angela marÍa benavides gordillo …iamot2016.org/proceedings/papers/iamot_2016_paper_67.pdf · was...

ANGELA MARÍA BENAVIDES GORDILLO

UNIVERSIDADE DE SÃO PAULO / DEPARTAMENTO DE ECONOMIA, ADMINISTRAÇÃO E

CONTABILIDADE – FEA USP / AV. PROF. LUCIANO GUALBERTO, 908 - BUTANTÃ, SÃO PAULO -

SP, 05508-010, BRAZIL, [email protected]

ANTONIO CESAR AMARU MAXIMIANO

UNIVERSIDADE DE SÃO PAULO / DEPARTAMENTO DE ECONOMIA, ADMINISTRAÇÃO E

CONTABILIDADE – FEA USP / AV. PROF. LUCIANO GUALBERTO, 908 - BUTANTÃ, SÃO PAULO -


DARIO IKUO MIYAKE

UNIVERSIDADE DE SÃO PAULO / DEPARTAMENTO DE ENGENHARIA DE PRODUÇÃO / AV.

PROF. ALMEIDA PRADO, TRAVESSA 2, NO. 128.CIDADE UNIVERSITÁRIA – SÃO PAULO –


MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES IN EFFICIENCY PROJECTS

This study focuses on the use of the Lean, Six Sigma and Re-engineering models for process efficiency

improvement. The scientific management or Taylorism movement originated these models. (Zoe & Barnes,

2007). In the 1950s, the Japanese began to develop the Toyota Production System (TPS), which led to the

Japanese management model based on the principle of waste elimination in the factory environment

(Maximiano, 2011). In the 1980s the Six Sigma model was created (Eckes, 2001). Finally, in the late 1980s and

early 1990s, the re-engineering business process, which is also known as the redesign process, was created (Zoe

& Barnes, 2007).

There are no studies that compare the Lean Production, Six Sigma and Reengineering models for

process improvement, neither studies about which of these models are most used by project leaders, especially

in developing countries. One must take into account that these models were created in developed countries and

their application in developing countries may be different. Due to the abovementioned, we understand the need

to answer the following question: among the Lean, Reengineering and Six Sigma models, which models have

project leaders applied most efficiently? The study also intends to identify, which models project leaders have

applied most effectively in Brazil and Colombia and identify critical factors that contributed to implementing

these models successfully.

This study involved a literature review and questionnaire-based survey.

Our main conclusion was that among the Lean, Six Sigma and Re-engineering models, in both

countries, the Re-engineering model was implemented most efficiently, followed by Lean projects, and finally,

the Six Sigma projects. When we analyzed the main critical factors that contributed to the successful

implementation of these models, we discovered that communication was of paramount importance for all

models. Finally we compared the application of these models in two countries (Colombia and Brazil), although

they are emerging countries, their economic development is different and the Brazilian economy is more

developed than the Colombian economy. From one country to another, we found similarities and differences

regarding the application of the models. The similar factor is that the reengineering project is the model that is

most applied by project leaders in these countries; but the Six Sigma and Lean projects were different.

Finally, this article generates two academic contributions: one is that it compares the implementation of

all three models by project leaders, especially between two countries that have different economic development

realities; and the second contribution is that the study analyzes what are the critical success factors for these

models.

Key Words: Lean, Reengineering, Six Sigma and Critical Success Factors

1. Introduction

For a long time, administrative theorists have been concerned with the development of models to

improve process performance in companies in order to make them more efficient and capable of producing

International Association for Management of Technology IAMOT 2016 Conference Proceedings

707

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

quality products. The Scientific Administration or Taylorism model was the first to study how to improve

process efficiency (Zoe & Barnes, 2007).

Then, in the 1950s, the Japanese developed the Toyota Production System (STP). The Toyota

Production System is based on the radical elimination of waste. This principle considers the application of work

rationalization techniques created by the scientific administration movement. The Japanese added other

ingredients to their management model, which resulted in a set of solutions which are known as the "Japanese

industrial arts". This set of techniques is also known as the lean production system (Maximiano, 2011).

After that, the Six Sigma model was introduced in 1980. This concept was created by Motorola, when

an engineer studied process variations as a way to improve performance. These variations were studied through

statistical measures (standard deviation and mean) (Eckes, 2001).

Finally, in the end of the 1980s and beginning of the 1990s, reengineering processes began appearing in

enterprises. This model is also known as process redesigning. Reengineering has the following principle: design

the organizations in regards to processes and analyze the organization horizontally, instead of functionally (Zoe

& Barnes, 2007).

Lean Production, Six Sigma and Reengineering are the most important models in the administrative

theory because they are pioneers, focusing studies to improve the performance of organizational processes. The

development of processes in companies is very important to achieve economic growth quickly and determine

how the products can be more competitive (Prokopenko, 1992). Nevertheless, the enterprises have been

developing these models with a project structure to ensure success, as it is very important and strategic for

competitive development in companies, since project management makes it possible to connect project results

with business objectives (Chapter São Paulo-Brazil, 2016).

However, there are a few studies that analyze these models as projects; this makes it often difficult to

identify the critical success factors that project leaders need to apply in order to develop these models. In

addition, there are not studies that compare the Lean Production, Six Sigma and Reengineering models, neither

studies that compare these models to identify which model is most used by project leaders, especially in

developing countries. It is important to recall that these models were created in developed countries and thus,

their application in developing countries may be different, as shown in this study, which focuses on

professionals in Brazil and Colombia.

The reason why Brazil and Colombia have been selected for this research is that they are two

developing countries; however, their economic growth has been different due to their history, which influenced

when their markets were open to foreign trade as well as foreign investments. For example, in the late twentieth

century, Brazil was one of the largest recipients of foreign direct investment. Brazil received 40% of the

investments corresponding to developing countries (De la Dehesa, 2002) and in 2006 the economy in Brazil

demonstrated favorable performance, which allowed Brazil to gain greater participation in international markets

(CEPAL, 2006-2007).

However, due to internal conflicts, Colombia only improved their economy, in recent decades, as

evidenced in 2006, when their exports and imports had high growth rates, and the inflows of foreign direct

investments-FDI and imports maintained its growth, due to the dynamism of investments (CEPAL, 2006-2007).

In addition, Brazil has been characterized as a country with great cultural diversity due to the important

migration flows, which created colonies with Italians, Japanese, Germans, and others. This has also made it

possible for Brazil to adopt different organizational models quicker, unlike Colombia, which has not been

influenced as much by cultural diversity.

Considering the abovementioned factors, we understand the need to answer the following question

through this study: among the Lean, Reengineering and Six Sigma models, which models have project leaders

applied most efficiently? In order to answer this question, three specific objectives were defined. (i) Among

these models (Lean, Six Sigma and reengineering) which is most used by project leaders; (ii) which critical

success factors have contributed to the implementation of these models (Lean, Six Sigma and reengineering);

(iii) comparing the implementation patterns for the lean, six-sigma and reengineering models as well as the

critical success factors for projects leaders in Brazil and Colombia.

Two tools were used for this study: a bibliographic review and a survey which was applied with, from

analysts to top managers, with experience developing models to improve process efficiency and project

management. The professionals that participated in the survey are from Brazil and Colombia.

This article is divided into five sections: (i) the first section provides an introduction about the research

objective; (ii) the second section presents a brief literature review about the model (Lean, Six-sigma and


708

Reengineering) concepts and reviews the critical success factors; (iii) the third section describes the research

problem and methodology; (iv) the fourth section analyzes the results and main findings; and (v) the fifth

section presents the discussion, final considerations, study limitations and recommendations for future studies.

2. Literature Review

In this section we review the three models that revolutionized management thinking and the critical

success factors that mainly consider project management with these models.

(i) Lean

The Toyota Production System became an important issue in many companies (Ohno, 1997). Most of

the applications were for productions with high volumes and relatively standardized products (Lander & Liker,

2007). The Toyota production system was designed and implemented after the Second World War, but it only

caught the attention of the Japanese industry with the first oil crisis in the second half of 1973 (Ohno, 1997).

Some authors mentioned that service companies and the industrial sector also adopted the lean

production model in the last decade. Empirical evidence shows that the transition to lean production is a

complex task that generates some obstacles (Jerez, Martinez & Moyano, 2014). Despite this, lean production

can be applied in different service companies and industries and one way to implement the Lean model is

through benchmarking (Lander & Liker, 2007).

Lean production refers to an integrated social-technical system, with the main objective of eliminating

waste. The Lean model represents the tools that produce finished products according to customer demand, with

little or no waste (Kull et al., 2014). However, to apply the Toyota System a set of important principles should

be considered first, which include waste elimination and quality manufacturing (Maximiano, 2006), and thus

choose the right tools, which will be adapted or modified according to the needs of the organization (Lander &

Liker, 2007).

In recent decades, the companies developed Lean projects to improve their processes and generate

added value for customers, for example in the health sector, where Lean projects are frequently applied

successfully, which is the case with the Beth Israel Reference Medical Center Project (Canacari & Simon,

2012). Other sectors have also developed Lean projects, such as Energy Systems (Weloa, Bjørset & Rølvåga,

2013). However, the economic sector where these projects are most developed is industry; as this methodology

was originated in this sector. For example, in Mexico, companies like GE Mabe Quantum, Lear Corporation

and Motorola, have applied this production model to reduce costs and become more competitive (Reyes, 2002).

In Colombia, experiences with Lean tools were also implemented in different economic sectors, such as

the automotive, metallurgy, food, and health services sectors (Arrieta et al., 2011).

Additionally, some studies indicate that managers in organizations that developed Lean projects, also

applied the Six Sigma model, which in many cases is integrated with the Lean model, as mentioned by Pinto

and Tenera (2014). This integration intends to improve management processes for projects that must support

continuous results and business process improvement.

(ii) Six Sigma

The 80’s presented rapid attempts to change the concept of quality in the United States, due to their

concern in imitating the Japanese results. One of the results of such attempts was the creation of the Six Sigma

method (Eckes, 2001). Six Sigma was introduced by Motorola in the beginning of the 1980´s, as their quality

excellence program and the word is associated with a statistical process capacity level that provides superior

quality performance (Maximiano, 2006). Upon seeing the results of this model, other companies began to adapt

it such as General Electric (GE), as they realized that this focus not only promotes continuous improvement but

also contributes to revenue growth and increased productivity in the enterprises. GE mentioned that the essence

of this method is improving process efficiency and effectiveness (Eckes, 2001).

Other authors complement the definition of Six Sigma, as a tool to reduce variations in organizational

processes, using improvement specialists, a structured method and performance metrics. The main


709

characteristics of the Six Sigma system includes a focus on processes as the fundamental building blocks in an

organization, adapting project teams that use an approach to solve their troubles in a structured format, and thus

gain knowledge and improve processes (Easton & Rosenzweig, 2012).

Some authors also defend that six-sigma projects can balance the effective application of the

methodology provided (for example, tools and techniques, such as quality control) and the context (for

example, leadership and organizational culture) (Parast, 2011).

Cariño (2002) emphasizes the importance of defining a clear goal when people work in six-sigma

projects, to ensure the team's efforts. There are different roles in the implementation of a project like this, such

as government seals, champions and the personnel responsible for the technical specifications, and people who

are called master black belts, which are the key to success.

Finally, as presented by Eckes (2001) the Six-Sigma method was tested and approved in many

countries, where its application has been effective in helping companies dominate competition. In addition, the

six-sigma project is applied in different companies, not only in the industry sector, but also in the services

sector, and the results presented in several studies, demonstrate that the efficiency levels in processes have

improved. One of the sectors where this type of project was also implemented is the health sector, in different

hospital processes. For example, a hospital in Los Angeles adopted the six-sigma method to reduce

contamination rates (Taneja, Finney & Nagaishi, 2014).

(iii) Reengineering

The reengineering model emerged in the 1980s, but was recognized after Hammer wrote his article,

"Reengineering work: don´t automate, obliterate", published in 1990. The key point is the need to break the

rules and assumptions inherited from previous management business models, as a result of the extension of the

work and creation of hierarchical levels in organizations (Champy & Hammer, 1994, p. 8-9 apud Trad, 2006, p.

21).

According to Hammer apud Trad (2006) reengineering means starting again. It does not mean

reformulating what already exists or making small changes and keeping the basic structures intact. Which

means making the procedures enshrined and reviewing the work that is necessary to create products and

services that the company offers to customers.

Other authors like Klein and Manganelli (1995) define reengineering as the rapid and radical redesign of

strategic business processes that add value to enterprises, as well as redesigning the system rules and

organizational structure that maintain these processes in order to optimize the workflow and productivity in an

organization.

However, it should not be confused with reorganization, because reengineering represents something

new (processes, products and services), replacing the way something is done currently for something new

which is better than the old process. It also cannot be confused with incremental improvement programs

because it does not emphasize on small, incremental changes. The reengineering model seek innovations and

multifaceted goals for improvement, i.e. it seeks to improve several items in the process such as, quality, cost,

flexibility, speed, precision and customer satisfaction, simultaneously (Klein & Manganelli, 1995).

However, the reengineering model distanced itself from the original concept, and became modified,

which is why it has received many criticisms. Despite this, the principles have remained and it received a new

name, which is process redesign. The fundamental principle is process improvements (Maximiano, 2006). Most

of the contributions from reengineering projects are related to the IT sector (Simón et al., 2004).

Although reengineering projects are important for the organizations because they provide radical

process changes, they are not common. However, process redesigning has severe changes and obstacles

involved in launching the project that can be multifaceted; in other words, certain organizational, technological

and strategic elements need to be overcome, representing possible obstacles to change, so that these projects

may have successful conclusions (Teng, Fiedler & Grover, 1998).

(iv) Critical Success Factors

A project team has certain attributes called critical success factors which are (Pinto & Slevin, 1986):


710

(i) Project Mission: this point presents the importance of clarifying the project goal definitions, and that

all of the team members understand these goals. The project mission comprises the scope definition,

focusing on the main product that will be supplied, as well as defining the objectives that will be

delivered to the customer, the timing and costs involved.

(ii) Top Management Support: the administration must provide the necessary resources and audit the

project development to ensure its success.

(iii) Project Schedule/Plan: A detailed specification of the individual action steps required for project

implementation.

(iv) Client Consultation: the team and customers agree on the project requirements. In this point, the

project team should begin to list the functional specifications and research what the client expects for

the final product.

(v) Team Work: Recruitment, selection and training for the necessary personnel in the project team.

(vi) Technical Support: Availability of the required technology and technical aspects to accomplish the

specific technical action steps.

(vii) Client Acceptance. The act of "selling" the final project to the ultimate intended users.

(viii) Monitoring and feedback: Timely provision of comprehensive information control during each

stage of the implementation process.

(ix) Communication: Providing an appropriate network and necessary data for all key actors in the

project´s implementation. To have a successful project design, it is important to exchange information

between all parties involved.

(x) Trouble-Shooting: Ability to handle unexpected crises and plan deviations.

3. Research Methodology

The purpose of this chapter is explaining the procedures adopted to develop this study. A quantitative

approach was used and the main research instrument is a questionnaire which was answered by professionals in

Brazil and Colombia , with experience developing models to improve process efficiency (Lean, Six Sigma and

Reengineering or process redesign) as well as project management experience, including analysts, directors and

top managers.

Due to time and resource restrictions, the efforts to obtain answers focused on organizations that accept

research cooperation. In Brazil, this study received support from a foundations that provides MBA courses and

the questionnaire was applied to two courses there, and in Colombia, four companies from the service sector,

including a health company and insurance companies (General, Life and Capitalization), agreed to collaborate

with the study.

The questionnaire was applied after a pre-test with another group of students who are masters in

Business Administration in the University of São Paulo, which allowed us to identify points in the

questionnaire that required improvements and adjust them. The following sample profile was finally obtained,

presented in images 1 - 5.

Image 1: Participation of respondents in Lean projects, Six Sigma projects or Reengineering projects

No

13%

Si

87%


711

Image 2: Economic Sector Companies where the respondents work

Image 3: Profile of the respondents

Image 4: Years of experience of the respondents

Services

86%

Manufacturing

10%

Others

4%

Analyst

4%

Director

18%

Manager

18%

Others

12%

Profissional

48%

Between 10 to

15

12%

Between 5 to 10

35%

More

than 15

8%

Less than 5

45%


712

Image 5: Respondents´ Country of Origin

Based on images 1-5, the following profile of the respondents can be defined:

(i) Most of the respondents work in companies in the service sector, representing 86%, and the lowest

percentage, represents participants working in others sectors (4%) such as the public sector.

Among participants who work in the service sector, 57% are from Colombia and 43% are from

Brazil. Only 10% of the respondents work in manufacturing and most of these professionals are

from Brazil (9%) with only 1% from Colombia.

(ii) Most of the respondents are professionals in the companies (48%) and only (4%) are analysts.

(iii) Only 12% of the respondents have more than 15 years of experience with projects.

(iv) When analyzing the respondents´ nationalities, most of them are from Colombia, 52% and 48% are

from Brazilian. The difference between these countries is very small.

Finally, it is important to highlight that respondents could choose more than one type of project (Lean,

Six Sigma and Reengineering).

4. Results Analysis

Among the Lean, Reengineering and Six Sigma models, which models have project leaders

applied most efficiently? This research question was answered, and the results show that the model

applied most efficiently is the Reengineering model, followed by the Lean model and finally the Six

Sigma model.

Image 6 show us that the Reengineering model has the highest percentage among all three

models with 60%; followed by Lean, 29% and finally Six Sigma with the lowest percentage, 11%.

Image 6: Type of project applied most efficiently by project leaders

Brasil

48% Colombia

52%

Six Sigma

11%

Lean

29%

Reengineering

60%


713

When we analyzed the secondary objectives of the study, all findings could be identified.

(i) Among these models (Lean, Six Sigma and reengineering) identify which model is most used

by project leaders;

In regards to the process improvement model which is most used by Project Leaders, most of the

respondents (60%) developed the reengineering model, followed by the Lean model (29%) and only 11%

developed the Six Sigma model. The last two last models add up to less than 50 percent of the total answers.

This means that leaders prefer to apply the reengineering project and none of the respondents considers other

models as presented in figure 6.

(ii) Identify the critical success factors that have contributed to the implementation of these

models (Lean, Six Sigma and Reengineering).

Here the study analyzed which of the three critical success factors are most important for the

implementation for each these models. For the Lean model, the three most important factors are:

communication (25%), trouble - shooting (19%) and top management support and client consultation (11%).

For the Reengineering model the important factors are: communication (26%); trouble - shooting (23%);

technical support (14%) and finally for the Six Sigma model, the three factors that are most important are:

technical support (24%); team work (20%) and Project Schedule/Plan and communication (18%). Only one

factor is common among these models, which is communication, with the following rates: 25% in the Lean

model; 26% in Reengineering and 18% in Six Sigma.

The least important factors are also analyzed here. Only one is common among all three models:

monitoring and feedback. However, the order of importance is different among them. For Six Sigma this factor

was the least important, with Client Acceptance, Trouble-Shooting and finally Monitoring and feedback (0%).

Monitoring and feedback in the Reengineering model is the third least important with a 4% rate and the same

factor for the Lean model is the second less relevant, with a 4% rate, as shown in image 7.

Image 7: Critical Success Factors vs Models which intend to improve processes

(iii) Compare the implementation patterns for lean, six-sigma and reengineering and critical

success factors for projects leaders in Brazil and Colombia.

When comparing the implementation of Lean, Six Sigma and Reengineering models among

project management professionals in Brazil and Colombia, it is interesting to observe that the behavior

pattern concerning the application of these models is only similar when they apply the reengineering

model, which had the highest percentage rate in both cases; 72% in Brazil and 48% in Colombia.

When we analyze the application results for the Lean and Six Sigma models, there were

differences between these countries. In Brazil, the second model that is most developed is the Six Sigma

Project

Mission

Top

Management

Support

Project

Schedule/Plan

Client

Consultation

Team

Work

Technical

support

Client

Acceptance

Monitorin

g andfeedback

Communi

cation

Trouble-

Shooting

Lean 3% 11% 7% 11% 5% 8% 7% 4% 25% 19%

Reengineering 3% 8% 6% 6% 9% 14% 2% 4% 26% 23%

Six sigma 6% 8% 18% 8% 20% 24% 0% 0% 18% 0%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%


714

with a 16% rate and the Lean with 12%. Which is different in Colombia, where the Lean model has the

second position with 44% rate and then the Six Sigma model with a 7% rate.

It is also interesting to observe that the Lean and Six Sigma models present a significant

difference between both countries: Brazil and Colombia (Lean with a 32% difference and Six Sigma

with 9%), as presented in image 8.

Image 8: Comparing the development of Lean, Six Sigma and Reengineering models in Colombia and Brazil

This study also analyzed the three most important critical success factors for each country and in

Colombia, the three most important factors are: Top Management Support with 24%, followed by

Communication with 14% and finally the Project´s Mission, Project Schedule / Plan and Client Consultation

with 11%.

When we compare these results with Brazil, the study identified that there are two critical success

factors that are considered along with the three most important in Colombia: Mission Project and Top

Management Support, with the first factor being the most important in Brazil, representing 20% and Top

Management Support being the second most important factor with 16%, the third factor is Technical support

with 13%. The last factor is different in Colombia, and not considered one of the most important factors by

project leaders to guarantee successful implementation. Image 9 presents this data.

Image 9: Critical Success Factors vs Countries

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Lean

Reingenieria

Six sigma

Lean Reingenieria Six sigma

Colombia 44% 48% 7%

Brasil 12% 72% 16%

Project

Mission

Top

ManagementSupport

Project

Schedule/Plan

Client

ConsultationTeam Work

Technical

support

Client

Acceptance

Monitoring

and feedback

Communicati

on

Trouble-

Shooting

Brasil 20% 16% 11% 7% 11% 13% 0% 2% 11% 8%

Colombia 11% 24% 11% 11% 5% 8% 3% 2% 14% 10%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%


715

5. Discussion and Conclusions

The purpose of this study was to identify, among the Lean, Six Sigma and Reengineering models

that focus in improving processes, which have been applied more efficiently by project leaders. This

study demonstrates that the model implemented most efficiently is Reengineering, followed by Lean,

and Six Sigma.

When reviewing literature, we noticed that reengineering projects are unusual because their

success depends on certain organizational factors, technological and strategic elements. The objective of

the reengineering model is to make big changes, and sometimes some elements in an organization as the

culture can be too difficult to change because people do not like turnarounds, which is why companies

don’t always begin this type of project (Teng, Fiedler & Grover, 1998). In addition, Reengineering is a

high-risk project and can be difficult due to a resistance to change (Martin, 1997).

On the other hand, the Lean and Six Sigma models are common projects and companies invested

more in their development. Over the last decade, the interest in applying Lean manufacturing projects

has increased dramatically because companies have seen the increasing importance of adapting this

model in order to become more competitive in the global market (Arrieta et al., 2011). Canacari and

Simon (2012) complement this by mentioning that not only manufacturing companies have applied

Lean projects, but also service companies, in the health sector for example, where many leaders realized

that if they apply Lean projects, they would be able to identify problems easily, with a logical structure

to help prioritize challenges and identify opportunities for process improvements.

The Lean model was also important in the construction sector due to the significant continuous

improvements in business process performance, eliminating wastes in time and other resources that do

not add value to the product or deliver customer services (Issa, 2013).

When we analyzed the application of the six-sigma projects, there are authors who emphasize

that this project is applicable in industry and in the service sector; however, a little less than the Lean

project. Cariño (2002) mentions that the six-sigma projects involve considerable efforts because they

must produce measurable benefits or profits, and are mainly focused on the benefits and reduction of

more than 50% of process costs, greater implementation time, reducing wasted materials, understanding

customer needs, increasing customer satisfaction and generating greater reliability for the products and

services that are offered by companies. These projects are developed in a short time usually, which is

why the Lean model is required, and their success depends a lot on the team established (Parast, 2011).

When we analyze the most important critical success factors for the application of these models,

this study shows that one of the three most important factors is communication among all models

presented here. In the reengineering project, communication is very important to guarantee that

everybody clearly understands the project´s goal and objective. In this kind of project it is important to

have communication flowing at all levels, from the strategic administration level to the lower levels

(Teng, Fiedler & Grover, 1998). In order to ensure good communication in the reengineering project,

the team should focus on a few processes, not all of them, because if they focus on too many processes,

there may be a higher probability of having communication problems that are difficult to control.

According to literature, another important factor for the reengineering project , is that the

operation should always be seen from the customer´s point of view as well as the process results

(Martin, 1997), it is important for these projects to pay attention to what customers have to say (client

consultation), however, it is interesting to consider that during our interviews, this critical success factor

was not considered among the three most important critical factors.

For the Lean model, one of the most important critical success factors is considering customer

opinions (Tenera & Pinto, 2014). It is important to highlight that in many sectors such as industry and

health services, managers and analysts frequently fail in their communication processes with customers

as well as understanding their needs (Canacari & Simon, 2012). This important critical factor is aligned

with this research, which considers that one of the most important critical factors for the Lean model is

client consultation.

Another critical factor for the Lean model is Trouble-Shooting (second), which is also mentioned

by Canacari and Simon (2012) who state that in the Lean model, it is important to have a problem

solving process because this makes it possible for the team to prioritize challenges, manage the actions


716

to provide solutions to such challenges, monitor the progress of these actions and transmit the learning

experiences after the Project has been developed.

On the other hand, it is interesting to see that in Lean projects one of the critical factors

considered less important is the project mission, which the literature considers to be a critical factor and

one of the most important because if the goals and objectives of the project are not clear, the team will

not understand and accept the project (Canacari & Simon, 2012).

Finally, when we analyzed six-sigma projects, one of the three most important critical factors is

team work. This is aligned with our study, although it has been considered the second most important

factor. The project team contributes with knowledge from different areas and individual members learn

with each other, the knowledge is widely shared between members through several techniques such as

DMAIC (Arumugam, Antony & Kumar, 2013). Sharing the learning experience is enabled through

good communication, and this is possible if the effort focus is clear. In short, our research is

complemented with literature when it shows that teamwork is one of the most important critical factors

for these projects.

The research conducted here, although limited to a particular situation in Colombia and Brazil,

made it possible to achieve all of the objectives satisfactorily, as evidenced in the previous chapter.

Thus, the research made it possible to demonstrate which of the Lean, Six-sigma and Reengineering are

most applied by project management professionals and which is most applied efficiently. Among the

critical success factors, it was also possible to identify which are most important and less relevant in

each of these models and which are common among all three kinds of projects.

This research also allowed us to compare the application of these models in two countries

(Colombia and Brazil), and although they are both emerging countries, the economic development is a

bit different, considering that the Brazilian economy is more developed than the Colombian economy,

although Brazil is currently undergoing an economic crisis. From one country to another, we found

similarities and differences in the application of these projects. The similar aspect is that the

Reengineering project was the most applied and the implementation of Six-sigma and Lean projects

presented differences.

Additionally, this study led us to analyze the three important critical factors for Brazil and

Colombia and it is interesting to see how the culture in each country can influence the organizational

culture.

One of the most important factors for both countries is support from top management, and this is

because both countries have a hierarchical organizational culture (Grupo de Investigación Gestión

Humana y Cultura Organizational, 2014), and all of the decisions involve senior management, the power

is concentrated among top managers. This is why it is very important for the projects to receive support

in order to ensure their success. They are also the ones to approve the project´s implementation and

provide the necessary resources. This research demonstrates that respondents from Brazil and Colombia

agree with the fact that senior management is key to the success of a project.

The other factor evaluated as one of the most important for both countries as well as in the

literature is the project mission, because this is the initial step for the implementation process and it is

responsible for clarifying the project goals, thus ensuring that the team members understand their roles

and assignments in the project (Slevin & Pinto, 1986).

In regards to the third factor evaluated by each country, it is interesting to see that there was no

coincidence between Brazil and Colombia. For Brazil, the third most important factor is technical

support, on the other hand, for Colombia it is communication. This difference may be due to the

organizational culture in each country, for example, for Colombia according to a study by Morales

(2010) one of the most important aspects that has a major impact in the organizational culture is

leadership and one of the characteristics of being a good leader is the ability to communicate ideas to

your team. While in Brazil this factor is considered the fourth most important factor.

However, since one of the objectives of the article is to compare the application behavior

between both countries, in future studied it would be interesting to analyze why Colombia considers

communication one of the three most important success factors for these projects and why Brazil

considers technical support one of the three most important critical factors.

This study does not have the purpose of analyzing the reasons why project leaders apply these

projects more than others, neither why one or more critical factors were more important than others in

the three models, presenting the differences between them. The study also does not intend to analyze the


717

reason behind these differences when comparing the implementation of these projects among

professionals in Brazil and Colombia.

Considering the abovementioned, in the future, it would be interesting to study why the Lean

model is most applied by project leaders in Colombia, and why the Six Sigma model is most applied by

project leaders in Brazil. In addition, other recommendations for future studies would be validating the

reasons why project leaders considered the Reengineering model, the one that is most applied

efficiently.

This article generates two academic contributions. The first contribution is that it compares the

application of the three models focused on process improvements by project leaders, in two countries

with different economic development scenarios. This made it possible to observe an organizational

behavior pattern in both developing countries.

The second contribution presents the three most important critical success factors for project

leaders, for the successful development of these projects, presents the best practices to apply the Lean,

Six sigma and Reengineering models.

On practical terms, this study made it possible to notice behavior pattern in both developing

countries when implementing these kinds of projects, and helps managers identify other practices that

can help them apply these projects successfully considering the contexts in each country.

References

Arumugam, V., Antony, J. & Kumar, M. (2013).Linking learning and knowledge creation to project success in

Six Sigma projects: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Production Economics, 141, (1),

388–402.

Arrieta, J. G., Muñoz, J.D., Salcedo, A. & Sossa, S. (2011). Aplicación Lean Manufacturing En La Industria

Colombiana. Ninth LACCEI Latin American and Caribbean Conference (LACCEI’2011), Engineering for a

Smart Planet, Innovation, Information Technology and Computational Tools for Sustainable Development,

Medellin, Colombia, 1–11.

Ballard, G. & Howell, G. A. (2003) Lean project management. Building Research & Information, 31 (2), 119–

133.

Canacari, E. & Simon, R. A. (2012) Practical Guide to Applying Lean Tools and Management Principles to

Health Care Improvement Projects. AORN Journal, 95 (1), 85–103.

Capitulo São Paulo Brasil (2015). PMI. Recovered on January, 2016. http://www.pmisp.org.br/sobre.

Cariño, R. (2002). Seis Sigma y la capacidad del proceso en proyectos. Tendencias Tecnologícas, 164–173.

Cepal (2006-2007). Estudio Económico de America Latina y el Caribe: Colombia.

Cepal (2006-2007). Estudio Económico de America Latina y el Caribe: Brasil.

De la Dehesa, G. (2002) Comprender la Globalización. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.

Easton, G. & Rosenzweig, E. (2012) The role of experience in six sigma project success: An empirical analysis

of improvement projects. Journal of Operations Management, 30 (7-8), 481–493.

Eckes, G. (2001) A Revolução Seis Sigmas: O método que levou a GE e outras empresas a transformar

processos em lucro. 5a ed. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier.

Grupo de Investigación Gestión Humana y Cultura Organizational (2014). Agenciadenoticias.unal.edu.co

Universidad Nacional of Colombia. Recovered on January, 16, 2016 :


718

http://www.pmisp.org.br/sobre

http://agenciadenoticias.unal.edu.co/detalle/article/modelo-jerarquico-en-empresas-del-pais-impide-la-

innovacion.html.

Issa, U. (2013). Implementation of lean construction techniques for minimizing the risks effect on project

construction time. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 52, 697–704.

Jerez, P., Martinez, P. & Moyano, J. (2014) Human resource management in Lean Production adoption and

implementation processes: Success factors in the aeronautics industry. Review Business Research Quarterly,

17, 47–68.

Klein, M. M. & Manganelli, R. L. (1995). Manual de Reengenharia. Rio de Janeiro: Campus.

Kull, T. J., Yan, T., Liu, Z. & Wacker, J. (2014) The moderation of lean manufacturing effectiveness by

dimensions of national culture: Testing practice-culture congruence hypotheses. Int. J. Production Economics,

53, 1–12.

Lander, E. & liker, J. K. (2007). The Toyota Production System and art: making highly customized and creative

products the Toyota way. International Journal of Production Research, 45 (16), 3681–3698.

Martin, G. (1997). International business reengineering: A view from the receiving end. Laboratory Automation

and Information Management, 33, 1–8.

Maximiano, A. C. (2006). Teoria Geral da Administração. São Paulo: Atlas.

Maximiano, A. C. (2009) Administração de Projetos: como transformar idéias em resultados. 3a ed. São

Paulo: Atla.

Maximiano, A. C. (2011) Introdução à Administração. 2a ed. São Paulo: Atla.

Morales, S.L. (2010). Caracterización de la Cultura Organizacional en Empresas Colombianas. Trabajo de

Grado of Universidad del Rosario, Departament of Business Administration.

Ohno, T. (1997). O Sistema Toyota de Produção. Porto Alegre: Bookman.

Parast, M. M. (2011) The effect of Six Sigma projects on innovation and firm performance. International

Journal of Project Management, 29 (1), 45–55.

Pinto, J. & Slevin, D. (1986) The Project Implementation Profile: New Tool for Project Managers. Project

management Journal, 57–58.

Prokopenko, J. (1992). Productivity Management: a practical handbook. Geneva : International Labour Office.

Radnor Z,J & Barnes, D.  (2007). Historical analysis of performance measurement and management in

operations management. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 56 (5/6), 384–

396.

Reyes, P. (2002) Manufactura delgada (Lean) y Seis Sigma en empresas mexicanas: experiencias y reflexiones.

Contaduría y Administración, 205, 51–69.

Simón, K., Olazaran, M., Igeregi, I. & Sierra, F. (2004). El papel de las consultoras en la introducción de

nuevos conceptos de gestión. Reingeniería de procesos en la Cav. Cuarto Congreso de Economía de Navarra.

Slevin, D.P. & Pinto, J.K. (1986). The Project Implementation Profile: New Tool For Project Managers. Project

Management Journal, 57-70.


719

http://agenciadenoticias.unal.edu.co/detalle/article/modelo-jerarquico-en-empresas-del-pais-impide-la-innovacion.html

http://agenciadenoticias.unal.edu.co/detalle/article/modelo-jerarquico-en-empresas-del-pais-impide-la-innovacion.html

Taneja, D. A., Finney, J. & Nagaishi, K. (2014). Performance Improvement Project: Reducing Emergency

Department Blood Culture Contamination Rate Using Six Sigma Methodology. American Journal of Infection

Control, 42, s29–s166.

Tenera, A. & Pinto, L. C. (2014). A Lean Six Sigma (LSS) Project Management Improvement Model. Procedia

- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 119, p. 912–920.

Teng, J., Fiedler, K. & Grover, V. (1998). An Exploratory Study of the In¯uence of the IS Function and

Organizational Context on Business Process Reengineering Project Initiatives. Omega, 26 (6) p. 679–698.

Trad, S. (2006). Seis Sigma: Fatores Críticos de Sucesso de sua implantação e impacto sobre desempenho

organizacional. Dissertação de Mestrado em Administração of University of São Paulo, Departament of

Economia, Administração e Contabilidade.

Welo, T., Bjørset, O. & Rølvåga, T. (2013) Lean Systems Engineering (LSE): Hands-on Experiences in

Applying LSE to a Student Eco-Car Build Project. Sciverse Science Direct, 16, 492–501.


720

angela marÍa benavides gordillo …iamot2016.org/proceedings/papers/iamot_2016_paper_67.pdf · was...

Documents