQ Six Sigma
Forum Magazine, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 38-43.
Holland, C.P. and Light, B. (1999), “A critical success factors model for ERP implementation”,
FOCUS, IEEE Software, May/June, pp. 30-5.
210 Koh, S., Demirbag, M., Bayraktar, E., Tatoglu, E. and Zaim, S. (2007), “The impact of supply
chain management practices on performance of SMEs”, Industrial Management & Data
Systems, Vol. 107 No. 1, pp. 103-24.
Lau, H.C. and Idris, M.A. (2001), “The soft foundation of the critical success factors on TQ
implementation in Malaysia”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 51-62.
Lowe, J. (1997), “High-performance manufacturing: evidence from the automotive components
industry”, Organization Studies, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 783-98.
Mann, R. and Kehoe, D. (1995), “Factors affecting the implementation and success of TQM”,
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 11-23.
Munro-Faure, L. and Munro-Faure, M. (1993), Implementing Total Quality Management,
Financial Times Pitman, London.
Näslund, D. (2008), “Lean, Six Sigma and lean sigma: fads or real process improvement
methods?”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 269-87.
Oliver, N. (1996), “Lean production practices: international comparisons in the auto components
industry”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 7, pp. 529-44 (special issue).
Pande, P.S., Neuman, R.P. and Cavanagh, R.R. (2000), The Six Sigma Way: How GE, Motorola
and Other Top Companies are Honing Their Performance, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Paul, L. (1999), “Practice makes perfect’”, CIO Enterprise, Vol. 12 No. 7, Section 2.
Pfeffer, J. (1997), New Directions for Organization Theory, Oxford University Press,
New York, NY.
PQA (2003), “Practical framework for implementation of Six Sigma in SMEs”, Process Quality
Associates, available at: www.pqa.net/sixsigma/ (accessed March 7, 2005).
Ramamurthy, K. (1995), “The influence of planning on implementation success of advanced
manufacturing technology”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 42
No. 1, pp. 62-73.
Salaheldin, I.S. (2008), “Critical success factors for TQM implementation and their impact on
performance of SMEs”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 215-37.
Saraph, V., Benson, G. and Schroeder, G. (1989), “An instrument for measuring the critical factors
of quality management”, Decision Sciences, Vol. 20 No. 4, p. 810.
Sekaran, U. (2006), Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach, 4th ed., Wiley,
New York, NY.
Siong, C.C. (2006), “KM critical success factors. A comparison of perceived importance versus
implementation in Malaysian ICT companies”, The Learning Organization, Vol. 13 No. 3,
pp. 230-56.
Slack, N., Chambers, S. and Johnston, R. (2001), Operations Management, 3rd ed., Prentice-Hall,
Harlow.
Sohal, S. and Egglestone, A. (1994), “Lean production: experience among Australian
organizations”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 14
No. 11, pp. 35-51.
Soja, P. (2006), “Success factors in ERP systems implementations”, Journal of Enterprise Lean Six Sigma
Information Management, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 460-71.
implementation
Spanyi, A. and Wurtzel, M. (2003), “Six Sigma for the rest of us”, Quality Digest, available at:
www.qualitydigest.com/july03/articles/01_articles.html (accessed February 26, 2005).
Spector, R. (2006), “How constraints management enhances Lean and Six Sigma”, Supply Chain
Management Review, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 42-7.
Spendolini, M. (1992), The Benchmarking Book, AMACOM, New York, NY. 211
Sriparavastu, L. and Gupta, T. (1997), “An empirical study of just-in-time and total quality
management principles implementation in manufacturing firms in the USA”, International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 17 No. 12, pp. 1215-32.
Waxer, C. (2004), “Is Six Sigma just for large companies? What about small companies?”,
available at: www.isixsigma.com/library/content/c010325a.asp (accessed March 2, 2005).
Zikmund, W.G. (2003), Business Research Method, Thomson Learning, Cincinnati, OH.

Further reading
Chong, H., White, R. and Prybutok, V. (2001), “Relationship among organizational support,
JIT implementation, and performance”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 101
No. 6, pp. 273-80.
Coronado, R.B. 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.
Dalton, G., Perry, L., Younger, J. and Smallwood, N. (1996), “Strategic restructuring”, Human
Resources Management, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 433-52.
Deming, W. (1986), Out of the Crisis, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Goyal, S. and Deshmukh, S. (1992), “A critique of the literature on just-in-time manufacturing”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 18-28.
Huber, G.P. and Powere, D.J. (1985), “Retrospective reports of strategy-level managers: guidelines
for increasing accuracy”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 171-80.
Juran, J.M. (1989), Juran on Leadership for Quality: An Executive Handbook, The Free Press,
New York, NY.
Keen, G. and Knapp, M. (1996), Every Manager’s Guide to Business Processes: A Glossary of Key
Terms and Concepts for Today’s Business Leader, Harvard Business School Press,
Boston, MA.
Parks, C.M. (2002), “Instill lean thinking”, Industrial Management, Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 14-18.
Rockart, J. (1979), “Chief executives define their own data needs”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 57 No. 2, pp. 81-93.
Shirouzu, N. and Moffett, S. (2004), “Bumpy road: as Toyota closes in on GM, quality concern
also grow”, The Wall Street Journal, August 4.
Sila, I. (2007), “Examining the effects of contextual factors on TQM and performance through the
lens of organizational theory: an empirical study”, Journal of Operations Management,
Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 83-109.
Taj, S. and Berro, L. (2005), “Application of constrained management and lean manufacturing
in developing best practices for productivity improvement in auto-assembly plant”,
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 55 Nos 3/4,
pp. 332-45.
IJLSS Winter, S. (1994), “Organization for continuous improvement, evolutionary theory meets the
quality revolution”, in Baum, J. and Singh, J. (Eds), The Evolutionary Dynamics of
1,3 Organizations, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Womack, J. (2006), “Value stream mapping”, Manufacturing Engineering, May, pp. 145-56.
Worley, J. and Doolen, T. (2006), “The role of communication and management support
in lean manufacturing implementation”, Management Decision, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 228-45.
212 Yasin, M. and Wafa, M. (1996), “An empirical examination of factors influencing JIT
Success”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 16 No. 1, p. 19.

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

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

Independent variables
Management engagement Reward and Company financial
and commitment recognition system Competency of MBB/BB capability

Item A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 B7 B8 B9 C10 C11 C12 C13 C14 D15 D16 D17 D18
Average 4.22 3.96 4.39 4.09 3.96 4.22 4.30 4.17 4.09 4.17 4.09 3.74 3.91 4.09 4.00 3.74 3.83 4.00
Overall average 4.14 4.19 4.00 3.89
Cronbach’s alpha 0.8435 0.8191 0.7443 0.8199
implementation

study variables
Reliability results of
Lean Six Sigma

Table AI.
213
 1,3

214
IJLSS

Table AII.
Independent variables
Frequent Project selection,
communication prioritization, Project success
and assessment on reviews and stories and best practices Established LSS
LSS result tracking sharing Effective LSS training program dashboard

Item E19 E20 E21 E22 F23 F24 F25 G26 G27 G28 G29 H30 H31 H32 H33 H34 H35 I36 I37 I38 I39
Average 3.96 4.04 3.91 4.09 3.74 4.09 4.13 4.17 4.00 3.96 3.96 4.26 4.26 4.26 4.17 3.91 3.87 4.22 4.09 3.78 3.70
Overall average 4.00 3.99 4.02 4.12 3.95
Cronbach’s alpha 0.7286 0.8268 0.7335 0.8364 0.7948
 Moderating variable Dependent variables
Organization belief and
culture Operational performance Organizational performance

Item J1 J2 J3 J4 OP1 OP2 OP3 OP4 OP5 OP6 OR1 OR2 OR3 OR4 OR5 OR6
Average 4.09 3.91 3.74 4.09 4.52 4.35 4.13 4.39 3.78 3.78 3.17 3.26 2.87 3.96 3.35 3.48
Overall average 3.96 4.16 3.35
Cronbach’s alpha 0.8569 0.8691 0.8698
implementation
Lean Six Sigma

Table AIII.
215