According to W. Edwards Deming, American companies require nothing less than a transformation of management style and of governmental relations with industry. In Out of the Crisis, originally published in 1982, Deming offers a theory of management based on his famous 14 Points for Management. Management's failure to plan for the future, he claims, brings about loss of market, which brings about loss of jobs. Management must be judged not only by the quarterly dividend, but by innovative plans to stay in business, protect investment, ensure future dividends, and provide more jobs through improved product and service. In simple, direct language, he explains the principles of management transformation and how to apply them.

Out of the Crisis

How we Think

* Starting from Need* Evolution of the Toyota Production System* Further Development* Genealogy of the Toyota Production System* The True Intention of the Ford System* Surviving the Low-Growth Period

Toyota production system : beyond large-scale production

In Art as Experience, Dewey brings together the deep and enduring connection between art and human experience. Art is understood not as a commodity or solitary object but as an intensely meaningful...

Art as experience

Implementation science is growing in importance among funders, researchers, and practitioners as an approach to bridging the gap between science and practice. We addressed three goals to contribute to the understanding of the complex and dynamic nature of implementation. Our first goal was to provide a conceptual overview of the process of implementation by synthesizing information from 25 implementation frameworks. The synthesis extends prior work by focusing on specific actions (i.e., the “how to”) that can be employed to foster high quality implementation. The synthesis identified 14 critical steps that were used to construct the Quality Implementation Framework (QIF). These steps comprise four QIF phases: Initial Considerations Regarding the Host Setting, Creating a Structure for Implementation, Ongoing Structure Once Implementation Begins, and Improving Future Applications. Our second goal was to summarize research support for each of the 14 QIF steps and to offer suggestions to direct future research efforts. Our third goal was to outline practical implications of our findings for improving future implementation efforts in the world of practice. The QIF’s critical steps can serve as a useful blueprint for future research and practice. Applying the collective guidance synthesized by the QIF to the Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation (ISF) emphasizes that accountability for quality implementation does not rest with the practitioner Delivery System alone. Instead, all three ISF systems are mutually accountable for quality implementation.

http://nrepp.samhsa.gov/Docs/The%20Quality%20Implementation%20Framework_%20A%20Synthesis%20of%20Critical%20Steps%20in%20the%20Implementation%20Process%20.pdf

The Quality Implementation Framework: A Synthesis of Critical Steps in the Implementation Process

Six Sigma programs: An implementation model

The purpose of this study is to show how Lean and Six Sigma (LSS) improvement events were implemented to improve the performance of a home furnishing manufacturing operation. Each LSS improvement event was conducted at the targeted shop by an experienced facilitator with a team of workers from the shop. An improvement event consisted of a host of activities involving five phases which were completed over an eight-week period. The first four weeks included four phases: 1planning and discovery 2training and opportunity finding 3refinement and preparation 4implementation and changes. The last four weeks included one phase: 5enhancement and transfer of ownership. The facilitator was responsible for the first phase and the workers were responsible for all other phases, although the facilitator also played an important role in those phases. With some variation, the workers spent 100% of their time in activities related to phases 2 and 4, and 20% of their time in activities related to phases 3 and 5. Important t...

Lean Six Sigma (LSS): An Implementation Experience

Despite the pervasiveness of Six Sigma programs, there is rising concern regarding the failure of many Six Sigma programs. One explanation for many Six Sigma failures could be escalation of commitment. Escalation of commitment refers to the propensity of decision-makers to continue investing in a failing course of action. Many researchers have applied escalation of commitment to explain the behavior of individuals, groups, companies, and nations. Using the escalation of commitment model (Staw and Ross 1987a; Ross and Staw Acad. Manag. J. 36:701–732 1993) as a basis, this research describes a Six Sigma failure in an electrical components company. In documenting this failure, this research contributes in two ways, both in the practice and in the theory of Six Sigma. First, while examining the Six Sigma failure, this research uncovers important factors for successful implementation, which should improve the practice of Six Sigma. Second, academic research (e.g., Schroeder et al. J. Oper. Manag, 26:536–554 2008; Zu et al. J. Oper. Manag, 26:630–650 2008) is engaged in uncovering the definition of Six Sigma, and its differences from other improvement programs. This research provides a new direction to academic research and has the potential to impact the theory of Six Sigma.

Six Sigma failures: An escalation model

Over the past decade two approaches, just‐in‐time (JIT) and theory of constraints (TOC), for designing and operating production lines have developed, each claiming to be the “correct” way. In addition there are still those who maintain that line balanced (whenever possible) is the optimal method. This study uses simulation to compare each of these approaches for designing and operating production lines under various levels of processing time variability, station downtime, and total system inventory. Not surprisingly, the JIT approach appears to work best when system variability is low. The TOC approach works best when system variability is high. This shows that lines designed using TOC principles perform significantly better than JIT lines when inventory is low, and JIT lines perform significantly better than TOC lines as inventory is added to the system. The traditionally balanced line did not perform best under any of the conditions used in this study.

A comparative study of line design approaches for serial production systems

Goldratt, the originator of the Theory of Constraints (TOC), maintains that only the system's primary resource constraint(s) should be scheduled at 100% of capacity. All other resources should have excess capacity. This paper presents the results of a simulation experiment that studies how changes in the capacity utilization of a systems two most heavily utilized resources affect the performance of a drum-buffer-rope (DBR)scheduling system. The research demonstrates that 100% utilization of the primary constraint is not optimal. It also shows that DBR responds well to relatively low levels of increased capacity at the operations second most heavily utilized resource. This research also highlights several other issues related to capacity utilization that need further investigation.

Satya S. Chakravorty

Papers

Six Sigma programs: An implementation model

Lean Six Sigma (LSS): An Implementation Experience

Six Sigma failures: An escalation model

A comparative study of line design approaches for serial production systems

A study of the utilization of capacity constrained resources in drum‐buffer‐rope systems*