THE SIX SIGMA PROJECT MANAGEMENT

STRATEGY
Rafat A. Samman1 and Ian Graham2
1
Management school and Economic, The University of Edinburgh, 16 Buccleuch Place, G1, Edinburgh,
EH8 9LN, UK
2
Management school and Economic, The University of Edinburgh, 50 George Square, Edinburgh, EH8
9JY, UK

Stockholders and customers both challenge executives to produce products and

services at lower cost and higher quality. In response to this need executives have
implemented quality improvement programmes. One widely applied programme is
Six Sigma, which promises massive cost-reduction, and improved quality of products
and services. Six Sigma methodology is a business strategy for operations
improvement. As a project-driven approach, it is closely linked to project
management. Six Sigma has received growing attention over the last two decades. Six
Sigma has its roots in high-volume manufacturing industries, but it is now being
implemented in health care, financial institutions, services industries and engineering
organizations. In order to successfully implement Six Sigma, organizations need to
understand the methodology. The main aims of the study is to provide a detailed
definition of Six Sigma, its various methodologies, and present an empirical
examination of Six Sigma in the construction industry using case study approach. The
results and analysis of projects and a series of interviews on lost working days due to
workplace injuries concluded that Six Sigma implementations can be implemented in
the construction industry. To implement Six Sigma strategy, it should be based on
verifiable facts; senior executives need to support the new initiatives; qualified
employees must be trained to become Six Sigma experts and project leaders; and
customer satisfaction needs to be the focus of process improvement.

Keywords: business improvement, project management, quality tools, six sigma.

INTRODUCTION
The construction industry is often criticized for its poor performance, low safety, poor
work quality, wasteful, inefficient, and low productivity. In 1999 over one billion
sterling pounds were spent on projects due to errors and rework (Nicholson 1999).
According to Lahndt project mismanagement, insufficient planning, and poor
craftsmanship contribute to poor quality performance (Lahndt 1999).
Quality management is not a widely applied strategy in the construction industry, but
many studies have urged mangers in the sector to understand the relationship between
quality management and performance. This generates a need in the construction
industry for quality management strategies and quality improvement programmes to
improve work quality and to enhance performance.
The construction industry plays an important role in the economy of many countries.
This study proposes the use of Six Sigma in the construction industry as a continuous
improvement project management strategy. This paper draws on the results of a recent
1
r.a.samman@sms.ed.ac.uk
Samman, R A and Graham, I (2007) The six sigma project management strategy. In: Boyd, D (Ed)
Procs 23rd Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2007, Belfast, UK, Association of Researchers
in Construction Management, 587-596
Samman and Graham

empirical study in which forty semi-structured interviews were conducted to

investigate Six Sigma implementation across manufacturing and service industries.
Based on the research results and large savings of the organizations studied, this paper
proposes the use of Six Sigma in the construction industry. To implement Six Sigma
managers need to understand the underlying methodology and how it differs from
other quality initiatives.
The main motivations for organizations in implementing Six Sigma are to improve
performance, provide reliable products and services, meet and exceed customers’
expectations, improve processes, and reduce defects. Six Sigma also may provide
other benefits, including reduced operational cost, improved work quality, improved
competitive position and image, and reduced cycle times.
Why do some organization’s implementations of Six Sigma not deliver the expected
benefits? One reason is the lack of understanding about the methodology. According
to Tatham, Six Sigma tools have been widely misunderstood (Tatham and Mackertich
2003). Companies believe the program can provide an organization-wide cure for all
problems, ranging from employee behaviour, management, business processes, to
workflow difficulties, as if they can all be treated in the same manner as assembly-line
issues. They choose Six Sigma because it helps adjust and perfect processes once they
are established. However, according to Tatham, Six Sigma will not redesign processes
or identify which processes are unnecessary at the start (Tatham and Mackertich
2003).

SIX SIGMA LITERATURE REVIEW

Six Sigma has been transformed over the last twenty years. It is now a flexible and
adaptive business strategy, applicable to many aspects of business and organizations.
It has been applied over this time with great success, and subsequently ascribed four
separate and varying definitions with respect to its literal, conceptual, and practical
uses. Six Sigma has received considerable attention over the last two decades: “In
recent years Six Sigma has grown in popularity especially in the US and companies
like General Electric and Motorola have obtained significant improvements in their
performance” (Pande, Neumann and Cavanagh 2000). The first widespread use of Six
Sigma methodology was in the US. Subsequently, the methodology spread to Europe,
Far East, and in the Middle East.
The term ‘Six Sigma’ has been used in the literature in many different ways. While
some literature sees Six Sigma as a Business Improvement Methodology (Harry and
Schroeder 2000), (Motorola University 2005) elsewhere it is treated as being a
statistical measurement tool (Fontenot, Behara and Gresham 1994, Behara 1995) or a
Business Strategy (Harry 1998). Six Sigma, is all these things, but overall it can be
seen as being a diverse and comprehensive business management strategy application.
It provides a structural framework within which it allows management leaders to
manage and prioritize the usage of project resources for clarifying and establishing
project metrics. This intrinsically reflects the measurements of the levels of success
within a given business strategy, ultimately contributing to management efforts to
impose rapid, efficient, and sustainable improvements toward any modicum of
business development results.
Six Sigma is about technical, process, and people excellence: “Six Sigma is as much
about people excellence as it is about technical excellence. Creativity, collaboration,
communication, dedication—these are infinitely more powerful than a corps of super-

588
 Six sigma

statisticians” (Pande, Neumann and Cavanagh 2000). Six Sigma’s focus on people is
not limited to leadership, it goes further to include employees, customers, suppliers,
and owners: “Stakeholder involvement implies that the vision of Six Sigma, variation
reduction, methodologies and tools must be communicated to the customers,
employees, suppliers and owners” (Magnusson, Kroslid and Bergman 2003).

Six sigma gains

Gains from implementing Six Sigma are not just in the manufacturing industries but
as well in the services, engineering, health care, software, airline, technological, and
financial services industries: “The potential gains from Six Sigma are equally
significant (if not greater) in service organizations and non-manufacturing activities as
they are in “technical” environments” (Pande, Neumann and Cavanagh 2000). The
attention Six Sigma has received is due to the claims of massive savings and
successful outcomes: “Six Sigma initiatives have tallied billions of dollars in savings,
dramatic increases in speed, strong new customer relationships—in short, remarkable
results and rave reviews” (Pande, Neumann and Cavanagh 2000). The experiences of
organizations which have implemented Six Sigma, including Motorola, GE, Allied
Signal, reveal product and service quality improvement, cost reduction, and
significant savings. This is due to Six Sigma projects focus on bottom line results:
“Six Sigma places a clear focus on getting bottom line results. No Six Sigma project is
approved unless the bottom-line impact has been identified” (Snee 1999). The success
of Six Sigma projects are also due to its results orientation, data driven and ability to
align the goals with objectives across the organizations: “The types of “business
success” you may achieve are broad because the proven benefits of the Six Sigma
“system” are diverse, including Cost reduction, Productivity improvement, Market
share growth, Customer retention, Cycle-time reduction, Defect reduction, Culture
change, Product/service development, And many more” (Pande, Neumann and
Cavanagh 2000). Six Sigma benefits are not limited to the organization implementing
the program as Jack Welch claims: “Six Sigma is the only program I’ve ever seen
where customers win, employees are engaged in and satisfied by, shareholders are
rewarded – everybody who touches it wins.” Jack Welch, past-Chairman of GE.
However not all organizations who have implemented Six Sigma have successfully
achieved their goals. The reasons for organizations’ lack of success with Six Sigma
differ from misconceptions of its concepts, lack of leadership commitment and
involvement, work environment and organization culture, lack of proper employee
training, program not focusing on the customers, management style, and the way it is
implemented.

Six sigma methodologies

Three interrelated sub-programs “Methodologies” of Six Sigma, DMAIC, DFSS, and
DMADV are generally utilized in diverse improvement projects. The Six Sigma
DMAIC acronym refers to the terms: define, measure, analyze, improve, and control.
DFSS is the acronym for Design for Six Sigma. Differing from DMAIC, the steps for
implementing DFSS are not universally acknowledged or defined (Simon 2006).
Since nearly every organization or training facility defines DFSS in a different way,
there is no universal standard regarding DFSS. DMADV is a popular DFSS
methodology that refers to the terms: define, measure, analyze, design, and verify. It is
an improvement methodology utilized to create new processes.

589
Samman and Graham

DMAIC methodology
Organizations commonly use Six Sigma DMAIC program: “The use of the five-phase
improvement cycle DMAIC, within Six Sigma companies, has become increasingly
common” (Pande, Neumann and Cavanagh 2000). DAMIC acronym refers to the
terms: define, measure, analyze, improve, and control. It is an improvement
methodology for current processes that are not meeting required specifications, but
only need incremental improvement. A key principle of Six Sigma, DMAIC can be
used to manage the flow of information into, through, and out of organizations (Brett
and Queen 2005). DMAIC consists of the following 5 steps:
• Define customer need, requirements, and what needs to be improved.
• Measure current processes.
• Analyze the data, process, root cause, and develop a plan to improve existing
processes.
• Improve existing processes and methods of measuring success.
• Control gains and repeat the process.
Design for six sigma
DFSS is the acronym for Design for Six Sigma. Differing from DMAIC, the steps for
implementing DFSS are not universally acknowledged or defined (Simon 2002).
Since nearly every organization or training facility defines DFSS in a different way,
there is no universal standard regarding DFSS. Often, a business tailors DFSS to the
needs of its organization, industry, and culture. Alternatively, some institutions utilize
the version of DFSS provided for them by a consulting firm that is helping them adopt
the system. As a result, DFSS refers to a method more than to a standardized
methodology.
Usually, DFSS is employed to design or re-design a product or service. The projected
sigma level for a DFSS product or service is no less than 4.5, about one defect per
thousand chances, but may be 6 Sigma or more, depending on the manufactured goods
or services. In order to produce such a low level of deficiencies, it is necessary to fully
comprehend consumer desires and requirements (CTQs) prior to the completion and
implementation of a design (Simon 2002).
DMADV methodology
DMADV is a popular DFSS methodology that refers to the terms: define, measure,
analyse, design, and verify. It is an improvement methodology utilized to create new
processes or products. In addition, it may be used if an existing process needs
immediate upgrading. DMADV consists of the following 5 steps (Pyzdek 2003):
• Define the goals of the new process. Identify exactly what is being designed
or changed. Why is the change being made? Pyzdek (2003) suggests using
the Quality Function Deployment (QFD) or Analytic Hierarchical Process
tools to insure that the goals are compatible with consumer demand and the
company’s overall strategy.
• Measure. Identify the measurement standards that are important to
stakeholders. Convert customer needs into project objectives.
• Analyse the alternatives available for meeting project aims. Identify the
behaviour of comparable best-in-class designs.

590
 Six sigma

• Design the new product, service, or process. Utilize prognostic modelling,

simulation, prototypes, pilot trials, and other techniques in order to confirm
the design’s ability to meet the established aims of the project.
• Verify the efficiency of the new product or process in a real world situation.

WHY ORGANIZATIONS CHOOSE SIX SIGMA?

Organizations choose to implement Six Sigma for numerous reasons. Reasons for
implementing Six Sigma can vary from one organization to another, however, the list
below present the most common reasons for organizations to implement Six Sigma to
resolve issues facing the organization:
• Cost reduction
• Cycle time reduction
• Error and waste reduction
• Increase competitive advantage
• Improve customer satisfaction
• Increase shareholder value
• Change company culture
• Improve quality. (Samman and Graham 2007)
Other reasons are for image improvement or simply because other organizations have
implemented the methodology with success and huge savings. According to a recently
conducted research, the largest 500 public listed American companies reported total
savings of 427 billion US dollar from implementing Six Sigma, and that 82 percent of
the largest 100 public listed American companies are implementing Six Sigma
methodology at their organizations (Marx 2007).
While Six Sigma applications often involve changes in organizational culture, many
organizations select Six Sigma when their strategy involves major cultural change
(Lamarsh 2005). Six Sigma is an extremely effective method of accomplishing a
change strategy (Lamarsh 2005). The dedication of many institutions to the
establishment of the Six Sigma method as the nucleus of their organization’s
transformation is indicative of their belief that change is not only inevitable but
necessary for a successful enterprise. Continuous change is the way commercial
enterprises remain competitive and expand. Six Sigma is an effective method of
implementing change while sustaining an emphasis on quality. It is believed that by
incorporating the Six Sigma approach into the culture of the organization, an
enterprise can increase its potential for expansion(Lamarsh 2005). Six Sigma provides
discipline and structure to any change process that is shared throughout the enterprise.

CASE STUDY
This case study investigates the implementation of Six Sigma in the construction
industry, one of the most industries that play an important role in the economy of
many countries. This section present the result of a case study conducted on a
construction company to reduce personal lost days due to work injuries and to achieve
a successful safety and health program by proposing the usage of Six Sigma methods.
Data consists of series of interviews and company documents of projects done

591
Samman and Graham

between the years 2004 and 2006. The number of personal lost days due to injuries
was found to be averaged to more than 10 days per year for each employee. The
organization management considered the finding to be very high and a proposed
solution was of high priority as it was known that this will lead to a significant impact
on bottom-line.

Overfiew
The Health and Safety Executive HSE in the United Kingdom UK revealed that there
are 4 million lost working days in the UK construction industry due to illness or/and
injuries self reported work related in 2003-4 and average lost working days per worker
at 1.9 (Hse 2007). In 2004-5 HSE revealed that there are 3.2 million lost working days
in the UK construction industry due to illness or/and injuries self reported work
related and average working days lost per worker at 1.5 (Hse 2007). Among all
industries in the UK presented in the report, the construction industry remains to be
one of the most hazardous areas of work, and the average lost days remain to be above
the country average.
The construction organization understudy suffer from huge number of employee lost
days due to work related injuries, reasons for the high injury rate were unknown to the
organization and a demand for solution to the problem was of high priority.

Discussion
The project deals with the reduction of lost working days due to work related injuries
in the construction industry using the five steps Six Sigma DMAIC methodology.
Data of the project were collected from organization safety records, projects in the last
three years, and a series of semi-structure interviews with the organization employee
and top management. Total of five hundred and thirty five lost days in the last three
years were collected and entered into MINITAB statistical program, and seven
interviews.
Define phase
The project started by defining the statement problem, mission statement, customer
requirements, project scope, goals/objectives, issues/constraints, project team
roles/responsibilities, and key performance metric affected. This was done using a
developed project charter, which was referred to/and updated throughout the project to
insure and control improvement for future projects. Therefore, the project aim was to
reach 10 x reductions of the lost days.
Measure phase
This stage served as a guideline for the organization to observe current performance
position and condition to form a baseline assessment of performance. In addition, it
provides the management and process owner with information about causes of the
problem. Three main tools were used, the cause and effect analysis (see Figure 1)
which is used to determine major causes of problem, process capability analysis which
is used to determine areas, and processes needing improvement, and time series
analysis (see Figure 2) of the days lost per month which provide an overview of
current process situation.
The measurement phase divulged the causes of injuries in the workplace. Causes were
related to the use of non motorized equipment, safety policy violation, employee work
location, training, workers experience and education, and supervisor been absent
during the incident.

592
 Six sigma

Figure 1: Cause and Effect Analysis

Figure 2: Time Series of Lost Days per Month

Analysis phase
The goal of the analysis phase is to create an alternative solution to the problem and
analysing tradeoffs. Two statistical tools were used in this stage: Pareto chart (see
Figure 3) which present ranking of the main causes of the problem, it also serve as a
guideline to focus on the main activities causing the defects. And probability plot,
which gives a visual overview to determine if the distribution of activities is
approximately normal. Based on the data collected and measurements in the last two
phases the results reviled that majority of injuries occur in the workplace are: 30%
from falling from high areas while using non motorized equipment such as ladders
and scaffolding, 22.6% from employee violation of safety roles, 20.2% were occurring
in facility such as work location, 11.8% occurred in using motorized equipment such
as man lifts and vehicles, 6.7% occurred while the supervisor was not present to make
sure safety rulings is being followed, 4.7% occurred due to low training, and 3.2%
occurred for other reasons such as employee level of awareness and education.
The alternative solution for the problem is to put in place routine inspection program
to avoid safety violation, provide maintenance program for non motorized and
motorized equipment, launch an awareness program, and offer employee safety
training.

593
Samman and Graham

Figure 3: Pareto Chart of Causes of Lost Days

Figure 4: Probability Plot for Days Lost Per Month

Improve phase
In the improve phase, the focus is to develop the details of the proposed solution, also
to evaluate the new solution in real situation. Regression analysis and analysis of
variance were performed in this stage to evaluate major causes needing improvement.
The result reviled that the first two causes are the ones needing immediate
improvement and the third cause need to be improved next. In addition, it reviled that
non motorized equipment is responsible for 41.88% of the 70.59% variation, and
safety violation is responsible for 30.71% of the 70.59% variation.
Based on these results, the estimated savings of the project were calculated as: X=
70.59% of causes of lost days= number of lost days*variation; Savings= wage per
hour*number of working hours per day*number of improved lost days. 70.59% of the
current number of lost days= 377.7 lost days. Therefore, the savings= wage rate per
hour*number of working hours*377.7.
Control phase
In this stage, Control Chart, Flow Chart, and Quality Control Process Chart were used.
These charts acted as a guideline to prevent role back of process in the future.
Moreover, documentation of variation causes and how the improvements were carried
was conducted in this stage. Establishing required training, and incentive programs are
the main recommendation to insure process improvement control.

594
 Six sigma

CONCLUSIONS
Six Sigma is gaining gradual attention from service and manufacturing organizations
which are recognizing the unique features of Six Sigma for improving their
competitive positions and images. The source of value in Six Sigma comes from
improving the organization performance, effectiveness, image, and its ability to be
integrated with other quality tools. Based on the results of the empirical study, the
research proposes the use of Six Sigma in construction industry.
Organizations that have adopted Six Sigma indicate they have chosen it for several
reasons. Organizations indicated that they generally adopted the Six Sigma technology
in order to lower costs, increase time to market, and improve both process and product
and service quality. In addition, they intended to institutionalize Six Sigma as a
company culture or state of mind.
Six Sigma differs from other quality approaches used in organizations because it
emphasizes the definition of measures of customer satisfaction and employs teams to
continually lessen the DPMO for each measure. The Six Sigma figure of 3.4 DPMO is
so minute that it is viewed as perfection. The fact that it is not actually zero permits
individuals to believe in the Six Sigma approach.
Organizations implementing Six Sigma reveal product and service quality
improvement, cost reduction, and significant savings due to Six Sigma projects focus
on bottom line results. The success of Six Sigma projects are also due to its results
orientation, data driven and ability to align the goals with objectives across the
organizations.

REFERENCES
Behara, R S, Fontenot, Gwen F. and Gresham, Alicia (1995) Customer satisfaction
measurement and analysis using six sigma. International Journal of Quality and
Reliability Management, 12(3), 9-18.
Brett, C and Queen, P (2005) Streamlining enterprise records management with lean six
sigma. Information Management Journal-Prairie Village-, 39(6), 58.
Fontenot, G, Behara, R and Gresham, A (1994) Six sigma in customer satisfaction. Quality
progress, 27, 73-6.
Harry, M J (1998) Six sigma: A breakthrough strategy for profitability. Quality progress,
31(5), 60-4.
Harry, M J and Schroeder, R (2000) Six sigma: The breakthrough management strategy
revolutionizing the world's top corporations. 1st ed. New York; London: Currency.
HSE (cited 2007) Working days lost by industry. [Available online from
www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/tables/0405/wdlind.htm.].
Lahndt, L (1999) TQM tools for the construction industry. Engineering Management Journal,
11(2), 23-7.
LaMarsh, J (2005) Approaching transformation: How does six sigma drive change and what's
the best way to manage it? Industrial engineer(Norcross, Ga.), 37(2), 36-40.
Magnusson, K, Kroslid, D and Bergman, B (2003) Six sigma: The pragmatic approach.
Studentlitteratur.
Marx, M (2007) Six sigma saves a fortune. iSixSigma, 3(1), January/February.

595
Samman and Graham

Motorola University (cited 2005) Faqs: What is six sigma? [Available online from
www.motorola.com/content.jsp?globalObjectId=3088.].
Nicholson, R (1999) Egan: rethinking construction. Construction Productivity Network
Seminar, Royal Institution of British Architects, Birmingham, November.
Pande, P S, Neumann, R P and Cavanagh, R R (2000) The six sigma way: How ge, motorola,
and other top companies are honing their performance. McGraw-Hill.
Pyzdek, T (cited 2006) Dmaic and dmadv. [Available online from
www.pyzdek.com/DMAICDMADV.htm.].
Samman, R A and Graham, I (2007) Six sigma management strategies: The case of saudi
arabia. In: First Conference on Project Management: The Future Trends in The
Project Management, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: The Project Management Chapter of
Saudi Council of Engineers.
Simon, K (cited 2006) What is dfss? And how does design for six sigma compare to dmaic?
[Available online from www.isixsigma.com/library/content/c020722a.asp.].
Snee, R D (1999) Why should statisticians pay attention to six sigma? Quality progress, 32(9),
100-3.
Tatham, M and Mackertich, N (2003) Is six sigma falling short of expectations. Optimize,
Manhasset, NY, 19-21.

596