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

www.emeraldinsight.com/1741-038X.htm

JMTM
21,4

The implementation of lean

Six Sigma in financial services
organizations

512
Received October 2009
Revised January 2010
Accepted January 2010

Catarina Delgado
Faculty of Economics, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal and
EDGE (Research Centre in Management Studies), Porto, Portugal

Marlene Ferreira
EDGE (Research Centre in Management Studies), Porto, Portugal, and

Manuel Castelo Branco

Faculty of Economics, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal and
EDGE (Research Centre in Management Studies), Porto, Portugal
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to obtain pertinent information pertaining to benefits
accomplished, main difficulties felt, and key lessons learned in the implementation of lean Six Sigma
(LSS), which are likely to be helpful to financial services organizations wanting to implement the same
tool.
Design/methodology/approach This paper reports the results of a case study from a financial
services organization which has begun the implementation of LSS methodologies ten years ago, in the
pursuit of service excellence.
Findings The benefits derived from LSS implementation, such as lowering the operational costs,
improving processes and product quality, increased efficiency, which leads to the increase of
productivity, the agility and versatility obtained by the organization, vastly outweigh the costs. At an
international level, there are cultural differences pertaining mainly to internal resistance and openness
to change.
Research limitations/implications This work focuses on a specific case study.
Practical implications The authors compiled the lessons learned and recommendations for future
implementations of this methodology. The paper, therefore, will be of interest to managers of similar
companies.
Originality/value The paper presents a successful application of LSS for a financial services
company.
Keywords Six sigma, Lean production, Financial institutions, Financial services, Portugal
Paper type Case study

Journal of Manufacturing Technology

Management
Vol. 21 No. 4, 2010
pp. 512-523
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1741-038X
DOI 10.1108/17410381011046616

1. Introduction
Organizations have been facing an increasingly competitive and global environment,
which calls for enhanced firm capability in identifying new opportunities and
sustaining superior performance.
Strategies used by companies to avoid competitive disadvantages include the
elimination of operational inefficiencies (which are large in the financial sector, on the
order of 20 percent or more of total banking industry costs) (de Koning et al., 2008b)
and improvement of revenue by increasing the number of customers and their
satisfaction, through innovation and improvement (de Koning et al., 2008a).

Lean Six Sigma (LSS) is a method that can help financial institutions to improve
operational efficiency and effectiveness (George, 2003; Snee and Hoerl, 2003), by
combining the strengths of lean thinking and Six Sigma. Since lean does not possess
the tools to reduce variation and provide statistical control and Six Sigma does not
attempt to develop a link between quality and speed (Su et al., 2006), the application of
the combined tool LSS offers useful solutions that can lead to greater efficiency and
better quality in the financial services industry (de Koning et al., 2008a).
The paper presents results of a case study from a company that has initiated the
implementation of LSS methodologies, in the pursuit of service excellence. The study
analyses the implementation process of LSS in GE Money Portugal, which is part of the
general electric (GE) group. GE Money Portugal is a financial services organization,
providing services such as mortgages, real estate and homeowner services.
Content analysis of semi-structured interviews to the agents involved in the
implementation of LSS is used to understand the characteristics of the implementation
process, illustrate the benefits that can be accomplished, the main difficulties felt, and
the key lessons learned. In addition, the differences relating to the implementation
processes in several companies of the GE Money group implemented in European
countries, as perceived by the quality director for Europe, are analyzed.
Section 2 presents the literature review on LSS, lean management and Six Sigma
implementation and its critical success factors (CSF). In Section 3, the methodological
framework is presented. Next, the case study, which illustrates a successful LSS
implementation in financial services industry, is presented. Section 5 offers some
conclusive remarks and summarizes the lessons learned during the implementation
process.
2. Literature review
2.1 LSS in services organizations
To remain competitive, efficient and agile, companies in services need, increasingly,
a constant investment in innovation in the processes. LSS is a methodology that, by
combining two of the most popular tools for improving performance of organizations
in the 1990s, Six Sigma and lean management, allows us to meet this need (de Koning
et al., 2006). Its advantages include the cost control and capital investment, and
improvements in the quality of service and customer satisfaction. It is considered an
accurate and efficient methodology to support the development of a system of
integrated quality management in any business in order to perform virtually free of
errors and waste of time (George, 2002).
Services are by nature very often bound by time in terms of the processes that are
run and lead to the delivery of an outcome that benefits a customer. In services
organizations, lean comes in as a methodology to reduce waste (in terms of time) and to
allow the process to become more efficient. It requires the examination of the process
from the clients perspective, in order to eliminate the waste and inefficiency. Six Sigma,
however, focus on refining the process, reducing the variability, to obtain the same
result at least 99.9997 percent of the time (Six Sigma).
de Koning et al. (2008a, b) proposed a framework for the integration of lean and
Six Sigma, consisting of a project organization structure based on Six Sigma (black
belts (BB), green belts (GB), and champions) and in extensive training programs and a
define, measure, analyse, improve and control (DMAIC) approach, with lean analysis

The
implementation
of LSS
513

JMTM
21,4

514

tools and improvement models embedded and concepts/classifications of both lean and
Six Sigma combined.
Recently, publications have appeared in the literature devoted to applying these
tools in the financial (George, 2003; Hayler and Nichols, 2006; Hensley and Dobie, 2005)
and health (George, 2003; Kim et al., 2006; de Koning et al., 2006) sectors. According to
Antony (2008), this trend will increase significantly over the coming years, particularly
in Europe, given the importance of these sectors to the economic development of any
country. This statement confirms the high interest of this topic.
Unfortunately, there is still a limitation in the spread of Six Sigma in services, since
its use in other services besides health care and financial services is relatively
unexplored. In fact, limited application can also be found in call centers, human
resources and in product support services (Chakrabarty and Tan, 2007). An important
feature regarding Six Sigma research is the lack of a theoretical framework in the
existing literature, which is probably related to the scarce contribution in the literature
from academicians (Chakrabarty and Tan, 2007).
2.2 CSF of lean and Six Sigma implementation projects
Several authors (Banuelas and Antony, 2002; Henderson and Evans, 2000) have
studied the CSF for Six Sigma implementation. The following factors are among the
more important (Banuelas and Antony, 2002; Goh, 2000; Henderson and Evans, 2000):
.
Top-down top management commitment, since it helps to influence and
restructure business organizations and the cultural change in attitudes of
individual employees toward quality in a short implementation period.
.
Extensive education and training in Six Sigma and project management and
certification processes that result in GB, BB, and master black belts (MBB).
.
Change in organizational culture and structure, to a project driven approach, and
change in communication plan and channels, to motivate individuals to
overcome resistance and to educate senior managers, employees, and customers
on the benefits of Six Sigma.
.
Measure the success in terms of financial benefits, since it facilitates the acceptance
by employees and help them to relate to Six Sigma project outcome (Goh, 2000).
Other less important factors are: strategic focus in the customer, emphasizing the
quality and product specifications, in human resources management (HRM) and in
buyer-supplier relationships, emphasizing the Six Sigma performance levels; clear
performance metrics, to maintain a goal-oriented approach (although it may be difficult
to identify the variables); expanding Six Sigma to HRM and organizational process
thinking and measuring (Chakrabarty and Tan, 2007; Waterbury and Bonilla, 2008).
Fryer et al. (2007) have broadened the list and presented 13 key CSF for continuous
improvement initiatives (Six Sigma, kaizen, total quality management):
(1) management commitment;
(2) customer management;
(3) supplier management;
(4) quality data, measurement, and reporting;
(5) teamwork;

(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)

communication;
process management;
ongoing evaluation, monitoring, and assessment;
training and learning;
employee empowerment;
goal management culture;
product design; and
organizational structure.

Other factors suggested included recognition and reward systems, effective use of
technology, cultural change, trust in organization and project selection, and
prioritization. Regarding lean management project implementation, Achanga et al.
(2006) stressed that management involvement and commitment are perhaps the most
essential factors in aiding any of the desired productivity improvement initiatives,
followed by financial capabilities, skills and expertise and an organizational culture of
sustainable and proactive improvement.
It is generally acknowledged that the factors discussed above can be equally
applicable to services as they are to manufacturing (Achanga et al., 2006; Chakrabarty
and Tan, 2007). Badri et al. (1995) found that although service sector organizations
consistently had a lower level (of practice) compared with manufacturing organizations,
both organizations agreed on the importance of training, product/service design,
supplier quality management, and employee relations but there was a strong negative
correlation with their levels of practice regarding quality departments and quality data
and reporting. One wonders whether the findings would be the same nowadays.
3. Methodology
3.1 Introductory remarks
A single case study was used in order to find answers to the following research
questions:
RQ1. How is the LSS process implemented in financial services organizations, in
terms of main steps, main tools, and design of new products (design for lean
Six Sigma (DFLSS))?
RQ2. In the implementations process of LSS, are the CSF presented in the literature
perceived as such by financial services organizations?
RQ3. In the implementation process of LSS, what are the main difficulties and
obstacles perceived and how to overcome them?
RQ4. At a international level, do cultural differences affect the implementation
process of LSS?
The case study methodology, suited for exploratory research (Eisenhardt, 1989), was
chosen because research in LSS and its implementation in service organizations is still
at a very early stage. This methodology offers advantages not found in more
quantitative research tools (Yin, 2003). Qualitative data allows the researcher to
explore more fully complex relationships difficult to capture in a quantitative study

The
implementation
of LSS
515

JMTM
21,4

516

using tools such as surveys. Moreover, while quantitative methods are suited to deal
with situations characterized by homogeneity of behaviors and routines, case studies
are important when dealing with situations in which creativity and innovation prevail.
The fact that few Portuguese service organizations have implemented LSS and the lack
of studies with a framework for the implementation of this tool were also factors
considered in the choice made.
Despite the advantages presented, this methodology has been criticized for its lack
of objectivity and accuracy (Patton and Appelbaum, 2003). It is particularly relevant
the central role that the researcher assumes, since the results of the study depend, more
than in quantitative studies, upon the researchers personal interpretation of the data.
Furthermore, the methodological flexibility is also associated with obtaining data from
many different sources, for which it is difficult to find standard procedures of
treatment. Qualitative research does rely on data collection methods that may be
subject to biases such as researcher bias or over-reliance on one source. To mitigate the
possible effects of some of these biases the researcher must develop a documented,
systematic approach to data collection to allow other researchers to assess potential
bias. Utilizing triangulation will also help increase research robustness (Patton and
Appelbaum, 2003). Triangulation is defined as occurring when data from multiple
sources from different data collection methods support the same conclusion, or at the
least, do not contradict it (Miles and Huberman, 1994).
3.2 Case presentation
GE Money, brand name for GE Consumer Finance and a unit of General Electric
Company with $163 billion in assets, is a leading provider of credit services to
consumers, retailers and auto dealers in 51 countries around the world. GE Money, in
Portugal since 1997, offers a range of financial products, including personal loans, auto
loans and leases, mortgages, debt consolidation, real estate, and homeowner services.
For ten years, GE Money Portugal has been adopting LSS for financial-services
operations, such as loan application processing. It has been able, for instance, to cut the
processing time for auto loans, reducing the lead-time to one-tenth of the original value,
and to simplify the application forms, in order to make them easier and quicker to fill.
Nowadays, all of the steps involved in getting a product to the customer are mapped
and analyzed through a LSS process.
3.3 Data collection and analysis
Data were collected primarily from semi-structured interviews to the agents involved
in the implementation of LSS and to executives who were familiar with the process:
.
the quality director of both GE Money Portugal and GE Money Europe;
.
the chief operations officer of GE Money Portugal;
.
the project leader, from the IT department;
.
the IT, the auditing and the insurance directors and the mortgage leader;
.
customer services, auto, mortgage operations, and new business operations
managers; and
.
six team members from pricing, loans, operations, and quality departments
(two BB, four GB).

All interviews were conducted in July of 2008. The interviewees were separated in four
groups, according to their hierarchical level, and the script for the interviews, built
from the research questions listed above, was adapted to each group. Therefore, each
group had a different script.
The interviews were recorded on audio for later transcription, after prior
authorization. This transcript resulted in over 70 pages of electronic notes. Because
the amount of data to be analyzed was considerable and could not be processed
expediently or accurately without the aid of a computer, a database was designed (Miles
and Huberman, 1994). A database provides another advantage in that it allows other
researchers the opportunity to inspect the data leading to the conclusions presented by
the researcher (Yin, 2003). The transcript of the interviews was sent to interviewees for
verification and clarification of doubts after a careful hearing of testimony. Where
possible, the results were enriched by the analysis of information on the mission, goals,
values, and other relevant aspects of the company, which was obtained from various
sources. The possibility of a have different sources (triangulation) is a method defended
by Yin (2003), which can confirm information and used to avoid misinterpretation.
Nevertheless, when doubts remained, some more focused interviews took place, by
phone.
The data were coded and a table was generated, by associating data to the different
categories. After patterns emerged, content analysis of the data was used to understand
the characteristics of the implementation process, illustrate the benefits that can be
accomplished, the main difficulties felt, and the key lessons learned. In addition, the
differences relating to the implementation processes in several companies of the GE
Money group implemented in European countries, as perceived by the quality director
for Europe, were analyzed.
4. Results and discussion
The results obtained were analyzed by looking for the emerging characteristics of the
implementation of the LSS tool and the nature of the impact of the different choices
made.
4.1 LSS and design for LSS in GE Money
The strategic focus in customer provided by LSS methodology is one of the main
reasons that lead GE Money to invest in it. It is the customer, internal or external, that
identifies the critical points in each business unit. Tools like the voice of customer
(VOC), voice of the employee (VOE), and the net promoter score facilitate this part of
the process. Following that identification, business process management system
(BPMS), an internal statistical control tool from the marketing department used. This
tool shows the direction to follow, since it provides information pertaining to
aspects such as when a proposal comes up to be formalized, the percentage of
customers returning, how many approvals are made, the number of proposals that are
formalized (or rejected for lack of documentation) and how many customers have been
awarded a lesser amount than requested.
The LSS teams are created by selecting mainly process owners, project managers,
and department managers with proper training in lean thinking and Six Sigma (several
team members are usually GB, BB, or MBB). They are required to master skills such as
knowing how to measure and collect data with the lean and Six Sigma tools, to properly

The
implementation
of LSS
517

JMTM
21,4

518

identify the needs of the customers and the processes that are critical to quality and to
map processes. Once the teams are created, they may have a training period followed
by a set of sessions on goal setting and critical processes identification, Then, its time
to the lean week to start.
The lean week is a five days brainstorming week dedicated to the critical to
quality process identified previously by the team. In the first two days a value
stream-mapping (VSM) meeting takes place with all members of the team, in order to
identify the added-value actions in terms of inquiry to order, order to remittance and
new product introduction, in a client-based approach. In the third and fourth days, the
process owners meet to measure and analyze the process map and to build an action
plan and in the fifth day, the action workout day, all members meet to perform a
3608 analysis and verification of the new proposed process and to contribute with
suggestions. After that, the final part of the DMAIC cycle take place: control.
The integration of Six Sigma and lean management tools has allowed GE to give
the proper response to the demands of their partners by providing a smaller and
with less variation in lead-time. With these tools, therefore, GE Money can be a
reference in terms of service excellence by being quicker, simpler, more flexible, and
competitive.
The methodology itself focuses on a number of parameters to be fulfilled and which
allow an efficient control, ensuring the transition from one stage to another, and the
high quality levels required in the final implementation. This methodology focuses on
the needs and expectations of customers, not only to respond to their needs but also to
anticipate them by creating products and services. This is called design for LSS
(DFLSS).
In GE Money, the DFLSS methodology follows a define, measure, analyze, design,
implement, and control (DMADIC) cycle. This methodology is used mainly in IT
projects when a new application is to be implemented.
The tools used in the implementation of DFLSS by GE are quality function
deployment (QFD), VOC, failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) and the software
package Cristal Ball, a simulation tool, among others. The QFD is used to compare the
proposals of suppliers by establishing a ranking for the decisions regarding the choice
of supplier. This ranking is obtained by assigning weights to a number of criteria
defined by the user. The FMEA is used to define and analyze each step of the process
so that difficulties may be foreseen. In addition, the impacts of failures, the causes of
these failures, their severity, the levels of occurrence, and how to control and detect
them are also analyzed.
The VOC, already presented above, is used to describe what customers need and
their perceptions of how well products/services meet their needs. Because LSS focuses
on customers, identifying their needs and their satisfaction levels is tantamount to
identify the critical processes of business.
4.2 The lessons learned and recommendations on future implementation of LSS
Several of the lessons learned by the interviewees are associated with what is known in
the literature as CSF. In particular, the factors identified by Banuelas and Antony
(2002), Goh (2000), and Henderson and Evans (2000) as being among the most
important, are also considered as such by the interviewees in this study.

First, the commitment of the top management is perceived as crucial because top
manager are the driving elements in the process of changing the organizational culture
and influencing the training of key elements of the organizational structure.
Next, the extensive education and training in Six Sigma and project management
and certification processes that result in GB, BB, and MBB are also perceived as
crucial. This has been a priority in GE Money, which has provided specialized training
courses including the MBB, BB, and GB for a great number of its key employees,
acknowledging that they could identify gaps, waste and can suggest ideas for
improvement.
Third, the need to change cultural aspects has been a constant priority in GE, both
under Jack Welch and Jeffrey Immelt leadership. Companies acquired by GE are
compelled to undergo fundamental changes in culture. These companies are now
required to have everything documented, manuals for each process and function, and
many more tools. In addition, all processes are mapped, all functions are written, and in
the absence of anyone, others can continue to carry on the functions and processes
without any major problems.
Finally, the need to measure the financial returns and assess the success (measuring
the before and after) is widely acknowledge, since it facilitates the acceptance by
employees and helps them to relate to Six Sigma project outcome.
Other important lessons also emerged which are not present in previous literature.
These are related to:
.
Project selection. Regarding the implementation process of LSS in GE Money, the
bet was to start with small projects and show the positive results associated with
the methodology, giving visibility to people who coordinated them and to LSS.
.
Cultural change in terms of status acquired by the quality management team and
knowledge in this area. In GE Money, the probability of advancing in the career is
now related to extensive training and certification in Six Sigma and lean tools
(GB, BB, MBB).
.
Team selection and human resource management. Team members are selected
by their technical, analytical, interrelationship, and knowledge transference
skills. The members are expected to be project facilitators, gathering the skills
that project managers are supposed to have. In GE there is an evaluation
process called employment management summary (EMS) which allows to
define precisely the position of the employees within the company and the
skills each has.
.
Leader selection. Leaders of the implementation processes in GE are selected by
their strategic placement in the company structure, by their training and
certification in BB or MBB, by their communication and know-how transference
skills, since they are supposed to influence people in every hierarchical level in
the company to pursue the LSS goals.
4.3 Difficulties in implementation of LSS methodology in GE
Because Six Sigma implies a thorough control of work and assessment of results, some
resistance from collaborators was verified. One way of dealing with this resistance in
GE was to stimulate greater involvement of the collaborators and communicate the
results of the projects, improvements in lead-time, in time spent performing the tasks,

The
implementation
of LSS
519

JMTM
21,4

520

and in the variation in the response to the proposals. This information is disclosed for
all the employees in a dashboard.
Other obstacles perceived are:
.
the balance between routine work and the work involved in LSS training and
projects;
.
the broad set of tools available in LSS and the difficulty to select the proper ones
to the business reality;
.
some employees do not possess the knowledge necessary to understand the
mathematical and statistical nature of some tools; and
.
the long time necessary for some projects to be fully developed and to produce
results can reduce the motivation felt by some employees.
Because LSS affects the way employees work and even the physical space in which
they work, it is important to know them and their characteristics, and help them
understand the importance of the change in their work conditions brought by the LSS
and the contribution of measurements and subsequent control to their personal results.
4.4 Implementation of LSS at the international level
Since five of the executives interviewed in GE Money Portugal had experience in the
implementation of the methodology also in several other countries (Spain, Italy, France,
Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, the UK, Caribbean, Denmark, and the USA), a set of
additional semi-structured interviews was conducted in order to gain some insight on
the differences perceived between Portugal and the other countries.
A cultural characterization of the countries referred above allowed us to understand
the way in which the methodology was implemented. We were able to detect some
differences. First, regarding the project management approach, in Nordic countries, the
UK, the USA, and Switzerland teams follow a more formal and structured project
planning and control routine. In these countries there are people specialized in project
management and teams only move on to a next phase when all the work in the
previous tasks is completed. In the Southern European countries and Caribbean, the
project management is not taken as seriously. All members of the team are working
directly towards the business, lacking time and disposition to plan in a proper way the
projects.
Regarding change in the working environment, people in Italy, Spain, and France
were perceived as being very open to job and workplace rotation. In terms of
organizational culture evolvement, Spanish people were perceived by the GE Money
quality leader for Europe as being very pragmatic, direct and more rigorous in the LSS
implementation process. On the other hand, Italians showed to be less enthused with
the change necessary to the implementation of LSS. In some situations, the
implementation processes are more difficult in Italy due to legal issues imposed by the
government.
In general, all teams showed little resistance to change during the implementation of
the LSS project. The cultural differences emerged in details such as the way each team
tackled power issues. In Nordic countries and Switzerland, teams are more likely to
become less resistant to the change imposed by LSS projects as the benefits (mostly
financial ones) begin to appear. However, in France, where labor unions are very

powerful, employees are very critical towards organizational change process are very
prone to discuss and negotiate even little details.
The cultural differences become less evident due to GE policies of keeping the LSS
implementation teams leadership not local. For instance, in Switzerland, the leader was
American, in Spain, he was French, in Portugal, he was Dutch and in Italy, he was
Irish. Therefore, cases in which the leader is national are extremely rare. The fact that
leaders are from Anglo-Saxon countries.
5. Conclusions
This paper examines the use of LSS by a financial services organization, GE Money
Portugal, namely the introduction of the lean component in the established Six Sigma
corporate culture of the GE Group. Several questions were raised:
.
the perceived changes after the introduction of lean (in terms of processes, tools,
advantages and difficulties) in an already Six Sigma services organization;
.
the differences between the CSF of the implementation process of lean production
and the CSF of the implementation process of LSS; and
.
the differences at the international level, raised by the cultural differences.
Among the perceived benefits are:
.
an increase of productivity due to the application of the lean and to the
improvement of the processes; and
.
improving revenue by increasing customer satisfaction and by servicing more
customers, due to a focus on projects such as decreasing operational costs by
improving processing efficiency.
Regarding the tools used in LSS processes, results suggest that, after the introduction
of lean, the tools became more qualitative than quantitative in order to be more easy to
use and less time-consuming. Tools such as the VSM, fishbone analysis, BPMS, service
level agreement, QFD, VOC, VOE, and FMEA tools are mixed with some tools that are
exclusive to the GE group (EMS process of evaluation, the DMADIC cycle in DFLSS,
an adaptation of the traditional define, measure, analyse, design and verify to the
reality of GE business).
Regarding the CSF, results suggest that the following are among the most
important ones:
.
the need of total commitment of top management;
.
selection of the LSS team members based on their technical and analytical skills
and specific personal and interpersonal characteristics (facilitators,
communicators, know-how transfer ability, global vision of the business);
.
major investment in specialized training in Six Sigma (GB, BB, MBB) and lean
thinking and in dissemination of knowledge; and
.
change in the entrepreneurial culture, facilitated by the involvement of top
management and the by demonstrating the benefits achieved in small projects.
Finally, at an international level, there are cultural differences pertaining mainly to
internal resistance, openness to change, preferences for a more formal project

The
implementation
of LSS
521

JMTM
21,4

522

management approach and the preference for lean or for Six Sigma tools in LSS.
When the management team is not local (in most cases involving persons from
countries such as the UK or the USA), cultural differences are not as significant. In an
increasingly globalized corporate environment, this seems to offer a way to the desired
homogeneity between multicultural project teams, without the loss of their creativity
and fresh approaches in problem solving.
There are several limitations to the study:
.
the chosen methodology of single case study does not allow generalizations;
.
there are content analysis issues associated to the level of subjectivity involved
in the coding process; and
.
the fact that few companies work in a LSS approach (or are implementing one).
However, the implications of this paper are that managers in financial services
organizations need to consider LSS as a valuable instrument to improve both
operational efficiency and effectiveness and may obtain here pertinent information
regarding the benefits accomplished, the main difficulties felt, and the key lessons
learned, when implementing the tool in a similar company.
Nowadays, with all the pressures to cut costs, implementing tools such as LSS may
be easily dismissed given the investment and effort required. However, the benefits
derived from its implementation, such as lowering the operational costs, improving
processes and product quality, increased efficiency, which leads to the increase of
productivity, the agility and versatility obtained by the organization, vastly outweigh
the costs. Thus, LSS is more than likely a safe bet.
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. (2008), What is the role of academic institutions for the future development of Six
Sigma?, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 57 No. 1,
pp. 107-10.
Badri, M.A., Davis, D. and Davis, D. (1995), A study of measuring the critical factors of quality
management, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 12 No. 2,
pp. 36-53.
Banuelas, 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.
Chakrabarty, A. and Tan, K. (2007), The current state of six sigma application in services,
Managing Service Quality, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 194-208.
de Koning, H., Does, R. and Bisgaard, S. (2008a), Lean Six Sigma in financial services,
International Journal of Six Sigma and Competitive Advantage, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
de Koning, H., Does, R. and Bisgaard, S. (2008b), Generic Lean Six Sigma project definitions
in financial services, Quality Management Journal, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 32-45.
de Koning, H., Verver, J., van den Heuvel, J., Bisgaard, S. and Does, R. (2006), Lean Six Sigma
in healthcare, Journal for Healthcare Quality, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 4-11.
Eisenhardt, K. (1989), Building theories from case study research, Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-50.

Fryer, K.J., Antony, J. and Douglas, A. (2007), Critical success factors of continuous
improvement in the public sector: a literature review and some key findings, The TQM
Magazine, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 497-517.
George, M. (2002), Lean Six Sigma: Combining Six Sigma Quality with Lean Production Speed,
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
George, M. (2003), Lean Six Sigma for Service, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Goh, M. (2000), Quality circles: journey of an Asian public enterprise, International Journal of
Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 7, pp. 784-99.
Hayler, R. and Nichols, M. (2006), Six Sigma for Financial Services: How Leading Companies
Are Driving Results Using Lean, Six Sigma, and Process Management, McGraw-Hill,
New York, NY.
Henderson, K. and Evans, J. (2000), Successful implementation of Six Sigma: benchmarking
General Electric Company, Benchmarking and International Journal, Vol. 7 No. 4,
pp. 260-81.
Hensley, R. and Dobie, K. (2005), Assessing readiness for Six Sigma in a service setting,
Managing Service Quality, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 82-101.
Kim, C., Spahlinger, D., Kin, J. and Billi, J. (2006), Lean health care: what can hospitals learn from
a world-class automaker?, Journal of Hospital Medicine, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 191-9.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook,
2nd ed., Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Patton, E. and Appelbaum, S. (2003), The case for case studies in management research,
Management Research News, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 60-71.
Snee, R. and Hoerl, R. (2003), Leading Six Sigma: A Step-by-Step Guide Based on Experience with
GE and Other Six Sigma Companies, Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Su, C., Chiang, T. and Chang, C. (2006), Improving service quality by capitalising on an
integrated Lean Six Sigma methodology, International Journal of Six Sigma and
Competitive Advantage, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Waterbury, T. and Bonilla, C. (2008), A lean six sigma execution strategy for service sectors,
International Journal of Six Sigma and Competitive Advantage, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 395-408.
Yin, R.K. (2003), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 3rd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
About the authors
Catarina Delgado is an Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Economics of Porto (FEP),
University of Porto. She is a researcher of EDGE Estudos de Gestao (Research Centre in
Management Studies), which is a research unit institutionally hosted by the FEP. Her academic
work has been published in journals such as the International Journal of Systems Science.
Catarina Delgado is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: cdelgado@fep.up.pt
Marlene Ferreira is a researcher of EDGE Estudos de Gestao.
Manuel Castelo Branco is an Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Economics of Porto (FEP),
University of Porto. He is a researcher of EDGE Estudos de Gestao. His academic work
has been published in journals such as Corporate Communications: An International Journal,
Journal of Human Resource Costing and Accounting, The British Accounting Review, and Journal
of Business Ethics.

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

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

The
implementation
of LSS
523