six sigma for different culture - doctoral thesis
TRANSCRIPT
Six-Sigma ImplementationIn Different Cultures:
By: Mr. Naruepont Pongcharoen
Master of Public and Private Management (Bangkok Thailand), 1998
International Graduate School of BusinessDivision of Business
University of South Australia
Submitted on this 17 of December in the year 2005for the partial requirements of the degree of
Doctor of Business Administration
UNIVERSITY OFSOUTH AUSTRALIA
12 JUL 2006
LIBRARY
Name
Name
Supported by:
Chair, IGSB Doctoral Academic Review Committee
DOCTOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
PORTFOLIO/DISSERTATION SUBMISSIONSUPERVISOR APPROVAL DECLARATION
Candidate Name: Mr. Naruepont Pongcharoen
UniSA Candidate ID Number: 00110917N
Dear Sir
To the best of my knowledge, the portfolio contains all of the candidate's own work completed under mysupervision, and is worthy of examination.
I have approved for submission the portfolio that is being submitted for examination.
Signature: Principal Supervisor Date
Dr. Kamonchanok Suthiwartnarueput,
Signature: Associate Supervisor (where applicable) Date
L l'itoref4 /dgi_ 1p/z_/64
Date
17 December 2005
Declaration of Research
'I declare that this portfolio does not incorporate without acknowledgment any material
previously submitted for a degree or diploma in any university; and that to the best of
knowledge it does not contain any materials previously published or written by another person
except where due reference is made in the text'
Mr. Naruepont Pongcharoen
Doctor of Business Administration candidate
Date: 17 December 2005
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to International Graduate School of Management, University of South Australia
for giving me a chance to be a candidate for Doctoral of Business Administration and also to
all the Professors who have been my lecturers during the course works. I also with to thank
Professor Kamonchanok, Professor Helen Torn and Professor Scott Pine, who comprise the
supervisory panel who gave me guidance and advice.
I realize that this has been one of the toughest times ever in my life. However, I never felt
that I was walking alone. Thanks to my friends, my family, and the one I love. I always got
your support, encouragement, and understanding when I felt stressed or got stuck. Especially
Cathy Patt, my best friend, who does the best part of these researches, editing my papers. My
researches could not be completed without her hands.
Finally, I would like to express my appreciation to all participants in these researches. I
always received full support from all of them in sharing their ideas, knowledge, opinions, and
valuable experiences.
If some value is found in these works, please give credit to the persons that I have mentioned
above.
Six-Sigma Implementation in different cultures
An Overview
This research portfolio is part of a Doctorate in Business Administration of the University of
South Australia. This portfolio consists of three research papers, the combined objective of
which is to study what cultural obstacles may exist to prevent or frustrate successful Six-
Sigma implementation specific to the manufacturing business in Thailand. The portfolio also
studies how these cultural barriers to successful implementation of Six-Sigma could be
overcome and offers first hand evidence from specific case studies on Six-Sigma
implementation in manufacturing businesses in Thailand. The results of this research will
increase knowledge of Six-Sigma implementation and better equip Thai manufacturing
businesses for successful implementation of Six-Sigma methodology which is necessary to
ensure competitiveness in today's highly competitive world.
Six-Sigma is more than a methodology, it's a management philosophy or way of thinking
used to improve quality and productivity and ultimately impacts on the bottom line of the
organization. After world war two, American products were claimed to be of poor quality
when compared to its Japanese competitor's products. Six-Sigma was initiated by American
engineers at Motorola, an American company, and subsequently to other leading American
businesses. Six-Sigma methodology combined a management approach called "Break
through management", with practical problem solving and logical statistical techniques.
Six-Sigma project consists of 5 phases (DMAIC); "Define", "Measure", "Analyze",
"Improve" and "Control". It can be described as follows;
Define; the purpose of the Define Phase is to further refine the Six-Sigma project
team's understanding of the problem.
Measure; establish techniques for collecting data about current performance
Analyze; the preliminary data to document current performance and to begin
identifying root causes of defects, and their impact.
levels.
Improve; determine how to intervene in the process to significantly reduce the defect
Control; the purpose of the Control Phase is to institutionalize process or product
improvements, and monitor ongoing performance.
Six-Sigma methodology has gained interest, not only in the United States and Japan, but also
in others countries such as Thailand. It could be claimed that the successfulness of Six-Sigma
in the American firms is due to the fact that the methodology of Six-Sigma is an excellent
match with American management characteristics or American business culture. Many Thai
companies would like to implement Six Sigma into their organizations but this research offers
that a full understanding of the methodology introduction into Thai organizations should be
fully understood by the implementation team so as to en sure success.
Research portfolio was divided into three research papers;
First research paper
The first research paper is a review of literature; this review of literature aims to reveal
knowledge of the Six-Sigma process; definition, revolution, methodology and what are the
key success factors of Six-Sigma implementation in United States? Pre literature review
found that Thai and American culture is different in many dimensions so this study will see
the potential implication of Thai's culture on Six-Sigma implementation. The researcher
reviewed all related text books to understand clearly Six-Sigma methodology and benefits of
its methodology. Research reports specific to the topic of Six-Sigma implementation were
also reviewed, to understand what key success factors there are for implementation. Then the
specific topics of American and Thai cultures were studied.
Research found that there are 9 key success factors in implementing Six-Sigma in American
companies;
Top management involvement and commitment
Breakthrough management characteristics
Communication
Training
Organization infrastructure and resources allocation
Process Improvement.
Link Six-Sigma to Human Resources Management
2
Personal Qualification
Tracking and follow up system
9 Key Success factors were found although it does not mean they could be used for others
countries. Thai and American cultures were further studied and it was found that Thai and
American cultures are different in many dimensions as studied by Dr. Greet Hostede; Thai is
a much more collectivist culture, Thai's have high power distance, Thai's are fairly
comfortable with uncertainty, but less than USA, and Thailand is much more oriented toward
Feminine values. The Researcher has been studying further the Thai culture. The purpose of
this study is to see whether or not Thai culture creates obstacles, or has implications on Six-
Sigma implementation. Thus, pertinent Thai culture characteristics could be concluded as
follows;
Smooth Interpersonal Relationship Orientation culture; This orientation is
characterized by the preference for a non-assertive, polite and humble type of
personality, as well as the preference for relaxed, and pleasant interaction which
accounts for the "smiling" and Friendly" aspects of the Thai people."
Thai's are characterized as being self-admiring. They would like to work in an
individual manner so they can do what they want and also that job or organization
should be less controlled and not adhere strictly to the rules. Thai's are
characterized as having no work discipline and claimed to be less efficient when
working in a team.
Thai people characteristics are not straightforward, ambitious and aggressive
personalities similar to the western countries, although highly capable. They are not
tolerant and are hardly ever successful. However, if management approaches with
"Soft" and "Polite" it will often guarantee cooperation (Komin, 1991).
Thai's value "Face Saving"; Thai's always use soft approaches or indirect ways to
solve their problems. If the case concerns individuals Thai's do not like to strike
hard at the point.
Most Thai people are characterized as having the "Criticize Avoidance" value. They
try to avoid conflict. They will keep quiet, make no comments, or will not debate
when working in teams as a result of "Grateful Relationship Orientation" and
"Smooth Interpersonal Relationship Orientation" values.
Most Thai's are more flexible with good responsiveness to the situation.
Most Thai people believe that things are difficult to change. The result is less
innovative thinking and fewer corporation changes.
3
Thai's are characterized as having the "Inter-dependence" value resulting in the
desire to see a return when they make any contribution or actions.
After analyzing all data, the It could be concluded that Thai culture had implication on Six-
Sigma implementation as follows;
Breakthrough methodology and Result orientation in Six-Sigma methodology could
not be used with Thai people or Thai Manufacturing.
"Out Box" thinking concept and "Changing" environment could not be implemented
in Thai's culture.
"Team Work" could be an obstacle to Six-Sigma implementation.
"Performance-based promotion" and "Individual recognition system" could not be
used with Thai people.
The above listed Thai culture implications could be used as research questions for the second
research stage.
Second research paper
As previously mentioned, findings in review of literature can be used as questions to complete
further research. As a result, Thai culture influences Six-Sigma implementation. If Thai
manufacturing embarked on introducing Six-Sigma to their organizations, "How they manage
or perform successful implementation of Six-Sigma with Thai's manufacturing environment".
As a result, the second research aim is to study what implications Thai's culture has on Six-
Sigma Implementation and, if any, how those participant companies managed them in order to
achieve successful implementation. This second research will compare what the literature
stated; management characteristics adaptation and actual implementation into the Thai
companies.
Series interviews were deployed as the research methodology. Six-Sigma has just been
introduced in Thailand a short time ago. Most of the implementing companies are
subsidiaries or suppliers of American companies. There are approximately 15, or fewer, Thai
4
Manufacturers in Thailand employing Six-Sigma. The inherent limitation regarding a small
sample size is acknowledged. A semi-structured interview is deployed as a data collection.
In-dept interview is intended to collect qualitative data rather than quantitative data.
Interviews were conducted with a project leader or project deployment, which was not one of
top management, which led Six-Sigma implementation. Top management is the subject; in
order to avoid bias, top management is not selected to be an interviewee. Most of the
interviewees were Six-Sigma Master Black belts, Black belts or project coordinators, as well
as other employees who were selected for interview to rigor data collection. All concerned
documents such as project results, Six-Sigma organizational charts, and activities were
selected at interviewees' sites. Before ending an interview, all collected data was repeated to
interviewees for correction or confirmation.
Data analysis could be concluded that with regard to researcher questions and data analysis,
Thai's culture has an implication on Six-Sigma implementation in Thai manufacturing; Thai's
culture obstacles to "Result Oriented", "Team Working" and "Individual Recognition
System". However, there is no problem on 'outbox thinking or changing environment". From
this research results, it can be concluded that in successful Six-Sigma implementation most of
participants have adapted their management approaches as follows;
Clearly state in the company policy that everyone in the organization has to be a part
of Six-Sigma implementation.
The policy can be a clear set of directions the company would like employees to read,
understand, follow and comply with. Participation of all employees is one of the key
success factors. The policy could be utilized as a management communication tool to
get involvement from all of their employees. Most of the companies already have
policies which clearly state that all employees have to be a part of Six-Sigma
implementation.
Setting Objective targets, clear responsibility and deployment from top to floor level.
To get commitment from Thai people with better follow up performance and results,
objective target deployment is very important. It must be very structured and properly
deployed from top to floor level. This can be a valuable management tool to support
and create "Result Orientation" value for Thai's working environment.
5
Created efficient follow up system with close monitoring by top management.
As Thai values found in literature review pointed out, Thai's focus more on activities
than results. Thai's will put high priority on its activity even if they sometimes lose
control of the results or keep on track. All of the participants confirmed that a reliable
performance monitoring and follow up system is very important and must be provided
to them. Top management is required for close follow up and review of the results to
make sure that everything is on track and also sustainable after project post. These
actions could promote "Result Orientations" for Thai's working environment.
Process owner should be involved from the beginning of improvement phase.
To avoid resistance to change from Thai employees, it was recommended that
involvement of workers, or process owners, should begin in the early stages during
objective target setting and improvement phase. Involving workers early on has
enabled the company to obtain a commitment from workers effectively reducing the
workers resistance to change.
Built up Black belt leadership to lead implementation working group.
To build team work in Thai's working environment, project leader such as Black belt
is a key factor. Input from literature review and interview found it is difficult for Thai
people to contribute and participate during a project meeting due to Thais culture.
Therefore, as project leader, Black belt must utilize his strong leadership skills to
encourage participation, as well as garner support for the project.
Create "Activity base" and combine with "Fun" and "Work" concept to promote Six-
Sigma implementation. As finding in literature review; Kaisith, 1996 research report
that most Thai workers have a concept of "Fun" and "Work" with the activities being
combined. That found in many cases from research participants companies.
Motivate employees by providing recognition program with team or group.
Recognition is very important to encourage employees and team recognition is the
most preferable choice from these participants. However for individual recognition, it
has been used also but it was treated as sensitive issue or highly confidential in some
case.
To achieve Six-Sigma implementation, most of participating Thai manufacturers have adapted
their management approaches. Adaptation could be summarized and presented as follows;
6
Table Adaptation to Thai's culture
7
Literature - Culture Implication Adaptation to Thai's culture
Breakthrough methodology and Result
orientation in Six-Sigma methodology could
not be used with Thai people or Thai
Manufacturing.
State clearly in company policy that
everyone in organization has to be a part of
Six-Sigma implementation.
Setting Objective targets, clear
responsibility and deployment from top to
floor level.
Created efficient follow up system with
close monitoring by top management.
Motivation by linking the achieved
results to compensation program; bonus
both individual and group.
Continuous use of "Top Down and
Results Orientation" approach until it
becomes corporate culture
"Team Work" could be an obstacle to Six-
Sigma implementation
- Create "Activity base" and combine with
"Fun" and "Work" concept to promote team
working
- Built up Black belt leadership to lead
implementation working group.
"Performance-based promotion" and
"Individual recognition system" could not be
used with Thai people
- Motivate employees by providing
recognition program with both a monetary
and non-monetary award with a focus on
team motivation.
However, there were limitations found in this research. For instance, limited sample size; the
number of factories implementing Six-Sigma in Thailand is too small. The numbers of
companies, which are qualified in this research target, do not exceed 10. Next, is that most of
the participants are American subsidized companies. Therefore, they have more or less
absorbed their parent corporate culture to its organization, or they are familiar with American
working culture. To complete the research on this topic, researcher will conduct further
research by selecting one participating factory in second research to do a case study. To avoid
American culture bias to Thai Manufacturing, a Pure Thai Company will be selected. The
third research aims to deeply study "how Thai company implementing Six-Sigma is achieved
in Thai's working culture".
Third research paper
Regarding the limitation of the second research paper, researcher conducted further research
and a case study was deployed as research methodology. A pure Thai company was selected
to participate in this research. The research questions were based on the results found in
second research paper. The purpose of this research is to study how, and why, the selected
Thai companies implemented and managed those questions to succeed in implementing Six-
Sigma. Case study research can be helpful to provide a clear descriptive and explain
understanding of its implementation. Results of this research can be used as a model for other
Thai manufacturers who plan to introduce Six-Sigma.
One of the limitations found when researcher did the second research paper was that the series
interview research methodology was limited data collection in that time and it is only one
single source of data collecting. Most of the data collected is the opinion of project leaders or
management representatives. It is difficult to collect all details of its activities and
experiences. Therefore a case study research methodology was deployed for this research.
The aim of this study is to describe and explain; how and why selected unit was performed and
how they adapt themselves to success.
Another limitation found in the second research paper was that even though selected
participants were Thai factories located in Thailand, and managed by Thai staffs, 5 of the 6
participants were subsidized by American mother companies. It could be claimed that there
will be adaptation of working pattern, management style or corporate culture which transfer
from their mother companies. The Six-Sigma implementation process may be easy for them to
8
adapt into its organization. The sampling unit was selected from the participants in the
second research portfolio and is a real, local, Thai company.
The research was carried out over a 4 month period, focusing on the steps of implementation.
Research started with interviewing Top management and Project deployment manager to see
the overview of its implementation and surveyed the plant to see the working environment.
Document review was utilized for secondary data collection to see related activities. Next,
interviews were conducted involving people such as Black belts, process owners and workers
to get different opinions of the different angle of exactly had to be done. For rigor data,
observation and participation is also being performed for data collection such as participation
in Six-Sigma Black belt training, new employee orientation and Six-Sigma project meeting.
Data collection can be summarized as follows;
Interview, to complete data collecting, interviewees were divided into 4 groups;
Management consist of Quality director and project manager;
Supervisor group or process owners;
Black belts;
Operators or workers
The groups were classified by position, responsibility, or tasks. Dividing of groups for
interviewing can support the rigor data in the data analyzing phase.
Researcher then reviewed all concerned documents such as Six-Sigma implementation master
plan, Six-Sigma company procedure, Six-Sigma training scope, Six-Sigma training record, and
monitoring system.
Observation at participant factory has also been done; plant tour, participated in Six-Sigma
project meeting and observed how they communicated to its employees via poster campaign,
intranet, and Six-Sigma web site.
In conclusion, it could be claimed that to achieve successful Six-Sigma implementation in
Thai culture. To make it clear, or easier to understand; what are common practices in
implementing Six-Sigma in Thai culture environment. Researcher will group all similarities
in management adaptation in a major activity called "Module". The module will sequence
them in similar steps of the Six-sigma implementation as launched by most of the participant's
9
order of performance. Starting from policy deployment and ending up with recognition to
maintain or sustain the
Module 1: Policy and Communication
Establish clear Six-Sigma company policy and provide an effective communication system to
everyone in the organization. Policy and communication will create understanding of why
this method, what will be gained and what are their roles and responsibilities. Consequently,
there will be cooperation and commitment from employees.
Module 2: Achieving Target and Delegation
Result orientation could be a possible method for the Thai working culture. However, target
and specific responsible person or functions have to be clearly outlined even though Thai
people focus on activity more than the result or give importance to "Mean" more than "End".
Target setting will support Thai management and encourage their employees to evaluate the
achievement, their effort to get the job done, and make it easy to communicate to their
colleagues. Achieving Target and Delegation to each function encouraged employees to focus
more on "Result orientation" and "Top down" as important approaches from a Six-Sigma
methodology standpoint.
Module 3: Effective monitoring and evaluating system
The factory has to provide an effective system to support Thai management evaluation of its
performances and support them to allocate resources and decision making. Thai culture is
characterized as "Fun and Pleasure Oriented" which accurately reflects the way Thai people
work. Thai management also tried to find the activity that created a "Fun and Pleasure"
environment. Frequently they look over the results for effective monitoring and evaluation
system, therefore this is seen as an important management tool. Effective monitoring and
evaluating system also needs an effective management control mechanism such as monthly or
quarter reviews, which should be clearly specified.
10
Module 4: Leadership and Personnel Relationship
Key persons such as Black belt or Six-Sigma project leaders are required to have strong
leadership skills and good employee relations with their team members. Ego Orientation,
Criticism-Avoidance, and Value Grateful Relationship Orientation attributed to the Thai
culture could be the key obstacle to allowing Thai people to have an efficient way to work as a
team. The good relationship among their team members is as important as the leadership of
team leader or Black belt.
Module 5: Create "Activity base" and combine with "Fun" and "Work" concept to promote
Six-Sigma implementation.
"Fun and Pleasure Orientation" value of Thais culture, as study by Kaisith, 1996. His research
report referred that most Thai workers have a concept of "Fun" and "Work" with the activities
being combined. To get employees involvement or participation from Six-Sigma
implementation, The Company must be considered to have activity to support such as internal
project competition and big presentation event as finding from the researches. The activities
could be combining with "Fun" and "Work" concept.
Module 6: Individual and Group motivation
Motivation or recognition programs could be monetary or non monetary. It is most preferable
for the successful Thai companies to utilize both an individual and a team recognition
program. Horner certification, a non monetary recognition system can also be used for
promoting them.
Finally researcher would like to present lessons learned from these research findings to
whoever is interested in introducing Six-Sigma methodology to its Thai manufacturing
environment. Matrix model for Successful Six-sigma implementation was developed from
findings in research paper 1, 2 and 3.
11
Matrix will be presented in three dimension; Management; Operation and Recognition
approaches. First the management, operations and recognition has to be considered. Then
each approach needs a vehicle to convey them to get the output. The final step is the ultimate
outcome.
Six-Sigma implementation model for Thai manufacturing
rffiffinfinittPilM' pproaches4!film 'fir7
'141,6thaA
WiloPritIOPM,ipMehicleS0, AA , AMAMI;
uDPWftruitkiliatag
_.:_,-,---------------
-_ ------ ---------------_-__----
_._---------17-cognition------------- --------------------------:,'
---------------------------,:-------------------------__----------_____L-1410.Slina'.to
- - - -----.-- HumanI i-M- --&Ln-z-.Ttlsource--------Mranag-en-it--"'------:-----__----
------
Cleary PolicyStatementEffectiveCommunication
Target settingDelegationTrainingFollow up &MeasurementProject competitiorBlack BeltLeadership
Individual and TeamRecognition
'Motivation
SixSigma
Implementation
Successful
12
i1utcomer/
Key success factors in implementing Six-Sigma indifferent cultures: A review of literature
By: Mr. Naruepont Pongcharoen
Master of Public and Private Management (Bangkok Thailand), 1998
International Graduate School of ManagementDivision of Business and Enterprise
University of South Australia
Submitted on this 17 of December in the year 2005for the partial requirements of the degree of
Doctor of Business Administration
Table of contents
Page
Abstract 1
Title 2
Introduction 2
Six Sigma Methodology Definitions 4
Six Sigma Methodology Evolutions 6
Six Sigma Methodology 7
Six-Sigma Organizational Infrastructure 10
The Key Success Factors of Achieving Six-Sigma Implementation 11
The Importance of Environment Management or Culture on Six-Sigma 16
Implementation
Thai Culture 19
Thai People Value and Behavioral Patterns 23
Thai Characteristics Conclusion 26
Thai Culture Implications to Six-Sigma 27Implementation
Conclusion 32
Reference 34
Appendix 1 Six-Sigma Process Capability and DPMO 40
Figure 1. The rings of management 17
Table 1. Hofstede's dimension, Thailand and USA comparison 22
Table 2. Six-Sigma Process Capability and DPMO 40
Table of Abbreviations 41
Abstract
The aim of this research paper is to study the "Key success factors in implementing Six-
Sigma in different cultures". Literature review is used for the research methodology. The
review of literature revealed that Six-Sigma was originally initiated by Motorola, an
American company, and after recognizing the affect this could have on the organization and
to the bottom line, many other leading American companies then followed. It could be
claimed that the successfulness of Six-Sigma in the American firms are due to the fact that the
methodology of Six-Sigma is an excellent match with American management characteristics
or the American business culture. This research also found that cultural awareness issues are
likely to play a role in how effectively implementation of Six-Sigma methodology is in
American companies. Findings in this study indicate that Thai and American cultures are
vastly different in many dimensions. The question came up that if Six-Sigma were to be
introduced in a Thai manufacturing environment what implications the Thai culture would
have on implementation. This study focused on finding the potential implications of Thai's
culture on Six-Sigma implementation. The resultant finding of this study is "what are the
Thai culture implications to Six-Sigma implementation". Thai culture will have an impact on
the key success factors in implementing Six-Sigma and could be concluded as follows; Can
Breakthrough methodology and Result orientation in Six-Sigma methodology be used with
Thai people or Thai Manufacturing?; Can "Out Box" thinking concept and "Changing"
environment be implemented in Thai's culture?; How did those companies build "Team
work" to support Six-Sigma implementation?; Is performance-based promotion and
Individual recognition system being used with Thai people or Thai manufacturing?
1
Title
"Key success factors in implementing Six-Sigma in different cultures: A review of
literature".
Introduction
In the mid 1980's, an American firm, Motorola, initiated the productivity improvement tool
called Six-Sigma (Harry, 1994; Wyper, Harrison, 2000; Dawne, 2001). After its successful
implementation in Motorola, this new American philosophy has been deployed to other
organizations. Many authors, or research studies, claimed that Six-Sigma is a philosophy
designed to enhance quality, and productivity improvement (Harry, 1994; Deshpande, 1998;
Klefsjo, Wiklund, Edgeman, 2001; Banuelas, Antony, 2002).
Six-Sigma was initiated by Motorola, an American company, and embarked to many leading
American companies after that. It could be claimed that the successfulness of Six-Sigma
implementation in the American firms is due to the fact that the methodology of Six-Sigma
was designed for an American firm and therefore, is an excellent match with American
management characteristics or the American business culture.
Six-Sigma methodology has gained interest, not only in United States or in American
companies, but also in others countries such as Thailand. Many Thai companies would like to
implement Six Sigma into their organizations but there are some concerns regarding a
successful implementation. What are the key success factors that need to be learned? Are
there any culture implications when implemented?
It is hard for any business to change when it has been doing something the same way all of its
life. But in the business world, changes in consumer demands and competition force
companies to change just to stay in the race.
Thai companies along with other developing countries are finding they have to do things
differently to survive in today's marketplace. World competition-powered by a new, smarter
management style-has never been so intense. Increasing evidence shows that the American
economy is transforming, as industry after industry is restructured, reshaped, and reformed to
keep up with the competition.
2
Managers are learning new ways to run companies. Workers are learning how to contribute
their knowledge to improving processes. Chief executives are beginning to nurture and grow
healthy corporations for long-term strength, not just for short-term profit. All are listening to
the customer more effectively to make certain their products continue to be useful and
valuable. If they don't, someone else will quickly jump in and take away those customers.
With no customers, there is no business.
This new approach to management allows organizations to keep up with, even ahead of, these
rapid changes. It is practiced by most Japanese companies that have successfully assaulted
the US and UK industries over the past three decades. Thai industry is only just beginning to
understand these management principles and put them into practice.
This new management style is referred to as Six-Sigma and encompasses a new quality
leadership approach. It is a new view that shifts the emphasis from just quality improvement
to that of business improvement that effects the bottom line. By learning how to monitor,
control and continually improve processes and the overall system, organizations are better
able to provide customers with what they want, when and how they want it. This way of
doing business leads to better decisions for the customer and the organization, the worker and
the boss alike.
With Six-Sigma, decisions are based on data, not guesswork. Use of scientific approaches
becomes standard procedure. The focus is on improving products and services by improving
"How" the work gets done (the methods) and with Six-Sigma ensure these lead to bottom line
performance increases.
Relationships between associates and management are restructured: a manager's job becomes
helping people to do the best job possible, foreseeing and eliminating barriers that prevent
workers from consistently making quality products or providing quality service all of the time
(reducing variation.). Above all, managers treat people as part of the solution and not part of
the problem. Workers learn how to use the knowledge and insight they have gained from
being on the production line or working with customers day after day. They understand the
issues and can often make the right decisions to improve customer satisfaction. It is up to
management to remove the barriers that prevent them from doing so.
3
This review of literature aims to reveal knowledge of the Six-Sigma process; definition,
revolution, and methodology, as well as what the key success factors are for Six-Sigma
implementation in the United States?
International culture was divided by two contexts; "High Context Culture" and "Low Context
Culture". Context is defined in this case in terms of how individuals and their society seek
information and knowledge. People in each group have similarity in characteristics.
American culture was claimed as "Low Context Culture" and in the mean time; Thai culture
was claimed as "High Context Culture" (Hall, 1960, 1976, 1990). It is interesting to learn
what implications, if any, the different cultures will have on Six-Sigma implementation in this
research.
SIX SIGMA Methodology Definition
In the mid 1980's, Motorola, a well-known US company, introduced the new management
philosophy called Six-Sigma, to be used as a tool for its competitive advantage of quality, and
productivity, in order to effectively compete with Motorola's Japanese competitor companies
(Harry, 1994; Wyper, Harrison, 2000; Dawne, 2001). The success of Six-Sigma in the
Motorola, as well as in the GE company, promoted Six-Sigma Methodology to be applied in
several other leading companies (Basu, 2001; klefsjo, Wiklund, Edgeman, 2001), including
Du Pont, Raytheon, Ivensys, Seagate Technology, Ford, and GlexoSmithKline.
There are many definitions, by various authors, found in the review of literature. The
following are some of the Six-Sigma methodology definitions;
McClenahen, 2002 defined Six-Sigma as a disciplined quantitative approach for
improvement based manufacturing, or service processes.
Hahn and Hill, 1998 defined Six-Sigma as a highly disciplined and statistically
based approach for eliminating defects from products, processes, and transactions.
Basu, 2001; Dawne, 2001 defined Six-Sigma as a statistical term that refers to 3.4
DMPO or defects per million opportunities.
4
Paul, 1999 defined Six-Sigma as a statistics-based methodology aimed at achieving
fewer defects in every process and product.
Murphy, 1998 defined Six-Sigma as a quality initiative that employs statistical
measurement to achieve 3.4 DPMO.
Kane, 1998 defined Six-Sigma as a paradigm shift from correcting defective
products to improving the process.
Harry, Schroeder, 2000 defined Six-Sigma as a method that utilizes extremely
rigorous data and statistical gathering to point toward the error and elimination
point.
Wyper, B., Harrison A., 2000 defined Six-Sigma as a logical, and methodological,
approach to achieving continuous improvement in any critical areas of business.
In conclusion, Six-Sigma is a highly disciplined, and statistic-based, methodology used to
achieve quality and productivity improvements. The ultimate aim of Six-Sigma is to be able
to combine two aspects; meet the customer expectations, and to be linked to positive financial
results. Six-Sigma used the statistics-based approach to improve manufacturing processes, or
product designs, instead of fixing defective, finished goods.
Sigma is a Greek letter that has been used to denote "Standard Deviation" in Statistic Process
Control (SPC) techniques2; the standard deviation is used to exhibit a deviation value from a
mean3 of Bell Curve. However, the value of Sigma in Six-Sigma methodology has been used
in terms of statistics to indicate manufacturing process performance, for example, the number
of products' defects that occurred in a manufacturing process. Six-Sigma has a defective rate
of 3.4 defects per million (Basu, 2001; Dawne, 2001). Sigma of three, four, and five, produce
DPMO rates of 66,807, 6,210 and 233. If the manufacturing process has a Six-Sigma
performance rating, it means that the process will produce 3.4 DPMO, or close to defect free
products, see appendix 1 which describes process capability and DMPO rates.
Standard deviation is a set of data, which was deviated from the average value for a group of numericalobservations (Six-Sigma Academy, 2000).
2 Statistic Process Control is a monitoring system using statistical techniques to present the process performanceand to control deviation of the process (Six-Sigma Academy, 2000).3 Mean value is an average value for a group of numerical observations (Six-Sigma Academy, 2000).
5
Six Sigma Methodology Evolution
Productivity improvement cannot be separated from the manufacturing world. Although
many firms are focusing primarily on the quality initiative, which aims to meet the customer's
expectations, in reality it is difficult to form a definitive boundary between quality and
productivity. Some authors urged that quality could be a cost increaser, and not just a cost
reducer. In the meantime, Japanese manufacturing is globally accepted for having high
quality products, and high productivity levels. Along with the success of Japanese
manufacturing in the past 20-30 years, Kochan, 1998; Aeppel, 1999; Lebow, 1999; Comn,
Mathaisal, 2000; Hasek, 2000; Thilmany, 2000; Creswell, 2001, Dawson, 2001 claimed that
there are three well known manufacturing philosophies; TQM, Lean Manufacturing, and
Kaizen, and that they are the keys to the successfulness of those Japanese firms. Although
American companies try to learn, and try to adopt, some of the mentioned philosophies into
their organizations, there is not much support for American products to compete with
Japanese products (Bauelas, Antony, 2000). Collin, 1998; Murphy, 1998 cited in their study
that during the 1980's, America's products claim about 35,000 to 50,000 Defect Per Million
Opportunity, which is far behind the Japanese products' quality standard.
Deshpande, 1998 cited the similarities of SPC and Six-Sigma methodology in improving
quality and productivity. During the '60s and 70s, statistical process control (SPC) concepts
helped improve the quality, productivity, and competitiveness of discrete parts-manufacturing
processes and non-manufacturing enterprises. These concepts were later adopted in the
process industries. The arrival of Six- Sigma, a concept also developed in the discrete parts-
manufacturing environment in the '80s, was aimed at producing virtually all products that are
defect free.
Harry, 1994; Wyper, Harrison, 2000; Dawne, 2001 cited that Six-Sigma was developed
during the 1980's. The concept of Six-Sigma was started when Bill Smith, an engineer of
Motorola, combined complicated statistical methods with Quality Philosophy. At that time,
Quality Philosophy was an almost abstract concept, which made it difficult to measure its
success (Basu, 2001). Six-Sigma methodology is different from other Quality philosophies in
that Six-Sigma measures its success by measuring the direct impact on financial results. Its
successes can be reflected in the bottom line of the company's performance. Thereafter, Six-
Sigma was registered as a trademark of Motorola. Six-Sigma led Motorola to win the
6
Malcolm Baldrige Award4 in 1988 (Hendericks and Kelbaugh, 1998). Although the Motorola
Company originated Six Sigma, it had become well known, and was widely accepted, when
General Electric Co. (GE) applied Six-Sigma in a company during the 1990's (Basu, 2001;
Traylor, Keefe, Ettinger, Slaterbeck, 2002).
Six-Sigma Methodology
Six-Sigma Methodology consists of 5 phases; Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve andControl (DMAIC). The details of purpose and the out come of each step are as follows;
DEFINE:
The purpose of the Define Phase is to further refine the Six-Sigma project team's
understanding of the problem. In addition, the project team will use the define phase to get
organized, determine roles and responsibilities of all participants, establish goals and
milestones, and review all process steps (Six Sigma Academy, 2000). The project selection
has to prioritize which existing process, will have top priority for improvement, and that the
selected project will enable maximum leverage and customer satisfaction (Wyper, B.,
Harrison A., 2000). This is much the same as McClenahen, J., 2002; Wyper, B., Harrison A.,
2000 mentioned, which related to appropriate selection of projects, problem definition, and
defining the metrics with their baseline and entitlement (optimal) levels.
MEASURE:
The purpose of the Measure phase is to establish techniques for collecting data about current
performance (Six Sigma Academy, 2000), as well as to measure the capacity of the current
process (Wyper, B., Harrison A., 2000), then highlight improvement project opportunities.
Upon completing the measure phase (Six Sigma Academy, 2000), project teams will have a:
Plan for collecting data that specifies the data type and collection technique.
Validated measurement system that ensures accuracy and consistency.
Sufficient sample of data for analysis.
Set of preliminary analysis results that provide project direction.
The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award was created by Public Law 100-107, signed into law on August20, 1987. The Award Program, responsive to the purposes of Public Law 100-107, led to the creation of a newpublic-private partnership. Principal support for the program comes from the Foundation for the MalcolmBaldrige National Quality Award, established in 1988 (www.quality.nist.gov/Improvement_Act.htm).
7
Baseline measurement5 of current performance.
This is similar to other problem solving techniques. Before starting any improvement actions,
we must know where we are now, and what we should do next. In Six-Sigma methodology,
the current performance has to be measured, and recorded, by the project team. The data
collecting in this phase can be easily used to compare the process performance before, and
after, implementation. This method is an excellent way to measure the success of
improvement actions. Therefore, Six-Sigma could not be an abstract process but would have
tangible results.
ANALYZE:
The main purpose of the Analyze phase is the preliminary data analysis to document current
performance (baseline process capability), and to begin identifying root causes of defects, and
their impact on the final product (McClenahen, J., 2002). The Analyze Phase thus allows the
project team to further target improvement opportunities by taking a close look at the
collected data (Six Sigma Academy, 2000).
Upon completion of the analyze phase (Six Sigma Academy, 2000), project team members
should be able to answer:
What was the approach utilized to analyze the data?
What was the improvement opportunity?
What are the roots causes contributing to the improvement opportunity?
How was the data analyzed to identify sources of variation?
Did the analysis result in any changes to the problem statement or scope?
The way to solve the problem is to determine what the root causes are, and they should not be
considered based solely on the symptoms. One good thing about Six-Sigma methodology is
that it focuses on process improvement rather than on a fixing the finished product concept.
The process has to be able to produce a defect free product. This is a more proactive
approach when compared to the previous quality assurance inspection concept.
IMPROVE:
The purpose of the Improve Phase (Six Sigma Academy, 2000) is to:
In Six Sigma methodology, baseline measurement is validated measurement database before improving (Six-Sigma Academy, 2000).
8
Generate Ideas
Design, Pilot, and Implement improvements
Validate Improvements
Improve--determine how to intervene in the process to significantly reduce the defect levels.
Several rounds of improvements may be required. Recently, special emphasis has been given
to reducing variability (McClenahen, J., 2002).
As an outcome of the Analyze Phase, Six-Sigma project team members should have a strong
understanding of the factors impacting their project, including:
Key Process Input Variables (KPIV) the vital few "Xs" that impact the "Y"6.
Sources of Variation where the greatest degree of variation exists.
Even though, in this phase, there will be a lot of statistical tools being used, Six-Sigma also
uses a working team; brainstorming to seek problem solving actions. It is similar to the
Quality Control Circle (QCC) in the Japanese approach, or small group activity in Kaizen, but
in Six-Sigma it focuses on the facts (data), rather than using people's feelings, or common
sense, for their decision-making.
CONTROL:
The purpose of the Control Phase (Six Sigma Academy, 2000) is to institutionalize
process/product improvements, and monitor ongoing performance. Following the Improve
Phase, the Project Team needs to transition control of the process back to the Process Owner.
Performance parameters
Corrective measures
Referring to McClenahen, 2002; Control, once the desired improvements have been made, put
a system into place to ensure the improvements are sustained, even though significant
resources may no longer be focused on the problem.
6 A fundamental formula used in 6-Sigma is that "Y" is a function of "X."Y = (f) X, in mathematical terminology, "Y" is the dependent variable while "X" is the independent variable.Expressed in another way, "Y" is an output resulting from a number of inputs or "Xs."
9
Six-Sigma Organizational Infrastructure
As mentioned earlier, Six-Sigma methodology is project driven, and a highly structured
program. In Motorola, the Six-Sigma pioneer, the project leader was called "Black-Belt"
(Henderson, K., Evans, J., 2000; Ingle, Roe, 2001; Klefsjo, B., Wiklund, H., Edgeman, R.,
2001). The belt color was introduced to define the responsibility, and authority, of the Six-
Sigma project team members. Many companies who are using Six-Sigma methodology also
adopted the belt color to identify their people in the project team (Ingle, Row, 2001). There
are three levels in the classification;
Green Belt:
At Motorola Green Belt (GB) was trained, and had experience in using, Six-Sigma
tools and techniques. Green Belts are not required to have the same level of
experience in the use of statistics or leadership skills.
GE has a similar skill set to a black belt, and assists in the completion of black belt
projects.
Black Belt:
At Motorola Black Belt (BB) is a specialist in the use of Six Sigma problem solving,
prevention tools, and techniques (usually, but not necessarily, statistical or numerical).
BB has extensive experience in the use of tools suitable to the area of business in which
they are employed. They also have leadership, and team-building skills. They are well
trained both in Six-Sigma's tools, and project management and leadership. BB has to run
the project at the beginning, and then transfer the project to process owners after project
completion.
Master black belt:
At Motorola Master Black Belt (MBB) has practiced as a black belt for at least five
years. They will be a full-time practitioner in Six Sigma tools, and a mentor to at least
five successful black belt candidates. A master black belt needs the recommendation of
upper management from within their own, as well as one other Motorola business unit.
10
4. Project Champion
The Project Champion is a managerial level project leader who does the coaching. Project
champions are fully trained business leaders who promote and lead the deployment of Six
Sigma in a significant area of the business (Henderson, Evans, 2000) including project
selection, project review and project closing approval.
The Key Success Factors of Achieving Six-Sigma Implementation
After review of the literature from research reports there are 9 critical key success factors
found;
1. Top Management Involvement and Commitment
Studies reviewed reported that the most important key factor for its success in implementing
Six-Sigma was its management commitment, and involvement in all steps (Henderson, Evans,
2000; Banuelas, Antony, 2002). The initiative is driven from the highest level. Although top
management involvement, and commitment, is also important for other philosophies such as
Total Quality Management (TQM), the difference is that Six-Sigma demands more
management in every step or breakthrough management. For example, Jack Welch, GE's
CEO, has strongly influenced, and been the driving force in restructuring the business
organization. This restructuring has changed the culture of GE, and also changed the attitude
of all employees towards Six-Sigma (Welch, 1996). The other CEO's of successful
companies, such as Bob Galvin, Motorola and Larry Bossidy, AlliedSignal for instance, have
done the same things. Six-Sigma is a huge resources commitment, thus top management
commitment is very important to its success. For instance, to be a part of Six-Sigma
implementation from GE's case study, Henderson, Evans, 2000 reported that top management
has been doing the following;
Participate in the Six-Sigma training wave, speaking and answering questions for the
trainees;
Making site visits at the manufacturing and call-taking operations to observe first-
hand the degree to which Six-Sigma is ingrained in the culture; and
Monitoring Six-Sigma project progress weekly through summary reports from the
tracking database and monthly reviews with the master black belt team.
11
Breakthrough management characteristics
Henderson, Evans, 2000; Dawne, 2001; Klefsjo, Wiklund, Edgeman, 2001; McClenahen,
2002 cited that the success of Six-Sigma's project depends on the management direction in
managing resources allocation, and project selection. In Six-Sigma, the Project Champion, a
title of project control; management level, who works as a manager for the Black belt or
project leader is the one who selects a project for Black belts by mainly considering cost
saving, or customer satisfaction. In addition, the Project Champion also follows up,
evaluates, and approves, the closure of a project. The success of Six-Sigma implementation
depends upon its methodology, which needs to focus all projects in a narrow scope,
effectively and efficiently within a short period of time. It could be claimed that top
management directly controlled the activities in each step, resulting in breakthrough
management characteristics. It is in direct contrast with the Japanese way; bottom up
management. Many Japanese Quality or Productivity improvement approaches such as Total
Quality Management, or Total Productive Maintenance, involve all people in the organization
for its activities (Pegels, 1994; Ljungberg, 1998). Many good ideas came from the floor level
that worked together as a team, or on an individual basis, through the Japanese suggestion
activity (Masaaki, 1997).
Herbig, Jacobs, 1996 cited in their study report that the US companies seem to be better able
to capitalize on opportunities derived from a top-down management approach. American
management style is directed from top to bottom, and according to Smith, Carson, Alexander,
1984 cited that the organization results are significantly impacted by the leadership style.
American culture is high individualism; individual freedom (Hofstede, 1980; Herbig, Jacobs,
1996). The American's could claim that their culture makes it difficult to work as a team, or
bottom up management style, which the Japanese prefer. Americans are more likely to
express their affective states as opposed to suppressing them for group consideration (Triandis
et al., 1988). Thus, the normative forces reflect an individualistic bias that may not be
characteristic of collectivist cultures. The leaders, or managers, are strongly needed in
leadership to drive the team achieving the common objectives.
Communication
Although Six-Sigma methodology only impacts some working processes, or working team's
that work in the improving area, the Six-Sigma initiatives; why, how its works and what the
benefits are, have to be communicated to the whole organization. By doing this the resistance
12
to change will be reduced. (Handerson, Evens, 2000). Banuelas, Antony, 2002 cited that to
support a smooth flow in implementation, a communication plan must integrate all employees
into becoming involved in Six-Sigma.
Training
It is necessary, for people who are involved with the project of Six-Sigma, to be trained. For
example, Black belt candidates must have knowledge on the statistical tools of Six-Sigma.
Black belts must also be trained in leadership, and project management, so that they can lead
the projects. Training should start with the senior management team and it should then be
cascaded down through the organizational hierarchy. Companies engaged in a Six-Sigma
implementation program such as Motorola, Allied Signal and General Electric, allocate to the
Master Black Belt the initial facilitation of Statistic Process Control (SPC) involving top
management; usually the process' champions, middle management; usually the process'
owners, and the implementation teams, and oftentimes the supporting functions and/or the
shop-floor operators. It is important to note that training should not just be short-term but on
a long-term basis, with regular training follow-ups and briefings (Harry, 1994).
Six-Sigma training includes the Six-Sigma process DMAIC, and project management within a
three to four week period. Project Champion also needs to be trained for a week to learn
basic statistics, how to select the project, and overview of the process steps in order to be
capable of guiding the project (Henderson, Evans, 2000). Not only were Black belts, and
working teams, trained in the utilization of Six-Sigma tools, but all employees had to be
trained in order to create a sense of ownership for each, and every one of the levels in the
organization (Banuelas, Antony, 2002).
It is no different from other quality or productivity improvement philosophies which also
requires training their people in the why, how, and also in some theoretical concepts. In Six-
Sigma methodology, however, more effort placed on training is required. It not only tells
them about the concepts, but it uses a lot of statistical tools, and problem solving techniques,
which require a lot of training for the team.
Organization infrastructure and resources allocation
Banuelas, Antony, 2002 mentioned that to be successful, Six-Sigma has to be treated as a
long-term focus. Top management has to provide enough resources to sustain the program
13
over this period of time. Responsibility, and authority, needs to be deployed in a structured
way; clear definition with specific roles and responsibilities plays an important role in
deploying Six-Sigma (Henderson, Evans, 2000). The belt color classifications have been
introduced in many successful companies, for example Master Black belt, Black belt and
Green belt (Ingle, Row, 2001). One good thing about Six-Sigma is that resources can be
allocated directly to the problem areas requiring improvement, which creates a very fast
return on investment. However, it is not only about providing enough resources, but attaining
Six-Sigma quality levels requires total commitment from every department as well as active
participation of every member of the company team.
Process Improvement
Process improvement is the concept of defect free, which does not allow a process to deviate,
and then just start correcting the defect. The concepts of Six-Sigma focus on critical areas,
building tools for designing, and finally controlling, the process to prevent deviation. Process
Improvement by controlling deviation to reduce defect is a key factor of Six-Sigma
methodology (Welch, 1996; Kane, 1998; klefsjo, Wiklund, Edgeman, 2001). To seek a new
way of working, Six-Sigma methodology used problem solving techniques; DMAIC,
although the technique is similar to PDCA; Plan, Do, Control and Action of Deming's model
(Deming, 1982), the application is different. The Six Sigma methodology is to define a
potential problem area, and then design methods and controlling points of variables, which
may cause the production process to deviate. However, tooling is used by people, and Six-
Sigma methodology uses process owner as a problem solving team (Six-Sigma academy,
2000). The success of each project is dependent upon using proper Six-Sigma tools and the
quality of each team member.
Link Six-Sigma to Human Resources Management (HRM)
Truly changing behavior over the long term requires that the Six Sigma goals be internalized
on an individual level. To this end, human resources-based actions need to be put into effect
to promote desired behavior and results (Henderson, Evans, 2000).
The education and training components of Six-Sigma fall under the control of Human
Resources Management, who plays a very important role when implementing Six-Sigma by
aiding in achieving, and sustaining, Six-Sigma methods. Human Resources Management has
to be revised with emphasis placed on how Human Resources Management can support Six-
14
Sigma in the long run. For instance, top management has to develop incentive programs,
which focus on truly changing behavior in the organization, as well as developing other
Human Resources based actions such as, management performance measuring, promotion,
and compensation. In GE's case, if someone wanted to be considered for promotion, he/she
must be green belt trained, or in green belt training (Smith, Blakeslee, 2002), that includes
senior management (Hendericks, Kelbaugh, 1998; Harry, Schroeder, 2000). Likewise, across
all GE businesses, it is corporate policy that 40 percent of each bonus given to all top
managers is now tied to that manager's Six-Sigma goals, progress and successes within his/her
organization. Additionally, along with managerial promotions, the awarding of stock options
is linked with an individual's specific Six-Sigma performance. It is also interesting to note
that before any Six-Sigma savings (any savings generated by a Six-Sigma initiative) is
credited to an individual (e.g. green belt), Jack Welch requires the black belt overseeing that
project to prove that the problems are fixed permanently (Conlin, 1998). This can be
achieved by having the project improvements implemented, practiced, and under control for a
specified time period.
8. Personal qualification
Six-Sigma is project driven from the top down to the bottom. In GE, Black belts and Master
Black belts are selected from qualified candidates. Master Black belts, and Black belt's, are
crucial to the development of Six-Sigma methodology (Ingle, Roe, 2001). Black belts, who
lead in Six-Sigma projects, need to be qualified both in strong leadership, and in Six-Sigma
tool usage. The successes of Six-Sigma projects are mostly dependent on the competency of
both Master Black belts, and Black belts. The important task of the Black belt is managing
the project to completion within the set time limit (Banuelas, Antony, 2002). Master Black
belts play a dual role as trainer, and as project approver. Although, when Six-Sigma is
deployed, training will be provided, and the qualification of Master Black belts and Black
belts could not be overlooked. They are required to have strong leadership skills, project
management skills, and statistical skills. The kind of person being selected to receive such in-
depth training has changed over the last few years. Technical knowledge is no longer a prime
consideration; management and organizational skills are becoming increasingly important
(Ingle, Row, 2001).
15
9. Tracking and follow up system
Smith, Blakeslee, 2002 cited that achieving Six-Sigma implementation requires long- term
focusing. To be a sustainable process, the organizations need a proper tracking system; the
tools for monitoring, tracking, performance evaluation, and follow-up. A computer tracking
system will be needed to do this type of evaluation. The data, or information, needs to be
accessed by all management levels as well as the working team. Providing a proper database
definitely needs to be considered. For instance, in GE's case study, GE provided a supporting
system to track its Six-Sigma performance (Henderson, Evans, 2000);
Status of project
Closing project to share best practice
Information for generating business report
On-line monitoring/coaching on the Six-Sigma tools and methodology.
Review of literature reveals that 9 key success factors are crucial to the implementation and
success of Six-Sigma in American companies but none of the many research reports
mentioned what effect cultural implications had toward the implementation.
The Importance of environment management or culture on Six-Sigma implementation.
Culture is everything people do; behaviors, beliefs, attitudes, practices of religious faith,
values, thought patterns, languages, kinesthetic or body language, and other communication
patterns (Seelye, 1987). Hofstede, 1980 is one of the most commonly cited researchers on
cultural differences in management. Hofstede defines culture as the "Software of the mind"
that guides people in their daily interactions. People carry their patterns of thinking, feeling,
and potential acting, which were learned throughout their lifetime (Hofstede, 1991).
Tse, Wong, Tan, 1988 cited that cultural differences have been explored in cognitive
constructs impacting decision-making strategies of people. Kleine and Kernan, 1991; Strauss
and Quinn, 1992 also claimed that the way people thinks varies according to their culture
parameter. Culture becomes a framework for molding organizational behavior, (Pang,
Roberts, Sutton, 1998). This difference in culture could be attributed to the fact that they each
16
utilize a different form of management characteristics, organization behavior, decision
making, philosophy, and business strategy.
The relationship of culture with other vital change requirements appear in a concept called the
rings of management (Schultz, 1994).
Figure 1 The rings of management
StrategicManagement
Process Management
Environment management or culture;
Environment management or culture cannot be ignored when introducing process
improvement and Six-Sigma methodologies into Thai organizations or others culture. Many
improvement and change strategies have failed because of the lack of understanding and
attention to Cultural issues. In the model above, the largest ring "environment / culture
management" circumscribes all the others, indicating the absolute necessity of creating the
organizational climate. If the organizational climate or culture fails to support Six-Sigma, the
other efforts will die. Environment / culture management provides focus on the human
elements that are necessary for improvement and change. Separate this human element from
the tools and methodologies and the transformation will fail to materialize. Historically,
organizational change and improvement efforts have focused primarily on structural or
technical change. These efforts, however, are often unsuccessful, because they fail to
recognize that organizational, structural and technical systems are dynamically linked with
human behavior and culture (Persico, 1992). William Scherkenbach holds the same theory
(Scherkenbach, 1991). He developed this theory during his time as Group Director of
17
EnvironmentManagement or CULTURE
Personal management
Statistical and Process Improvement Techniques at the Cadillac Group of General Motors.
He found from empirical evidence of applying change and carrying out improvements that
improvements or change should have a balance of science and philosophy. He found in most
cases of failure, typically strong science or philosophy approaches but never together. He
found both must work together in order to make each one better than they could be separately.
To emphasize the need for integration of the science and human elements further, we must
look again to the Japanese whose post war development of quality took a different route from
the West, and led to the creation of Hoshin Kanri style policy deployment, multi-functional
project - by project improvement activities and the ubiquitous quality circles movement. For
the past two decades, the quality circles movement in Japan has underpinned the participation
process in the majority of leading Japanese and other Asian organizations. Many people in
the West think that quality circle-type groups are nothing more than problem solving teams.
They are very much mistaken. The circles form the basis of an integrated quality
management system that pervades all levels of the organization with its core embedded firmly
in the highest levels of strategic thinking. The quality circle has, under the right conditions,
the potential to unleash the intrinsic motivation in individuals, changing their whole purpose
of coming to work.
Strategy management;
The 1st of the inner rings, strategy management, provides a method for deploying the
organization's strategies to every employee or department. The needs of this inner ring are
often met by deployment of the business objectives to everyone in the organization. It is an
attempt to ensure that everyone knows the 'battle plan', what the objectives are, so that
everyone pulls in the same direction.
Personal management;
The 2nd of the inner rings is personal management. This refers to the actions of individual
employees to improve their own work. This is achieved through what can be best described
as an individual level or department level goal deployment.
Process management;
The final inner ring is that of process management and Six-Sigma methodologies. This
particularly refers to the 'way of thinking,' but also the tools and techniques necessary to
improve and innovate processes, services and products i.e. six sigma methodologies. This
type of organization is committed to continual improvement, and manages its processes on
an on-going basis; rather than trying to manage the business on outputs alone. Process
18
(how things are done) is more crucial, though not more important, than results. Results are
important to any organization, but in improving them further it is more critical to understand
and act on the process that produces them (Persico, 1992).
Thai Culture
Literature review on the "Thai Culture" revealed that there are many research reports on this
topic, however only four of them are very popular. Other studies of Thai culture or Thai
characteristics always use them as their reference. To understand clearly the Thai culture in
this review of literature, the researcher will use these four popular research reports as a study
basis. These four research reports include; "Thai loose structure society", Embree, 1950 and
Culture dimension, Hofstede, 1980, Dr. Geert Hofstede conducted perhaps the most
comprehensive study of how values in the workplace are influenced by culture. From 1967 to
1973, while working at IBM as a psychologist, he collected and analyzed data from a vast
body of empirical research data over fifty countries. From those results, he developed a
model that identifies four primary dimensions to differentiate cultures. The other two
research reports are; Thai's Value, Komin, 1991, who did a 2 national wide survey and
"Thais working Culture" which was done by Paisan Kaisith, 1981.
Loose Structure
Embree, 1950 is anthropological; he came to Thailand to study Thai society. He used
observation for his research methodology. A small village in outer Bangkok named
Bangchan is the place for his data collection. During that timeframe, most of the Thai people
were farmers growing rice. Embree, 1950 concluded from the study that Thai is a "Loose
Structured" social system. The loose structured characteristics were described by Komin,
1991 as follows,
Allow considerable variations in individual behavior;
Concern less in observing reciprocal rights and duties;
Have no long-term obligation;
Have no strong sense of duty and obligation in family relations, to parents, spouses
and kindred; and
19
There is an almost determined lack of regularity, discipline, and regimentation in
Thai life.
The study of Embree, 1950 was referred to, or used in general, for Thai culture studies.
However, Embree' study looks at the Thai social system more than 50 years ago. Times are
changing, Thai's have moved from a purely agricultural society to an industrial society. It is
doubtful that his study is still considered valid. The study of Embree, 1950 looks at Thai
culture in the sense of structures view; it is not clear enough to see Thai characteristics in
detail.
Hofstede's Culture Dimension
Literature review revealed that Hofstede's culture dimensions (Hofstede, 1980) were widely
accepted. Many of the research reports studied were about cooperative culture, or related
culture issues, and always referred to his dimensions. The four Hofstede's culture dimensions
are as follows;
Individualism and Collectivism dimension;
Individualism culture, which emphasizes the importance of individual identity needs and
rights over group identity needs and rights. Individuals are concerned primarily with their
own interests. Individualistic cultures place a high importance on the "Self' (Hofstede, 1980).
Thai culture was classified as a highly collective culture. Collectivism, or collective culture,
emphasizes the importance of the group rights over individual rights and in-group orientation
over individual orientation (Hofstede, 1980). A collective culture promotes relational
interdependent, in-group harmony, and in-group collaborative spirit, a sense of belonging,
warm relationship with others, and affiliation with others to be important among collectivistic
cultures (Singhapakdi, V itell, Leelakulthanit, 1994).
Power distance dimension;
Power distance is the extent to which the members of a society accept that power in
institutions and organizations is distributed unequally (Morakul, S., Wu, F., 2001). In low
20
power distance societies, people strive for equalization of power, and they do not accept
strong status differences even when power is unequal. Hierarchy, to the extent it is accepted,
comes from the position, not the inherent status of the person in the position. For example,
the American culture was classified very low in power distance, so American culture believes
in equality of relationship and attitude between Manager and staff (Noypayak, Speece, 1998).
Meanwhile, the Thai culture is very high in power distance (Table 1); the sense of position
and hierarchy remains very strong in Thai companies (Noypayak, Speece, 1998.). Thai's are
more likely to accept inequality in power and authority (Singhapakdi, Vitell, Leelakulthanit,
1994, Noypayak, Speece, 1998).
Uncertainty avoidance dimension;
In cultures with a high degree of uncertainty avoidance, there is a low cultural tolerance for
ambiguity and non-conformity. In terms of uncertainty avoidance culture, there is a tendency
to be less emotional, more excepting of personal risk, as well as more tolerant (Singhapakdi,
Vitell, Leelakulthanit, 1994). Americans are weaker or lower ranked, when compared to
Thai's from the uncertainty avoidance dimension. Americans are more likely to express their
affective states as opposed to suppressing them for group consideration (Triandis, Bontempo,
1988). American's also tend to be more accepting of risks, more tolerant and less emotional
(Singhapakdi, Vitell, Leelakulthanit, 1994). This is in direct contrast with Thai's, who are
strongly socialized to conform to group norms, traditions, rules and regulations (Hallinger,
Kantamara, 2001). Thai's also tend to be more emotional, security seeking and intolerant
(Singhapakdi, Vitell, Leelakulthanit, 1994).
Femininity and Masculinity dimension;
The fourth dimension of Hofstede's framework contrasts femininity and masculinity.
Masculinity-femininity is used to distinguish between cultures that are oriented toward
competition, achievement, assertiveness, and material success. Referring to Hofstede's study
Thai's are much more oriented toward Feminine values. The Thai population places great
emphasis on living and working in a pleasurable atmosphere as well as on fostering a strong
spirit of community long-term orientation (Noypayak, Speece, 1998; Hallinger, Kantamara,
2001).
21
Table 1 Hofstede's dimension, Thailand and USA comparison7.
Thai's characteristics, in the sense of Hofstede' culture dimension, can be concluded as
follows;
Thai's promote relational interdependent, in-group harmony, and in-group
collaborative spirit, sense of belonging, warm relationship with others, and
affiliation with others.
Thai's are more likely to accept inequality in power and authority of individual.
Thai's are strongly socialized to conform to group norms, traditions, rules and
regulations and Thai's are found to be more emotional, security seeking and
intolerant.
Thai's place great emphasis on living and working in a pleasurable atmosphere and
on fostering a strong spirit of community long-term orientation.
7 Note: Ranks on four dimensions are among 50 countries and three multi-country regions. The long-termorientation dimension is based on data from 20 countries.
22
Dimension USA
Score
USA
Rank
Thailand
Score
Thailand
Rank
Thailand compare to USA
Individualism 91 1 39-41 20 Thailand is much more
collectivist
Power distance 40 38 64 21-23 Thailand has high power distance
Uncertainty
avoidance
46 43 64 30 Thailand fairly comfortable with
uncertainty, but less than USA
Masculinity 62 15 34 44 Thailand much more oriented
toward Feminine values
Thai People Values and Behavioral Patterns
Komin, 1991 did the research study on " Psychology of the Thai people: Values and
behavioral patterns". Komin used survey as his research methodology and to rigor research
data; Komin conducted a nationwide survey for data collection two different times. Komin,
1991 concluded that Thai's have a National Character in the nine value clusters. Komin,
1991 also cited that culture, as the end product of a society, generally refers to the total
patterns of values, ideal, beliefs, customs, practice, techniques, institutions, objects and
artifacts, which make a society distinctive.
Another Thai culture research study that has to be mentioned is "the working culture of Thai
people" which was studied by, Paisan Kaisith, 1981. The research finding almost supported
completely the "Thai's values and behavioral patterns", Komin, 1991. Kaisith, 1981 used
secondary data review and interview as the research methodology.
Nine values, Komin, 1991 can be summarized as follows;
1. Ego Orientation
This is in direct contrast to Hofstede's culture dimension that claimed Thai culture was ranked
as collectivism. Komin, 1991 argued that Thai culture is not collectivism but Thai culture
could be claimed as individualism. Thai's are characterized by the highest ego value of being
Independent, being oneself with a very high value of self-esteem. Thai people have a big ego,
a deep sense of independence, pride and dignity. They cannot tolerate any violation of the
"Ego" self Despite their cool and calm front, they can be easily provoked to strong
emotional reactions, if the "Self' or anybody close to the "Self' like one's own mother is
insulted. It is supported by Kaisith, 1981 who cited that most Thai people have these values
preferring to work individually, self-admiring, with less rules and regulations. Thai's are less
disciplinary of working and also aim to work where they can get benefits for themselves.
They don't care about the common objective.
This ego orientation is the root value underlying various key values of Thai's, such as Face-
Saving, Criticisms avoidance, and the Kreng Jai attitude, which roughly means "Feeling
considerate for another person, not wanting to impose or cause another person trouble, or hurt
his/her feelings (Komin, 1991)".
23
"Face-Saving" value
Thai's give high importance to "Ego Orientation" whenever there is any problem to be solved
that would directly, or indirectly, involve people. The first criterion to be considered is saving
the face or the ego of all persons involved.
"Criticism-Avoidance" Value
Komin, 1991 cited that Thai's avoid criticizing; it is not only to people who have higher status
or higher rank but also for their peers. For instance, in many academic conferences or
seminars, it is difficult to find heated debates, arguments, or strong criticisms. They always
avoid criticizing; however, if that is unavoidable, they will do so by indirect criticism; without
mention or reference to any one specific person.
"Considerate KRENG JAI" value
Kreng-Jai is a Thai word which means "to be considerate, to feel reluctant to impose upon
another person, to take another person's feeling (and ego) into account or to take every
measure not to cause discomfort or inconvenience for another person". Thai's know how far
he should go in displaying the degree of Kreng-Jai in reference to persons, different degrees
of familiarity, and different situations, Komin, 1991.
Grateful Relationship Orientation
Reciprocity of kindness, particularly the value of being Grateful is a highly valued
characteristic trait in Thai Society. The Thai's have been socialized to value this Grateful
(Katanyu) quality in a person. The Bunkhun relationship is thus based on the value of
gratitude. And Bunkhun must be returned, often on a continuous basis and in a variety of
ways, because Bunlchun should not, and can't be, measured quantitatively in material terms.
Smooth Interpersonal Relationship Orientation
Komin, 1991 describes this relationship "This orientation is characterized by the preference
for a non-assertive, polite and humble type of personality, as well as the preference for
relaxed, and pleasant interaction which accounts for the "smiling" and Friendly" aspects of
the Thai people." Thai cognition of social interaction; Thai value of "Caring and
Considerate" is surface smooth and pleasant interpersonal interactions. This is a value that
does not appear on the American value list.
Flexibility and Adjustment Orientation
24
Thai's have a high flexibility; Thai's can adjust or respond to situations and opportunities. It
is essential to the "social smoothing" value. From the survey, this item got very high scores
from various respondents (Komin, 1991). Flexibility, and adjustment orientation value that
created Thai people's working behavior, was not a planned system, but a result of corrective
actions for problem solving more than preventive actions and acceptance of the problem by
adapting themselves to situations instead of killing the root causes (Kaisith, 1981).
Religion-Psychological Orientation
More than 90% of Thai's believe in Buddhism religion. The results of Buddhist teaching;
Thai's generally believe in the unequal; for example the word "Bun Wassana"; people are
born with unequal results of predestined goodness (or good karma). The Thai always use this
concept in situations to attribute to someone else's success, fortune, high status, promotion or
having a good family. Thai's also believe in things, which occur in their life depending on
their karma and it cannot be changed. This belief created Thai people's characteristics to be
more accepting of the problem and not to seek a new method of working, new innovations
and etc (Kai sith, 1981).
Education and Competence Orientation
Komin, 1991 describe value of "Education and Competence Orientation" that Education has
been perceived more than as a "means" of climbing up the social ladder in terms of higher
prestige and higher salary pay than as an end value itself. This is also related to the low task-
achievement value.
Interdependence Orientation
This value orientation reflects more of community collaboration spirits, and in a sense the
value of co-existence and interdependence (Komin, 1991). Wannaprasert, 1982 also cited he
found that more social activities were oriented traditions such as marriage, circumcision rite,
and Mohammed's birthday, entering a monkshood ceremony.
Fun and Pleasure Orientation
Thailand has been known as "The Land of smiles", this sentence is always used by foreigners
in reference to Thailand. Included in this reference is that Thai's behavior is very easy going,
enjoying the everyday routine pleasures of life with a happy carelessness, not letting troubles
touch them easily, viewing life as something to be enjoyed, not endured and would not do
anything that is not fun "Sanuk"; to have fun, to enjoy oneself and have a good time, (Komin),
25
1991. Kaisith, 1981 research report also supported the reference that most Thai workers have
a concept of "Fun" and "Work" with the activities being combined. If work is without fun,
Thai workers will seek others jobs.
9. Achievement-Task Orientation
Komin, 1991 cited that this orientation is characterized by the achievement motivation need
emphasizing internal drive towards achievement through hard work. The result of the
research showed very low scores on the achievement value of being ambitious and hard
working to attain one's goal. Thai people ranked maintaining good relationships as more
important than work. This is in direct contrast with American scores. The same with
Hostede's culture dimension; Thai's have a culture called "Feminine Values" which
characterized less toward competition, achievement, assertiveness, and material success.
Kaisith, 1981's research report also supported this theory, he cited that most Thai workers
have a lack of achievement-task orientation. Thai workers don't like to work in tough jobs
that are too challenging. Thai workers also don't like to work at a job that requires high
responsibility or high risk. This value reflects on the Thai worker seeking a job.
Thai Characteristics Conclusion
After review of many literatures we can conclude that Thai's culture, or Thai's characteristics,
are as follows;
Smooth Interpersonal Relationship Orientation culture; This orientation is
characterized by the preference for a non-assertive, polite and humble type of
personality, as well as the preference for relaxed, and pleasant interaction which
accounts for the "smiling" and Friendly" aspects of the Thai people."
Thai's are characterized as being self-admiring. They would like to work in an
individual manner so they can do what they want and also that job or organization
should be less controlled and not adhere strictly to the rules. Thai's are
characterized as having no work discipline and claimed to be less efficient when
working in a team.
26
Thai people characteristics are not straightforward, ambitious and aggressive
personalities similar to the western countries, although highly capable. They are not
tolerant and are hardly ever successful. However, if management approaches with
"Soft" and "Polite" it will often guarantee cooperation (Komin, 1991).
Thai's value "Face Saving"; Thai's always use soft approaches or indirect ways to
solve their problems. If the case concerns individuals Thai's do not like to strike
hard at the point.
Most Thai people are characterized as having the "Criticize Avoidance" value. They
try to avoid conflict. They will keep quiet, make no comments, or will not debate
when working in teams as a result of "Grateful Relationship Orientation" and
"Smooth Interpersonal Relationship Orientation" values.
Most Thai's are more flexible with good responsiveness to the situation.
Most Thai people believe that things are difficult to change. The result is less
innovative thinking and fewer corporation changes.
Thai's are characterized as having the "Inter-dependence" value resulting in the
desire to see a return when they make any contribution or actions.
Thai Culture Implication to Six-Sigma implementation
As mentioned earlier, literature revealed that the key success factors in implementing Six-
Sigma consist of 9 factors.
Top management involvement and commitment
Breakthrough management characteristics
Communication
Training
Organization infrastructure and resources allocation
Process Improvement.
Link Six-Sigma to Human Resources Management27
Personal Qualification
Tracking and follow up system
Culture also serves as a framework for shaping and guiding the thoughts, the actions, and
practices as well as the creativity of its members. It is transmitted, learned and shared.
Culture or people characteristics are a pattern of people behavior and performance. It made
quite clear the fact that Thai's and American's vastly differ in culture. The ways used for
successful implementation of Six-Sigma in the US might not be the same, or be successful, in
Thailand. The question is "What implications does the Thai culture have on Six-Sigma
implementation."
Management Characteristics and Management Approach
Top management is the most influenced by the successful implementation of Six-Sigma. It
not only requires involvement and strong commitment from top management as found in
literature review, but also includes a proper management approach. Top down and
breakthrough management approach is a key for successful implementation. Each Six-Sigma
Project must directly improve the bottom line financial results. From a managerial point of
view, Six-Sigma focuses on "End" more than "Mean" by breakthrough management
approach. This management approach is called "Result Oriented". Close follow up and
monitoring and aggressive drive force is considered normal practice for a "Result Oriented"
approach resulting in strong working pressure for all concerned employees.
Literature review reveals that Thai people are not characterized with straightforward,
ambitious, and aggressive personalities. They are not tolerant and are hardly ever successful.
Thai workers prefer management approaches that are "Soft" and "Polite" (Kaisith, 1981;
Komin, 1991). It is a question of whether the aggressive approach manner as used in Six-
Sigma breakthrough management can be used in the Thai working environment or not?
Thai workers also have a concept of "Fun" and "Work" in combination (Kaisith, 1981;
Komin, 1991). Thai's always focus on activity or something called "Activity based"
management aimed at getting support from there employees. This culture characteristic
allows most of the Thai workforce to focus more on activities rather than results. Again, will
close follow up and monitoring and aggressive drive force from top management as used in
"Result orientation" approach be usable for Thai workers or not?
28
Process Improvement
Process management is radically different from other approaches to management. It is often
counter intuitive, demanding a totally new way of thinking for those involved. As opposed to
performance management, which focuses on efforts to motivate employees, process
management looks at controlling the process and not solely at controlling employees. Process
management regards the entire organization as one system that is composed of a number of
processes, in which the human element is only one of several factors affecting the outcome.
Only by continually improving all critical processes can the organization continue to prosper.
A manufacturing organization is a system composed of vast numbers of processes and means
a shift to a more cross-functional view of the organization. In this cross functional view it is
important to look at the major processes as they cross departmental boundaries. Recruitment,
budgeting and purchasing, for example, are processes that are usually the primary
responsibility of a specific department, yet they often involve and affect people from several
departments. A process view shows the need for co-ordination and co-operative management
and communication. It also entails defining the process owner to establish accountability for
process development; defining and monitoring critical processes, quality measures, and
customer requirements.
Six-Sigma methodology is aimed at improving the process that can create defect
opportunities. Manufacturing process improvement, in the sense of Six-Sigma methodology,
is that the working team must seek out where, and what, factors of the process or input can be
deviated resulting in defect. Once these areas are localized, the working team must then try to
determine ways in which to improve and then control that process. Essentially this requires
the Six-Sigma project team to utilize "Out Box Thinking" to seek new ways, or new methods,
of working. Concerned persons such as process owners or working teams have to open their
minds and be ready to embrace change. However, Thai's culture is in direct contrast with this
concept. Regarding the study of Thai culture, most Thai people believe that it is too difficult
to change that which has always been considered acceptable as Religion-Psychical
Orientation of Thai's value. As earlier mentioned, more than 90% of Thai's believe in
Buddhism religion. The results of Buddhist teaching, Thai's believe in things, which occur in
their life, are dependent on their karma and cannot be changed. Thai's are considered to be
more flexible with a good responsiveness to any given situation (Komin, 1991). Therefore,
when something happens, or goes wrong in any given situation, instead of trying to solve the
29
problem, they prefer to adapt themselves to the situation instead of making changes. The
result is less innovative thinking and fewer corporate changes. This particular aspect of the
Thai culture could be an obstacle to successful implementation of Six-Sigma in terms of
"Outbox Thinking" or "Changing" environment.
Team Work
Six-Sigma projects require all work to be performed as a team. Six-Sigma methodology has 5
phases; to "Define" where the problem area is and what the problem is; "Measure" is to
collect all concerned data; "Analyze" the collected data; "Improve" seeking for improvement;
and "Control" last phase to keep maintained (details see appendix 2). Teamwork is strongly
needed for all Six-Sigma projects. The best solution to any problem always comes from a
variety of knowledgeable opinions; diversity in individual experience or individual
competency. Brain storming and open discussion is also a key word in "Team Work". Once
the best solution is selected, members in the team need to put forth great effort to complete
those tasks. This concept is also in direct contrast with Thai's culture. Thai's are
characterized as being less efficient when working in teams. Most Thai people have also been
characterized as having the "Criticize Avoidance" value and "Smooth Interpersonal
Relationship Orientation" (Komin, 1991). These culture characteristics, in essence, identify
most Thai's as a conflict avoidance culture who do not want to confront each other even if
they disagree. When they are in a group of working, they will keep quiet, make no
comments, and will not debate to defend their position. The consequence of these culture or
value patterns is that Thai's are claimed to be less effective and efficient when working as a
team.
Link Six-Sigma to Human Resources Management
In many successful cases of American companies, Six-Sigma was linked to Human Resources
Management. For instance, linkage with promotion and recognition system; anyone who
would like to get a promotion must be involved in a Six-Sigma project or must be certified as
a Black belt. Another practice is a recognition system, stock options are provided to
Champions and Black belts who are involved in Six-Sigma implementation. However, Thai's
culture gives importance to seniority by utilizing only a promotion called "Seniority Based
Promotion" (McCampbell, Jongpipitporn, Umar, Ungaree, 1999).
30
Moreover, recognition systems used in successful US manufacturers found that promotion or
recognition is done individually, for the key person only; Champion or Black belt. Thai's
culture was characterized as having an "inter-dependence" value (Komin, 1991). Inter-
dependence value in the Thai culture means that interactions between, or among, Thai people
is of a give and take nature. Even though Thai's will give something to others, it does not
mean they will not demand something in return. However, it is normal in the Thai culture
that the one who takes will return the gift some way or another. In the case of Six-Sigma
implementation, if recognition was provided only for certain key personnel, while workers
who participated and contributed to the team did not receive any benefits, it would only result
in creating trouble instead of encouraging Thai workers to support this implementation.
31
Conclusion
The opportunity for Thai organizations is therefore to find the link between their current
cultural approaches to achieve of targets to successful six sigma implementation and to create
a harmony between participation, employee satisfaction and improvement to the bottom line
performance of the business whilst avoiding heavy handed results orientated management
style. However many Thai manufacturers embarked on this methodology to their organization
and claim to have been successful in Six-Sigma implementation. The question for the
successful companies is "how those companies are practicing or managing Six-Sigma in the
Thai environment."
Literature review found that there are 9 key success factors in implementing Six-Sigma in
successful American companies;
I. Top management involvement and commitment
Breakthrough management characteristics
Communication
Training
Organization infrastructure and resources allocation
Process Improvement.
Link Six-Sigma to Human Resources Management
Personal Qualification
Tracking and follow up system
However Thai's and American's have very different cultures that more or less indicate a
successful Six-Sigma implementation. Thai culture was studied, then the Thai culture and the
9 keys success factors were analyzed. Thai culture could claim that its culture did have
implications in the successful implementation of Six-Sigma as follows;
Can Breakthrough methodology and Result orientation in Six-Sigma methodology be
used with Thai people or Thai Manufacturing?
Can "Out Box" thinking concept and "Changing" environment be implemented in
Thai's culture?
How those companies built "Team Work" to support Six-Sigma implementation?
32
33
4. Is performance-based promotion and Individual recognition system being used with
Thai people or Thai manufacturing?
These questions will be verified in my next research. The research will be done by a series of
interviews of Thai companies, who employed Six-Sigma methodology into their
organizations. The further research will compare what the literature said of management
characteristics adaptation or culture adjustment, and actual implementation into the Thai
companies. Series interviews will be deployed as the research methodology. The
participants, five to ten companies, will be selected from a group of Thai manufacturers who
have implemented Six-Sigma for more than one year. Interviews with Top management, or
project manager, will include data collection and face-to-face interviews at the participant
sites.
Reference
Aeppel, T., 1999, "More, More, More: Rust-Belt Factory Lifts Productivity, and Staff Finds
It's No Picnic --- At Westinghouse Air Brake, Workers Trade Boredom For Tough Juggling
Act --- A Hard-Earned $1.50 Bonus" Wall Street Journal; New York; May 18, 1999, pp Al.
Antony, J., Banuelas, R., 2001, "A Strategy for Survival", Manufacturing Engineer, 80, 3,
119-121.
Antony, J., 2002, "Design for Six-Sigma: a breakthrough business improvement strategy for
achieving competitive advantage", Work Study, Vol. 15, Issue 1, 2002, p6-8.
Banuelas, R., Antony, J., 2002, "Critical Success Factors for the successful implementation of
six sigma projects in organizations", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 14, November 2, 2002, p92-
99.
Basu, R, 2001, "Six Sigma to Fit Sigma", IIE Solution, Jul 2001, Vol. 33, Issue 7, p28, 6p.
Comm, C., Mathaisal, D, 2000, "A Paradigm for Benchmarking Lean Initiatives For Quality
Improvement", Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol.7, No.2, 2000, pp 118-127,
MCB University Press, 1463-5771.
Conlin, M., 1998, "Revealed at Last: The secret of Jack Welch 's Success", Forbes, Vol. 161,
Issue 2, p 44, 1998.
Creswell, J, 2001, "America's elite factories" Fortune; New York; volume 144, Sep 3, 2001,
pp 206A-206L
Dawne, C., 2001, "Six Sigma", Industrial Management, Computer world, /5/2001, Vol. 35,
Issue 10, pp38.
Dawson, C., 2001, "Machete Time", Business Week; New York; April 9, 2001;
Deming, E., 1982, "Out of the Crisis", The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London,
England.
34
Deshpande, P.B., 1998, "Emerging Technologies and Six Sigma", Hydrocarbon Processing,
Apr, 1998, Vol. 77, Issue 4, p 55, 6p.
Embree, J.F., 1950, Thailand: A "Loose structure" social system, American Anthropologist,
1950, 52, 181-193.
Garvin, D.A., 1991, "How the Baldrige award really works", Harvard Business Review, 69, 6,
80-95.
Hahn, G., Hill. W, 1998, "The impact of Six Sigma Improvement: A Glimpse into the future
Statistics", American Statistician, Aug 1999, Vol. 53, Issue 3, p 208, 8p.
Hall, E.T. (1960). "The Silent Language of Over seas Business" Harvard Business Re view,
May- June.
Hall, E.T. (1976). Be yond Cuture. Anchor Press, New York.
Hall, E.T. & M.R. Hall (1990). Under standing Cultural Differences. In - ter cultural Press,
Yarmouth, Maine.
Hallinger, P., Kantamara, P., 2001, "Learning to lead global changes in local cultures -
Designing a computer-based simulation for Thai school leaders", Journal of Educational
Administration, Volume 39, Number 3 2001 pp. 197-220, Copyright © MCB University Press
ISSN 0957-8234.
Harry, M., 1994, "The Vision of Six Sigma of Roadmap for Breakthrough, Phoenix, AZ:
Sigma Publishing Company.
Harry, M., Schroeder, R., 2000, "Six sigma: the breakthrough management strategy
revolutionizing the world's top corporations", Currency Publishers.
Hasek, G., 2000 "Extraordinary extrusions ", Industry Week; Cleveland; Oct 16, 2000,
Volume 249, Issue 17, pp 79-80.
35
Hendericks, C, Kelbaugh, R, 1998, "Implementing Six Sigma at GE", The Journal for Quality
and Participation.
Henderson, K., Evans, J., 2000, "Successful Implementation of Six Sigma: Benchmarking
General Electric Company", Benchmarking: An international Journal, Vol. 7, No. 4, 2000, pp.
260-281, MCB University Press, 1463-5771.
Herbig, P., Jacobs, L., 1996, "Creative problem-solving styles in the USA and Japan",
International Marketing Review, Volume 13, Number 2, 1996 pp. 63-71
Copyright 0 MCB University Press ISSN 0265-1335
Hofstede, G, 1980, Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-related
Values, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.
Hofstede, G, 1991, Cultures and Organizations: Software of the mind, New York, NYM,
McGrawHill.
Ingle, S. and Roe, W. (2001), "Six Sigma black belt implementation", The TQM Magazine,
Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 273-80, ISSN 0954-478x.
Kaisith, P, 1981, "Working Culture of Thai people", Srinakarintharawirote University, HD
4904.
Kane, L., 1998, "The Quest for Six Sigma", Hydrocarbon Processing, Feb. 1998, Vo.77, Issue
2,p 15, lp.
Kanutson, T.J. 1994, "Comparison of Thai and US American cultural values; mai pen rai
versus Just do it" ABAC Journal, 14, 3, Bangkok, 1-38.
Klefsjo, B., Wiklund, H., Edgeman, R., 2001, "Six Sigma Seem As A Methodology For Total
Quality Management, Measuring Business Excellence, 5,1, 2001, pp 31-35, MCM University
Press, 1368-3047.
Kleine, R.E. III, Kernan, J.B., 1991, "Contextual influences on the meanings ascribed to
ordinary consumption objects", Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 311-24.
36
Kochan, A., 1998, "European Associate Editor for Assembly Automation" Assembly
Automation, May 29, 1998, Vol. 18, Issue 2. Pp 132-137.
Komin, S., 1991, Psychology of the Thai People: Values and Behavioral Patterns, National
Institute of Development Administration, Bangkok.
Lebow J., 1999, "The last Word on Lean Manufacturing", TIE Solutions, September 1999.
Ljungberg, 0., 1998, "Measurement of overall equipment effectiveness as a basis for TPM
activities" International Journal of Operation & Management, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 495-507,
MCB University Press.
Masaaki, I., 1997, "GEMBA KAIZEN, A Commonsense, Low-Cost Approach To
Management", Mcgraw-Hill, ISBN 0-07-031446-2.
McCampbell, A., Jongpipitporn, C., Umar, I., Ungaree, S., 1999, "Seniority-based promotion
in Thailand: it's time to change", Career Development International, Volume 4 Number 6
1999 pp. 318-320, Copyright © MCB University Press ISSN 1362-0436
McClenahen, J., 2002, "ITT's Value Champion", Industrial Week/IW, May 2002, Vol. 251,
Issue 4, p 44, 4p.
McKenna, S., 1995, "The cultural transferability of business and organizational re-
engineering: examples from South-east Asia", The TQM Magazine, Volume 07 Number 3
1995 pp. 12-16, Copyright © MCB University Press ISSN 0954-478X
Morakul, S., Wu, F., 2001, "Cultural influences on the ABC implementation in Thailand's
environment", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Volume 16 Number 2 2001 pp. 142-158,
Copyright 0 MCB University Press ISSN 0268-3946
Murphy, T., 1998, "Close enough to perfect", World's Auto World, Vol. 34, No.8, August.
Noypayak, W., Speece, M., 1998., "Tactics To Influence Subordinates Among Thai
Managers", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Volume 13, Number 5/6, 1998, pp. 343-358,
MCB University Press ISSN 0268-3946.
37
Pang, C., Roberts, D., Sutton, J., 1988, "Do Business In China The Art of War?,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management Volume 10 Number 7-1998,
pp.272-282 Copyright MCB University Press ISSN 0959-6119
Paul, L, 1999." Practice Makes Perfect", CIO Enterprise, Vol. 12, No. 7, Section2, January
15.
Pegels, C., 1994, "Total Quality Management In terms of Reported Practice", International
Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Volume 11, No. 5, 1994, pp. 6-18.
Persico, J, 1992, "The TQM Transformation: A Model for Organization Change", One Water
Street, White Plains, New York 10601, ISBN 0-527-91654-4
Pick, H.L., Van Den Brokek, P.W. Knill, D. C., Cognition: Conceptual and Methodological
Issue, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, 267- 294.
Scherkenbach, W.W., 1991, Deming's Road to continuous improvement, SPC Press.
ISBN 0-945320-10-8 Seelye, Ned H., 1987, Teaching Culture: Strategies for Intercultural
Communication. Lincolnwood, IL: National Text Book Company
Schultz, L.E, 1994, Profiles in Quality, QR., ISBN 0-527-76238-5
Seelye, Ned H., 1987, Teaching Culture: Strategies for Intercultural Communication.
Lincolnwood, IL: National Text Book Company
Singhapakdi, A., Vitell,S., Leelakulthanit, 0., 1994, "A Cross-cultural Study of Moral
Philosophies, Ethical Perceptions and Judgments: A Comparison of American and Thai
Marketers, International Marketing Review, Volume 11 Number 6 1994 pp. 65-78, Copyright
MCB University Press ISSN 0265-1335.
Six-Sigma Academy, 2000, "Six-sigma Training Materials", Six-Sigma Academy.
Smith, D., Blakeslee, J., 2002, "The New Strategy Six Sigma" T & D, 15357740, September
2002, Vol. 56, Issue 9.
38
Smith, J.E., Carson, K.P., Alexander, R.A., 1984, "Leadership: it can make a deference",
Academy of Management Journal, 27, 4, 765-76.
Strauss, C., Quinn, N., 1992, "Preliminaries to a theory of culture acquisition"
Taguchi, G., Clausing, D., 1990, "Robust Quality", Harvard Business Review, 70, 1, 126-47.
Thilmany, J., 2000, "Lean manufacturing increases production" Mechanical Engineering;
New York; Jul 2000, Volume 122, Issue 7, p16.
Traylor, S., Keefe, D., Ettinger, W., Slaterbeck, J., 2002, "Quality Pioneer", Modern
Physician, June 2002, Vol. 6, Issue 6, p12, 6p.
Triandis, H.C., Bontempo, R.et. al., 1988, "Individualism and collectivism: cross-cultural
perspectives on self-in-group relationships", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
54, 324-38.
Trompenaars, A., 1993, Riding the Waves of Culture, Economist Books, London, 1993.
Tse, D.K., Wong, J.K., Tan, C.T., 1988, "Toward some standardized cross-cultural
consumption values", Advances in Consumer Research, 15, 387-95.
Ulijn, J., Monnet, J., "Geert Hofstede, The Founder Of A Culture "SCIENCE", contribution
to the Dale Research Encyclopedia of Management (3rd edition).
Welch, J., 1996, "GE Quality 2000: A Dream with a plan", Executive Speeches, Aug/Sep
1996, Vol. 11, Issue 1, p 5, 3p.
Wyper, B., Harrison A., 2000, "Deployment of Six Sigma methodology in Human Resource
function: a case study", Total Quality Management, Jul2000, Vol. 11 Issue 4-6, p5720, 8p, 1
chart, 2 diagrams.
Yates, B., 1983, The Decline and fall of the American Automobile Industry, Empire Books,
New York, NY.
39
Appendix 1
Table 2 Six-Sigma Process Capability and DPMO
Process capability is a capability to produce product according to the specifications (Six-
Sigma Academy, 2000).
DPMO is Defect per Million Opportunity; For instance, in your manufacturing plant, you are
an automobile part maker. Your process capability is Sigma 4 that means your output is
1,000,000 units with a rejected/defect finding of 6,210 units.
40
Six-Sigma Level DPMO DPMO
C/1000 C/1 Million
0.5 Sigma 2,672 2,672,000
1 Sigma 547 547,069
2 Sigma 308.5 308,537
3 Sigma 66.8 66,807
4 Sigma 6.21 6,210
5 Sigma 0.233 233
6 Sigma 0.0034 3.4
Table of Abbreviations
BB Black Belt
CEO Chief Executive Officer
DMAIC Define, Measure, Analyzes, Improve and Control
DMPO Defect per Million Opportunity
GE General Electric Company
GB Green Belt
HRM Human Resources Management
KPIV Key Process Input Variables
MBB Master Black Belt
PDCA Plan, Do, Control and Action
QCC Quality Control Circle
SPC Statistic Process Control
TQM Total Quality Management
TPM Total Productive Maintenance
USA United States of America
41
Key success factors in implementing Six-Sigma inThailand:
Views of the companies implementing Six-Sigma
By: Mr. Naruepont Pongcharoen
Master of Public and Private Management (Bangkok Thailand), 1998
International Graduate School of ManagementDivision of Business and Enterprise
University of South Australia
Submitted on this 17 of December in the year 2005for the partial requirements of the degree of
Doctor of Business Administration
Table of Content
Page
Abstract 1
Title 2
Introduction 2
Thai Culture Implication to Six-Sigma Implementation 3
Research Questions 7
Research Methodology 7
Selection and Sample 9
Research Participants Background and Six-Sigma Implementation 9
Data Analysis 15
Conclusion 35
Limitation of This Research 38
Reference 39
Appendix 1 Interviews Questions 42
Appendix 2 Six-Sigma Methodology 44
Table 1 Adaptation to Thai's culture 37
Table of Abbreviations 47
Abstract
Literature review revealed that the Thai culture does have implications on Six-Sigma
implementation when implemented into the Thai manufacturing environment. Culture
implications that could be claimed; Can "Out Box" thinking concept and "Changing"
environment be implemented in Thai's culture?; How those companies built "Team work" to
support Six-Sigma implementation?; Is performance-based promotion and Individual
recognition system being used with Thai people or Thai manufacturing?, these questions were
revealed in review of literature. Researcher would like to study these questions further. Six
of the successful Thai factories were selected to participate in this research. Case study and
series interview was deployed as the research methodology. Semi constructive research open
end questionnaires were used for data collection. Top management, or Six-Sigma project
managers, were selected for interviewing. In regard to researcher questions and data analysis,
Thai's culture has an implication on Six-Sigma implementation in Thai manufacturing; Thai's
culture obstacles to "Result Oriented", "Team Working" and "Individual Recognition1.`4
System". However, there was no problem on 'Outbox Thinking or Changing Environment".
There are certain limitations in this research. For instance, limited sample size; the number of
factories implementing Six-Sigma in Thailand is too small and most of the participants are
American subsidized companies. Consequently, Thai companies more or less absorb their
parent companies and work in a manner that is familiar with the American culture. To
complete the research on this topic, further research needs to be done.
1
Title
"Key success factors in implementing Six-Sigma in Thailand: Views of the companies
implementing Six-Sigma".
Introduction
Six-Sigma methodology is not a new concept. An American Motorola Engineer revised it
from the Deming model, Plan, Do, Control and Actions (Deming, 1982) into a properly
structured approach which was more suitable for the American business environment. Even
though many productivity and quality improvement techniques were introduced such as
TQM, Lean Manufacturing or KAIZEN (Kochan, 1998; Aeppel, 1999; Lebow, 1999; Hasek,
2000; Comn, Mathaisal, 2000; Thilmany, 2000; Creswell, 2001, Dawson, 2001), most of the
literature reviews found that these philosophies were very successful only in Japanese
companies. However, when American companies embarked these philosophies into their
companies, a high defective rate continued to be found in their products. American products'
claim of 35,000 to 50,000 Defects Per Million Opportunity (DMPO) is still far behind
Japanese products' quality standard (Collin, 1998; Murphy, 1998).
The literature review revealed that Americans then initiated Six-Sigma's methodology into
the American business culture. It could be claimed that Six-Sigma's methodology was better
matched with American management characteristics. Thai's and American's differ in many
culture dimensions according to Hofstede, 1980 study. Literature review revealed that the
Thai's have a specific culture or characteristics pattern as studied by Komin 1991.
Specifically, Thai values and behavior reflect on the working pattern in the Thai culture. As a
result, Thai culture influences Six-Sigma implementation; Can "Breakthrough methodology"
and "Result orientation" in Six-Sigma methodology be used with Thai people or Thai
Manufacturing?, or Can "Out Box" thinking concept and "Changing" environment be
implemented in Thai's culture?, or How did those companies build "Team work" to support
Six-Sigma implementation?, or Can performance-based promotion and Individual recognition
system be used with Thai people or Thai manufacturing?
The question is, if Thai manufacturing embarked on introducing Six-Sigma to their
organizations, "How they manage, or perform, successful implementation of Six-Sigma with
Thai's manufacturing environment". This research endeavor is to study what implications
2
P.
Thai culture had on Six-Sigma Implementation and, if any implications, how those
participating companies managed them successfully. According to the number of
manufacturers implementing Six-Sigma, which is very low, research used case study, series
interviews as the research methodology.
The benefit of this research could be a learning experience and a guide for avoiding culture
clash for other Thai manufacturers who intend to implement Six-Sigma methodology into
their organizations.
Thai Culture Implication to Six-Sigma Implementation
As mentioned earlier it was revealed from literature that key success factors in implementing
Six-Sigma consisted of 9 factors.
Top management involvement and commitment
Breakthrough management characteristics
Communication
Training
Organization infrastructure and resources allocation
Process Improvement
Link Six-Sigma to Human Resources Management
Personal Qualification
Tracking and follow up system
Culture also serves as a framework for shaping and guiding the thoughts, the actions, and
practices as well as the creativity of its members. It is transmitted, learned and shared. Culture,
or people characteristics, is a pattern of people behavior and performance. It is quite clear that
Thai's and American's are vastly different in culture. The process used to be successful in
implementing Six-Sigma in US might not be the same, or as successful, in Thailand. The
question is ''What implication does Thai culture have on Six-Sigma implementation" and this
concern was addressed by the questions that have been studied in the discussion phase of
research paper one. They could be presented as follows;
3
Management Characteristics and Management Approach
Top management is the most influenced by the successful implementation of Six-Sigma. It
not only requires involvement and strong commitment from top management as found in
literature review, but also includes a proper management approach. Top down and
breakthrough management approach is a key for successful implementation. Each Six-Sigma
Project must directly improve the bottom line financial results. From a managerial point of
view, Six-Sigma focuses on "End" more than "Mean" by breakthrough management
approach. This management approach is called "Result Oriented". Close follow up and
monitoring and aggressive drive force is considered normal practice for a "Result Oriented"
approach resulting in strong working pressure for all concerned employees.
Literature review reveals that Thai people are not characterized with straightforward,
ambitious, and aggressive personalities. They are not tolerant and are hardly ever successful.
Thai workers prefer management approaches that are "Soft" and "Polite" (Kaisith, 1981;
Komin, 1991). It is a question of whether the aggressive approach manner as used in Six-
Sigma breakthrough management can be used in the Thai working environment or not?
Thai workers also have a concept of "Fun" and "Work" in combination (Kaisith, 1981;
Komin, 1991). Thai's always focus on activity or something called "Activity based"
management aimed at getting support from there employees. This culture characteristic
allows most of the Thai workforce to focus more on activities rather than results. Again, will
close follow up and monitoring and aggressive drive force from top management as used in
"Result orientation" approach be usable for Thai workers or not?
Process Improvement
Process management is radically different from other approaches to management. It is often
counter intuitive, demanding a totally new way of thinking for those involved. As opposed to
performance management, which focuses on efforts to motivate employees, process
management looks at controlling the process and not solely at controlling employees. Process
management regards the entire organization as one system that is composed of a number of
processes, in which the human element is only one of several factors affecting the outcome.
Only by continually improving all critical processes can the organization continue to prosper.
A manufacturing organization is a system composed of vast numbers of processes and means
4
a shift to a more cross-functional view of the organization. In this cross functional view it is
important to look at the major processes as they cross departmental boundaries. Recruitment,
budgeting and purchasing, for example, are processes that are usually the primary
responsibility of a specific department, yet they often involve and affect people from several
departments. A process view shows the need for co-ordination and co-operative management
and communication. It also entails defining the process owner to establish accountability for
process development; defining and monitoring critical processes, quality measures, and
customer requirements.
Six-Sigma methodology is aimed at improving the process that can create defect
opportunities. Manufacturing process improvement, in the sense of Six-Sigma methodology,
is that the working team must seek out where, and what, factors of the process or input can be
deviated resulting in defect. Once these areas are localized, the working team must then try to
determine ways in which to improve and then control that process. Essentially this requires
the Six-Sigma project team to utilize "Out Box Thinking" to seek new ways, or new methods,
of working. Concerned persons such as process owners or working teams have to open their
minds and be ready to embrace change. However, Thai's culture is in direct contrast with this
concept. Regarding the study of Thai culture, most Thai people believe that it is too difficult
to change that which has always been considered acceptable as Religion-Psychical
Orientation of Thai's value. As earlier mentioned, more than 90% of Thai's believe in
Buddhism religion. The results of Buddhist teaching, Thai's believe in things, which occur in
their life, are dependent on their karma and cannot be changed. Thai's are considered to be
more flexible with a good responsiveness to any given situation (Komin, 1991). Therefore,
when something happens, or goes wrong in any given situation, instead of trying to solve the
problem, they prefer to adapt themselves to the situation instead of making changes. The
result is less innovative thinking and fewer corporate changes. This particular aspect of the
Thai culture could be an obstacle to successful implementation of Six-Sigma in terms of
"Outbox Thinking" or "Changing" environment.
Team Work
Six-Sigma projects require all work to be performed as a team. Six-Sigma methodology has 5
phases; to "Define" where the problem area is and what the problem is; "Measure" is to
collect all concerned data; "Analyze" the collected data; "Improve" seeking for improvement;
and "Control" last phase to keep maintained (details see appendix 2). Teamwork is strongly
5
needed for all Six-Sigma projects. The best solution to any problem always comes from a
variety of knowledgeable opinions; diversity in individual experience or individual
competency. Brain storming and open discussion is also a key word in "Team Work". Once
the best solution is selected, members in the team need to put forth great effort to complete
those tasks. This concept is also in direct contrast with Thai's culture. Thai's are
characterized as being less efficient when working in teams. Most Thai people have also been
characterized as having the "Criticize Avoidance" value and "Smooth Interpersonal
Relationship Orientation" (Komin, 1991). These culture characteristics, in essence, identify
most Thai's as a conflict avoidance culture who do not want to confront each other even if
they disagree. When they are in a group of working, they will keep quiet, make no
comments, and will not debate to defend their position. The consequence of these culture or
value patterns is that Thai's are claimed to be less effective and efficient when working as a
team.
Link Six-Sigma to Human Resources Management
In many successful cases of American companies, Six-Sigma was linked to Human Resources
Management. For instance, linkage with promotion and recognition system; anyone who
would like to get a promotion must be involved in a Six-Sigma project or must be certified as
a Black belt. Another practice is a recognition system, stock options are provided to
Champions and Black belts who are involved in Six-Sigma implementation. However, Thai's
culture gives importance to seniority by utilizing only a promotion called "Seniority Based
Promotion" (McCampbell, Jongpipitporn, Umar, Ungaree, 1999).
Moreover, recognition systems used in successful US manufacturers found that promotion or
recognition is done individually, for the key person only; Champion or Black belt. Thai's
culture was characterized as having an "inter-dependence" value (Komin, 1991). Inter-
dependence value in the Thai culture means that interactions between, or among, Thai people
is of a give and take nature. Even though Thai's will give something to others, it does not
mean they will not demand something in return. However, it is normal in the Thai culture
that the one who takes will return the gift some way or another. In the case of Six-Sigma
implementation, if recognition was provided only for certain key personnel, while workers
who participated and contributed to the team did not receive any benefits, it would only result
in creating trouble instead of encouraging Thai workers to support this implementation.
6
Research Questions
Many Thai manufacturers introduced the Six-Sigma methodology into their organization and
claimed that they were successful. The question that arises regarding their successfulness is,
"how are those companies practicing." As previously mentioned, findings in review of
literature will be used as questions to complete further research on this topic. As a result of
literature review it does appear that the Thai culture influences Six-Sigma implementation. If
Thai manufacturing embarked on introducing Six-Sigma to their organizations, "How do they
manage, or perform, successful implementation of Six-Sigma with Thai's manufacturing
environment".
The research questions for this study are as follows;
Can "Breakthrough methodology' and "Result orientation" in Six-Sigma methodology
be used with Thai people or Thai Manufacturing?
Can "Out Box" thinking concept and "Changing" environment be implemented in
Thai's culture?
How did those companies build "Team work" to support Six-Sigma implementation?
Can performance-based promotion and Individual recognition system be used with
Thai people or Thai manufacturing?
Research Methodology
A key concern of this study is to obtain richer and deeper insights of Six-Sigma
implementation issues using a qualitative research method, case study; series interview. The
qualitative method is able to provide a deeper understanding (Berg, 1998) and fuller
contextual information of the phenomena studied (Yin, 1994). This research aims to study
manufacturers in Thailand and how, and why, they implement Six-Sigma methodology in
their firms. It includes steps of implementation, problem findings, key success factors and
other important issues. Six-Sigma has been introduced in Thailand just a short time ago.
7
Most of the implementing companies are subsidiaries or suppliers of American companies.
There are approximately 15, or fewer, Thai Manufacturers in Thailand employing the Six-
Sigma methodology. The inherent limitation regarding a small sample size is acknowledged.
A semi-structured interview is deployed as a research methodology. An In-depth interview is
intended to collect qualitative data rather than quantitative data to accommodate the small
sample size design. Similarities and differences in practices of 6 surveyed corporations are to
be noted. The aim of using a qualitative interview is to allow for description and evaluation
of the implementation. In-depth interviews were conducted with key personnel who are
involved with Six-Sigma implementation, as Six-Sigma Deployment Manager or Project
manager, so as to obtain data for why and how they practiced. The interviews included both
closed and open answer types of questions, see Appendix 1. The interviews also provided an
opportunity for interviewees to contribute additional information apart from specifically asked
questions. The interview process took approximately 1 hour to complete for each of the 6
firms. All concerned documents such as project results, Six-Sigma organizational charts, and
activities were selected at interviewees' sites. Before ending an interview, all collected data
was repeated to interviewees for correction or confirmation.
The method of analysis was processed as shown in the diagram below;
Research questions;
- 4 research questions ware established from paper 1; literature review
Data Collection;
- Individual interviews
Related documents from each participants
Analysis;
- What is the answer from each participant response to each question?
What is the implication of Thai culture each company found and how they
are managing?
Cross check information from literature and comparing to interview findings.
Finding and conclusion;
- What is the common practice from the participations?
What is the limitation of this research or open question for next research?
8
For confidentiality of participants, pseudonyms are used instead of organizations' names
(Organization A through F) throughout the paper. Further information of research
participant's background will be described.
Selection and Sample
This research aims to study experience learned in the manufacturing field. Participants were
selected only from manufacturing companies in Thailand, both local firms and subsidiaries of
foreign firms and they have to implementing Six-Sigma methodology more than one year.
The rationale for interviewing both local and subsidiaries of foreign firms was to determine
whether organizations' own policies or local socio-cultural environment had the most bearing
on practices and attitudes towards Six-Sigma implementation. Cultural environment is a key
success factor of implementation in the Thai business environment.
Selection and sample were done first by researcher who obtained the list of manufacturers
names, who are implementing Six-Sigma, from the Thai Productivity Institute. Thai
Productivity Institute is a non profit organization which was established to support and
promote productivity improvements for Thai manufacturing. Thai Productivity Institute has
promoted Six-Sigma methodology by supporting training for those companies interested in
implementing Six-Sigma methodology. In the list there are not more than 15 firms who are
manufacturers that are implementing Six-Sigma methodology. Then 10 manufacturers were
selected from those 15 manufacturers according to the fact that they have implemented Six-
Sigma methodology for more than one year. The selected 10 firms were invited to participate
in this research. Out of those 10 firms, only 6 firms confirmed an interest in participating in
the research with the remaining 4 firms refusing with the reasons that they are not confident
of their implementation results or did not yet have enough experience in implementation.
Research Participants Background and Six-Sigma Implementation
Company A
Company A is an American subsidy. The company has many factories located in Thailand
who employ more than 10,000 people. The manufacturer is in electronic devices
manufacturing field that needed a very high quality product and high competitiveness in terms
9
of productivity. This factory has adopted Six-Sigma since 1998 which is now more than 5
years from the starting point. However, regarding the interviewee, the major objective of
implementing Six-Sigma did not focus on product quality improvement or product defective
rate reduction which differs from the other participating Thai companies' objective and most
of the successful American company's objective. The factory has adopted its concept by
stating profit making as the objective of the company, and eventually achieving a declining
cycle time as the final result. Six-Sigma projects were not only implemented in production
lines but also in others units in the company which have any association with the project
under implementation.
The evaluation of the Six-Sigma projects' success was then based on the amount of cash
saving or hard saving; other potential savings called soft saving or avoidance cost was not
taken into consideration. The company cited that it was very successful in saving money on
average of $150,000 per project per year. Presently the company already has 20% Black belts
on their management team or 160 persons in place to help facilitate successful all ongoing
projects as well as new project implementation.
The top management executive was Thai; however, the Board of Directors was composed of
both Thai and foreigners, predominantly American.
Following the organizational structure of Six-Sigma, the company has defined a manifest
organizational structure in which it separates the line of command from the regular working
functional unit. It also states a role, authority and line of command clearly. Moreover,
colored symbols called belts are used to define authority such as;
Master Black belt is an employee who has been Black belt certified with a high degree
of experience in Six-Sigma projects and its methodology. Master Black belt's
superior position is an integral part of the Six-Sigma working unit. Master Black belt
is responsible for training and coaching the Business Champions and Black belts.
Business Champion is a representative of the management division functioning as a
manager of Black belts. The Business Champion is responsible for project selection,
project approval, and providing a recognition program to his/her Black belts.
Black belt is a Six-Sigma project leader assigned by Business Champion. Black belt
is assigned a full time working position which has a minimum term of 2 years.
10
Green belt is a process owner; most were selected from the supervisor level up. They
are not as fully trained as a Black belt. Green belt is the person responsible to
implement, as well as sustain the process after project is past.
Six-Sigma's organizational pattern and set up within the company has been influenced by the
Six-Sigma Academy, previously a consultant and trainer for the company during the initial
stage. Afterwards, the organization has carried out all activities such as training,
implementation on its own.
Company B
This is a local Thai company that is located outside Bangkok. The objective of the
management in introducing Six-Sigma to the factory was to initiate a cultural change within
the organization. It was expected to improve continuously as a breakthrough style. In 1999,
when Six-Sigma was brought into use within the organization, it was not really a desire of the
organization. This factory was a preassembly material supplier for a hard disk reading unit's
manufacturer for computers. The purchaser required the company's products to be of very
high quality and reliability. Purchasing companies specified their requirements and forced the
factory to implement Six-Sigma. The purchasing company felt that Six-Sigma would ensure
that the factory's product quality was good, as well as reliable. Interviewee claimed that since
the factory did not originate it, it was therefore, not successful at all. Later in 2001, there was
a change in management; a new Chief Executive Officer (CEO) was motivated to implement
Six-Sigma projects in the factory. Lesson learned from the past, a management representative
was hired to run the implementation and acted as the Six-Sigma project deployment manager.
Presently, the factory has carried out Six-Sigma successfully for over 4 years already.
To measure the project's success, it considered major activities from within each of 4 phases;
launch planning, implementation, institutionalizing, and sustaining. Their project was
scheduled to be completed within the year 2005. The measurement of each Six-Sigma
project's success was not yet measured by cash savings as company A did. However, the
interviewee affirmed that the amount of cash savings from each Six-Sigma project must be
measured for evaluating the projects' success in the near future.
11
The factory restarted the project by considering the organization of Six-Sigma first. The CEO
was the chairman of the Six-Sigma steering committee. Top management team had a major
role in driving the project into success. The Executive Champion was a representative of the
CEO in setting targets while Head of Departments and Sections were included in the Six-
Sigma organization. They had the same duty as Champions of Company A., which was
mentioned previously. Six-Sigma targets were deployed from the top down. Similar to
Company A., belt color was used to define the role and duty of each person in the Six-Sigma
organization such as Master Black belt, Black belt, and Green belt, which were again the
same as Company A.
Company C
Company C is an American subsidy. It is an automobile business with around 1000
employees. Foreigners, American and Japanese, managed the factory. The objective of the
management in introducing Six-Sigma to their factory was to improve customer satisfaction
by placing emphasis on product quality and waste elimination. The factory adopted Six-
Sigma since 2000, or about 4 years ago. The organizational structure of Six-Sigma had been
established. Top managements Factory President, acted as a Six-Sigma project chairman and
heads of departments are members in the Six-Sigma working team. Six-Sigma Deployment
Manager worked as head of the Six-Sigma organization and reported directly to the President.
Belt color was also used to define the role and responsibility of each person in the Six-Sigma
organization such as Master Black belt, Black belt, and Green belt, which were again the
same as Company A and B.
Measurement of Six-Sigma project's success was carried out by an independent party via a
customer satisfaction survey. To reduce factory influence or bias, an independent third party
was hired to do a customer satisfaction survey. The survey was compared with competitors in
the market by looking at a product's defect or Things that Go Wrong (TGW). This is
accomplished by after market research. The interviewer claimed that the research results
indicated the success level of Six-Sigma projects beginning with Things Go Wrong since
2000 was the starting year. This level gradually improved when compared with competitors'.
Another measurement of the project's success was the declining amount of warranty claims.
12
Company D
This company is also an American subsidy. This factory is in the consumer product
manufacturing field. There is not the same high demand of product quality that was required
in companies A, B and C. Therefore, the objective and goal in using Six-Sigma was that the
factory viewed itself as a dynamic organization. Thus, whatever helped in the development of
the organization and reduction of cost would be adopted. After having considered all the
tools previously adopted by the factory, they were Total Quality Management (TQM), Just In
Time (JIT), and Demand Flow Technology (DFT) the company felt Six-Sigma would be a
valuable asset to their company. The company felt this management tool would result in a
better performance, and that the factory would be able to sustain and implement it
consistently. The rest would be terminated to help promote steady improvement and change
within the factory.
This factory started using Six-Sigma since 2000, or approximately 4 years ago. Top
management was American and used to work for an American company in the U.S.A. which
employed Six-Sigma. A distinct Six-Sigma organizational structure was prescribed and
totally separated from the regular working unit. The Six-Sigma unit directly reported to the
CEO of the factory in Thailand, but it still had a dotted line linked to a regional Six-Sigma
unit and its parent company in U.S.A.
Six-Sigma's organization was not varied by the other companies previously mentioned. The
use of colored belt symbols indicated individual duty and responsibility. Major duties were
not labeled differently, Master Black belt, Black belt, Green belt, or Champion etc. A person
occupying a crucial role such as Black belt needed to be involved full-time. Black belt's had
been well supported by top management. When a problem occurred, he could always ask for
assistance directly.
The factory evaluated the project's performance by looking at overall company performance.
Individual Six-Sigma projects were not measured. The projects' success was measured yearly
on its sales volume, percent (%) yield of manufactured items, and punctual delivery. They
had evaluated its success in the last 4 years compared with targets, and the outcome was quite
successful.
13
Company E
This 5,000 employee plant produces a semiconductor device. It is a well-known American
Company both in Thailand and Internationally. This factory had adopted Six-Sigma for over
5 years so it was said to be a part of the organization's culture already. Interviewee claimed
that an employee would feel strange if he/she did not participate in Six-Sigma projects. The
objectives of this organization included preventing a deviation of the production process as
well as creating continual development. Presently, continual process improvement is not
sufficient and also requires innovation. Six-Sigma in this factory was unique because the
application, or modification, was adopted from the original Motorola Company.
This factory differed from others because there are many dimensions of Six-Sigma
implementing. It did not have a Six-Sigma organizational structure set up. Color symbols
used to indicate duty, responsibilities such as Black belt, Master Black belt or Green belt
employed by other companies was not employed in this company at all. The regular work
structure was used instead. Targets and activities were deployed through line of command in
a pyramid pattern. There was a work unit that specifically monitored these activities, but its
role was just to support, and provide convenience. According to company policy everyone
must take part in Six-Sigma activities.
In conclusion, this company used only Six-Sigma methodology to align with normal line
functions. Company E did not have a Six-Sigma structure or organization which was
different from other companies.
The implementation of Six-Sigma activities did not focus on each individual project like other
companies. On the contrary, the factory divided them into main activities instead, such as
creating an errorfree-production process. The factory might study and concentrate only on
methodology that could assist people in making investment decisions right away.
Company F
This is an Automobile factory, which was subsidized by an American parent company. There
are around 500 employees and founded since 1976. The factory is managed by Thai
management team except for the Managing Director, who is a foreigner. The objective of
14
implementing Six-Sigma here was a corporate policy from the parent company. The parent
company required its subsidiaries to adopt Six-Sigma to create customer satisfaction by
focusing on cost saving or reducing waste. Six-Sigma was started in 2000 by training the
management to understand Six-Sigma, its tools and the role of each person. The factory did
not emphasize the communication to all employees but only to managers and certain groups at
monthly staff meetings.
The organizational structure of the factory was informally set. Belt color was used to indicate
the role and duty of each participating person such as Black belt, Master Black belt, and
Green belt. A consulting and training company, Six-Sigma Academy, influenced them all. A
person who was selected for an important duty such as Black belt was assigned full-time for a
period up to 2 years which allows for at least two successful projects.
The performance evaluation was measured by looking at cash savings per project, number of
certified Black belts and numbers of closing projects a year. Interviewee claimed that the
factory was quite successful and could achieve its targets.
Generally all participants in this research implemented Six-Sigma more than 2 years ago as a
target group of this research and all of them claimed to be successful. Most of the Six-Sigma
structure and Six-Sigma tools was influenced by their Six-Sigma consultant. Just one
company did not establish a Six-sigma organization. Also remarkable is that 5 of them are
subsidiaries of an American parent company. There is complete Thai ownership in only one
of the participants in this research.
Data Analysis
Data analysis will break down the research questions one by one to see how each company
addressed the questions. After the discussion phases, a conclusion of the findings will be
deployed.
Research Question 1;
Can "Top Down Management" and "Result Orientation" in Six-Sigma methodology be used
with Thai people or Thai Manufacturing?
15
Company A
This company had utilized top down management prior to implementing Six-Sigma therefore,
once Six-Sigma had been implemented in this factory, top down management was fully
functional. The way Company A deployed Six-Sigma implementation here, top management
has been setting the Six-Sigma objectives and targets and deployed these down to each
function. Each function has the responsibility to act and achieve those objectives and targets.
The matrix measurement was initiated to follow up and evaluate performance appraisal. For
instance, the matrix measurement utilized the number of Black belts, number of projects, and
savings per project for each year. It was clearly shown that Six-Sigma was deployed from the
top management level to the floor level.
To make sure that successful implementation will be achieved, follow up by top management
has been done bi-weekly on a regularly scheduled basis. The participant claimed that no
problem was incurred in this manner with the reason given that this factory had already been
adapted to the American management culture for a long period of time. Top down and results
orientation is not new for them and their employees were used to it. Participant also claimed
that the success of Six-Sigma implementation must use top down management style and
results orientations and that this is a crucial concept of Six-Sigma methodology.
Company B
Regarding data input from participation, Six Sigma's implementation approach in Company B
is similar to Company A. Six-Sigma has to be driven from the top management level. Top
Management has been setting up objectives and targets and deploying them down to each
function. This organization also established Six-Sigma organization to coordinate all related
activities. Even though this factory uses a "Top Down Management" and "Results
Orientation" approach, the same as Company A, the result is different. Company B
encountered difficulties when implemented, some employees do not cooperate with
management; there are no contributions to the Six-Sigma project, and an overall lack of
ambition to achieve the targets and objectives. The participant cited that according to the
employees, they did not see any benefits for them as an individual. Another problem found
was a lack of a follow up system; management was also not properly following up and
adhering to strict "Results Orientation".
16
After reviewing the results, Company B has improved by providing better communication to
their employees for what, and why, company want to introduce Six-Sigma. After building up
Six-Sigma methodology understanding, Company B has also motivated their employees to
cooperate with Six-Sigma implementation by linking the results of Six-Sigma to an annual
bonus scheme.
It could be claimed that this is the Thai people's way in a working environment. Regarding
the literature review of Thai's culture, as previously reported, Thai's are characterized as
having the "Inter-dependence" value (Komin, 1991). Thai's always try to live together or
belong to the group while relations between them are of a give and take nature. This kind of
value essentially means that when they give something to you, they also consider that
something must be given back to them one way or another. Similarly in this case, an
employee who gives a hand supporting, or working in, a Six-Sigma project would look
forward to taking some personal benefit back from the company. Company B both
communicated and provided a motivation program for its employees.
Company C
Regarding Company C, it was not difficult to find that "Top Down Management" and
"Results Orientation" was specifically introduced for Six-Sigma implementation. However,
the management team was comprised of Japanese, American, and Thai employees.
Therefore, the bottom up activities favored in other Japanese factories, has also been used for
quality and productivity improvement, such as the Quality Control Circle (QCC) and
Suggestion system. In the Japanese way, QCC methodology was used to involve their floor
workers in quality and productivity improvement. Floor workers can select the topic or
problem area by themselves, however they are under supervision by their leader or supervisor.
Management just acts as supporter or facilitator. To avoid conflict between the top down and
bottom up activity approaches, Six-Sigma activities were deployed only to the salary staff
level or supervisor level. A Bottom up activity approach was still used for workers on the
floor level. This is a good example of how to adapt Six-Sigma methodology to different
management cultures in this company.
Even though the company initiated the strategy by deploying down to salary staff level, the
workers have to be involved in Six-Sigma implementation. After Six-Sigma project post,
17
workers who work in that process have to maintain or sustain the new process or new working
method. Therefore, in order to achieve the Six-Sigma implementation and sustain them with
a top down approach, top management has also established and utilized objectives and targets
as a control mechanism. Thus, close monitoring and regular follow up meetings by top
management can be claimed as a key success factor of "Top Down Management" and
"Results Orientation".
Company D
From the beginning, for Company D, "Top Down Management" and "Result Orientation"
approaches are not successful here. The participant claimed that the Thai working culture did
not match the "Top Down Management" and "Result Orientation" approaches. They found
that its employees were not participating in, and also not cooperating on, Six-Sigma
implementation. The reasons are that workers, as well as middle management, were not
invited to be involved in objective target setting and aggressive focus was placed on
monitoring and following up of the results of Six-Sigma which created extreme pressure on
the working team. Those that could not withstand the working pressure have resigned.
Company D has changed their implementation strategies by involving staff for objective
target setting. For instance, top management will create objective targets for the whole
organization, together with middle management, and middle management will deploy the
objective targets to each function. Another approach change that was implemented was to
provide a motivation scheme; annual bonuses were linked to achieving Six-Sigma results. To
reduce working pressure, the follow up meetings by top management will decrease in
frequency.
To support achieving and problem solving of "Top Down or Result orientation approach", key
success activities here are; involve the employees in objective target setting and providing a
motivational scheme to encourage their people in cooperation.
Company E
The Six-Sigma implementation Company E is different from others, there was no Six-Sigma
organization established. Company E used Six-Sigma methodology as an improvement tool
18
and worked with other tools such as Statistic Process Control (SPC) and Total Productive
Management (TPM). However, top down management and results orientation is still used for
Six-Sigma implementation. This participant claimed that its organization is very familiar
with the American management working culture so there were no obstacles found during
implementation.
However, input obtained from this participant indicated that Company E encourages its
employees to get commitment for the results. Company E has provided many recognition
programs such as individual recognition by extra score mark up in annual performance review
for those who participate in the implementation as well as group motivation in the form of a
monetary award for the winner of Six-Sigma project competition.
Company F
Similar to the other companies, Company F utilized "Top Down Management" and "Results
Orientation" approaches for Six-sigma implementation. Top management set objective
targets then deployed these targets to the functional units. A monitoring and follow up system
has been established. Monthly follow up meetings have been done by the parent company
and local top management. According to data collected from the participant, less cooperation
from their workers was found. Even though they are not resisting the implementation, they
are not fully supporting it. Participant input shows that workers who participated in the
projects did not see any benefits to them. There is no recognition for workers who participate
in Six-Sigma projects except for key personnel such as Black belt. This company's
recognition system supports key personnel but discourages the working group.
One recommendation from the participant was that a proper recognition program and proper
communication system could be used to support the implementation. Communication to all
employees as to why the company has chosen to implement Six-Sigma and what the benefits
would be could help effectively implement Six-Sigma. Even though benefits might not be
given directly to employees, the benefit of a better communication system for Company F
might be enough of an incentive to encourage all employees to give full support to
implementation. This case is similar to Company B, which recognized the need to implement
an employee recognition program in order to gain more cooperation from its employees.
19
Discussion
After analysis of the answers to research question 1, it could be concluded that "Top Down
Management" and "Result Orientation" approaches have created obstacles that need to be
overcome, when used in conjunction with Thai's working culture as found in the review of
literature. The obstacles found were that Thai workers are not cooperative and less ambitious
when it comes to achieving the objective target setting. With regard to literature review it
was revealed "Thai people's characteristics are not straightforward, ambitious, or have
aggressive personalities." Thai's also prefer the "Soft and Polite" approach rather than the
"Hard and Aggressive" approach (Komin, 1991) as "Result Orientation" management is
required to be. Thai's culture could have an impact on this management approach.
Moreover, the "Inter-dependence" value attributed to Thai people, can create a working
attitude of a "Give and Take" nature. Cooperation will come together when there is personal
benefit.
Research question 1 was valuable in learning from participants how to achieve Six-Sigma
implementation in Thai's working culture. The first phase is to reduce the employees'
resistance to change and get employees to become cooperative hands. The second phase is to
create a proper communication system to communicate what the Six-Sigma methodology is
and the benefit of its methodology to organization to all employees. The next phase is to try
involving employees from the stage of target setting to further facilitate acquiring a
commitment from them. Objectives and targets will be not achieved if a lack of proper
monitoring and close follow up is not done by top management. To encourage its employees
to be straightforward and have ambition to achieve the objective targets with a recognition
program that results in group and individual incentives that can be linked to the results.
Top down management and result oriented working cultures have to be utilized continuously
in the organization until it becomes an organizational culture. Many of participants claimed
that they have been using this management style, top down and result orientation, for a long
period of time and before Six-Sigma was introduced into their companies. They are
continuing to use them until these approaches are now an important part of their
organizational culture.
20
The results finding could be concluded that participants have used their implementation
strategy to achieve "Top down and Result orientation" approaches as follows;
State clear corporate policy, objective targets and deploy down from top to floor
level.
Communicate that policy, objective target, methodology and its benefits to all
employees.
Create proper monitoring and close follow up by top management.
Motivation by linking the achieved results to compensation program; bonus both
individual and group.
Continuous use of "Top Down and Results Orientation" approach until it becomes
corporate culture.
Research Question 2;
Can "Out Box" thinking concept and "Changing" environment be implemented in Thai's
culture?
Company A
Participant input states that it is quite normal for Thai people to object when changing the
working method they are used to. This is supported by Kaisith, 1981 when studying the Thai
culture; Thai's believe in things, which occur in their life depending on their karma (former
life) and it cannot be changed. This belief created Thai people's characteristics to be more
accepting of the problem and not to seek a new method of working, new innovations and etc.
Thai's always resisted changing from a familiar working pattern to a new working concept or
new method.
However, interviewee cited that not much resistance was found in Six-Sigma projects because
the Six-Sigma methodology used facts and data to prove the value of change. The participant
further claimed that Six-Sigma methodology does not rely on common sense. Six-Sigma
methodology used a large amount of data to define Six-Sigma projects. Problem areas have
to be stated clearly, encompassing the entire scope of the project, at the beginning and then
concerned data has to be collected and used in the analytical phases. Workers, or process
owners, normally are members of the project team. They are involved from the first stage
21
until the improvement phase. Thus, improving the process or changing the working method
did not receive any resistance from the workers.
Company B
Company B found a different result from Company A, Thai workers did resist changing. No
problem was found during Six-Sigma project implementation. However, later after the
project closed, they found workers kept turning back to the old way of working. Interviewee
claimed that their workers were used to it and familiar with the old style. It is quite difficult
to change worker attitudes.
A thorough understanding of Thai values clearly helps to explain the evidence of why the
workers accepted the new idea or new working method during the implementation period but
later ignored the new methods. Workers might not want to have a confrontation with Black
belt or project leader during implementation period eveti though they disagree with the new
ideas and do not want to change. It is in reference to another Thai culture characteristic;
"Smooth Interpersonal Relationship Orientation"; this orientation is characterized by the
preference for a non-assertive, polite and humble type of personality (Komin, 1991). Thai's
might keep quiet; however, it does not mean they agree with the change.
Understanding of this culture implication, with regards to success, or to solve this question, in
Company B is that the factory used ISO 9000, or Quality standard, as a management follow
up and sustainability tool. After project post, new processes or working methods have to be
registered in the quality standard. In quality standard, there will be an internal and external
audit system to follow up and make sure that all working procedures were complied with. A
non compliance report will be sent to the head of that function for corrective and preventive
action.
Company C
This particular question did not pertain to this Company C. Company C has introduced small
group activities calling QCC, or Quality Control Circle, for many years. As earlier
mentioned, QCC activity is well known in Japanese companies. The purpose of this activity
is to improve their process by the process workers in that area. However, QCC activity and
22
Six-Sigma is a similar tool for problem solving or quality improving. They are different to
each other only in management approaches; "Top down" or "Bottom up". Process
improvement by small group activity, such as QCC, in some cases need "Out Box Thinking
and Changing" for their existing process. Their workers have been trained in, and practice,
this way of thinking. As a result, when Six-Sigma was introduced into their organization, this
question had no bearing on Company C.
Company D
Company D's participant reacted with a different opinion to this question. Company D felt
that a changing environment here is a big problem. There is a very strong show of resistance
to change by workers. Workers adhere strictly to the old process. They do not care whether a
new idea is good or bad. The participant claims that workers are not supportive due to the
fact they are not involved at the beginning. The Six-Sigma project here is run by Black belt
and the supervisory levels only. They are not involving workers during the beginning stages.
Company D thought that if their supervisors agreed to any change, it would not be any
problem with the workers to implement the changes.
After the initial implementation attempt, management has changed their strategic approach; to
be successful in Six-Sigma implementation, management involved workers from within the
project team area. Workers can share their opinions, or ideas, to improve their work process
from the beginning.
Involving workers early on has enabled Company D to obtain a commitment from workers
effectively reducing the workers resistance to change.
Company E
Company E's experience is similar to company C; the participant cited that there is no
problem in their organization due to the fact that the company has already changed their
working culture. The workers have been involved in quality and productivity activity such as
Quality Control Circle (QCC), Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) before Six-Sigma
implementation. "Out Box Thinking and Changing" environment can be implemented here.
23
Participation of its employees is a key factor of "Changing environment" for this company.
Company E involves all employees in quality and productivity improvement all the time. For
instance, each engineer needs to have at least one improving project per year as a company
policy. Similar to Six-Sigma implementation, Company E claimed that there is a company
policy that states clearly to its employees that all employees have to be a part of a Six-Sigma
team. Everyone has to be involved and must contribute to Six-Sigma.
As a result, changing the environment here does it step by step until it is a normal practice for
its employees. Another comment from the participant was that consistency and continuous
improving has to be done. Company E now claims that improvement and changing attitude is
already part of their organizational culture.
Company F
Company F also states that changing is not a question for this company. The participant
comments that it depends on facts and data during project implementation and that Black belt
must have a clear understanding with the process owners for any required changes. Thus,
interviewee claimed that "Out box thinking or Changing is not a problem here. However, the
question found here is how to make it sustainable after completion of implementation. This is
the same question Company B is facing. To make changes sustainable, the participant
comments that an effective follow up system is a key for success and that top management
must also be closely involved in the follow up process.
Therefore, to make it sustainable and successful, a Six-Sigma tracking system was established
to monitor during, and post, project. It can be viewed online via Six-Sigma's intranet web
page. The objective target was set as a milestone for achievement measurements and monthly
Six-Sigma performance reviews were done by top management.
Discussion
For this research question, Thai's culture does not adversely affect Six-Sigma
implementation. Only one company claimed that it discovered difficulties when
implementing Six-Sigma. However, most of them did not find difficulty with changing
environments in Thai's culture because they have implemented other productivity or quality
24
improvements previously. It could be claimed that they moved past that situation and trained,
as well as instructed, their people to use "Out box" thinking and "Changing" environment.
However, insights obtained from this research found that to be successful most of the
Companies adopted a similar strategic approach identified as follows;
First, they establish a company policy which clearly stated that all employees must be a part
of the implementation. The purpose of which is to obtain employee participation.
Next, the Companies used data and facts in the problem area analysis and process
improvement phases. As previously identified, Six-Sigma methodology required this as a
requisite for successful implementation.
Finally, changing environment is needed to continuously achieve and sustain goals. It is
difficult in the beginning; however, repetition gradually allows the changes to become the
organizations culture.
All strategic approaches that were covered from this question could be summarized as
follows;
Promotion of employee participation and clearly state that all employees have to
participate in Six-Sigma implementation.
Use of data and facts in problem area analysis and process improvement phase.
Introduction of changing environment to its employees and practicing this approach
until it become an organizational culture. Newcomers will automatically comply
with this environment.
Research Question 3;
How those companies built "Team works" to support Six-Sigma implementation?
Company A
To create team working and supporting Six-Sigma implementation, Company A's participant
described their efforts. First, the company established a policy and stated clearly that all
25
employees have to be a part of the implementation team. Second, the company set common
objective and functional targets and deployed them down to each function and team. Then, to
encourage people to work together as a team, the company had promoted team activities by
establishing an internal competition among teams to determine who the best savings team is.
Internal competition among teams is not only about providing team motivation program. As
found in literature review, Thai's prefer to focus more on activities. Thus, if that activity can
combine with a concept of "Fun" and "Work" it creates more cooperation by its employees
Kaisith, 1981; (Komin), 1991.). Regarding recognition; the company has recognition scream
in both monetary support and non-monetary recognition such as becoming Horner certified
for the winning team.
It could be concluded Company A built team work by using a company policy that stated
clearly that each employee has to be a part of the Six-Sigma team. Thus, when objective
targets were set and deployed down to each function and team, they were prepared to accept
and participate in achieving the objectives. Objective targets provide a direction and scope
for its employees, what company expects to see as the end results. Finally, the company
found a way to encourage the employees' team work by implementing a motivation and
recognition program.
Company B
To promote team working, this company focused on the qualifications of the project leader,
Black belt. Black belt worked as project leader of the working team. Company B believed
that the key factor of a working team is a good team leader. Basically a Six-Sigma team was
set up for control process deviation or process improvement to reduce defective goods and the
members of the working team comes mainly from line worker or operators. The purpose of
having team work is to share experience, knowledge, information of each team member and
get support from Six-Sigma statistical tools. To be effective in team working the team
leader's role is to encourage people in team participation and contribution for information or
experience exchange. Moreover, team member participations during recommendation of
improvement, or seeking areas to improve, are very important part of Six-Sigma project.
Therefore, Black belt is a key to successful team building here.
Leadership was considered a Black belt qualification. Black belt requires strong leadership
skills so leadership was a key consideration during the Black belt selection phase and during
26
the training period. The company provided a special leadership training program along with
Six-Sigma tools training.
Company C
Before embarking Six-Sigma to its organization, Company C has built up their team working
environment utilizing a method called "Small Group Activity" (SGA). The objective of the
working group formed was improvement of their working areas. It is similar to the Six-Sigma
working team. The difference between SGA and Six-Sigma working group is the way they
select improvement areas for SGA; the team will select the problem area to be solved by
them. The group will be trained for the problem solving tools. Management will merely
support the team. For Six-Sigma, improvement areas will be selected by management.
Management will focus on items that impact areas from customer satisfaction to cost saving.
In addition to utilizing SGA to teach team working, an in order to keep employees
enthusiastic about supplying good support and team working, the company also provided a
recognition program that included both monetary and non-monetary incentives. Similar to
company A, an internal team competition was put in place to promote team working and also
these activities were linked to a recognition program.
Company D
Company D used corporate policy as a management tool to promote team working which was
similar to Company A's response. All employees have to participate in Six-Sigma activities
and work as a team to achieve a successful Six-Sigma project. For Company D the policy is
more clearly defined. Company policy clearly states that within 3 years everyone must be a
member of the Six-Sigma working teams. This is a guideline to its employees to be aware of
their role and responsibility in Six-Sigma implementation. However, to promote and
encourage employees to work as a team, a recognition program, such as an annual bonus, was
connected to successful Six-Sigma implementation.
Company E
Company E's participant cited the same response as in the above research question, this
company has promoted a team working environment to its employees until it has become an
27
organizational culture. Employees were assigned to work as a team in many other projects.
However, the important thing is their recognition program to support and encourage the
employees. This company has provided motivations such as bonus scream, internal project
competition both in Thailand or regional factory competition.
Based on experience learned from this company, before it became a culture change; the
Company did many activities to promote team working. For instance, they support people
working in groups in Quality Control Circle (QCC) or Total Productive Maintenance (TPM),
or Statistic Control Process (SPC). Because of these team working activities, Company E has
promotional events to support the activities and to encourage all employees to participate in
events such as SPC day, internal competition or to join an outside competition.
"Activity Base" is important for Thai's working environment in order to facilitate the "Fun
and Pleasure Orientation". Thai's behavior is very easy going, enjoying the everyday, routine,
pleasures of life with a happy carelessness, not letting troubles touch them easily, viewing life
as something to be enjoyed, not endured and would not do anything that is not fun (Komin
1991). Another study of Thai's culture, Kaisith, 1981 research report also supported the
reference that most Thai workers have a concept of "Fun" and "Work" with the activities
being combined. So it could be claimed that the company has combined "Fun" and "Work".
This tactic was also found to be used by Company A.
Company F
Company F found that it is difficult to build team working here. Workers do not contribute
when the team has a meeting. This does not mean they are resisting but they are too shy to
express their opinions. The same as found in Company B, Company F participant comments
that the key success factor of team working is the Black belt, who is project leader. A Black
belt is required to have strong leadership, and good interpersonal skills. A Black belt has to
encourage people to participate or contribute both ideas and work force to achieve a
successful Six-Sigma project.
However, interviewee commented that it is difficult to encourage people here to work as a
team. Interviewee felt that the problem found here is the lack of a recognition program to
support, as well as encourage, them. Company F only provides recognition for Black belt but
not their entire team. Participant comments that it would be much more effective if the
28
recognition program established a way to promote people working together as a team instead
of providing individual recognition. Recognition can be monetary or non monetary.
It is confirmed that to have a successful Six-Sigma project, there is a need to consider a
proper motivation and recognition program.
Discussion
With regard to literature review, Thai's are characterized as being self-admiring. They would
like to work in an individual manner so they can do what they want and also that the job or
organization should be less controlled and not adhere strictly to the rules (Kaisith, 1981).
Thai's are characterized as having no work discipline and claimed to be less efficient when
working in a team. Literature also found that Thai's are characterized as having the "Inter-
dependence" value resulting in the desire to see a return when they make any contribution or
actions (Komin, 1991).
Moreover, "Smooth Interpersonal Relationship Orientation" is Thai's culture; this orientation
is characterized by the preference for a non-assertive, polite and humble type of personality.
Thai's value "Face Saving"; Thai's always use soft approaches, or indirect ways, to solve
their problems. Most Thai people are characterized as having the "Criticize Avoidance"
value. They try to avoid conflict. They will keep quiet, make no comments, or will not
debate when working in teams as a result of "Grateful Relationship Orientation" and "Smooth
Interpersonal Relationship Orientation" values (Komin, 1991). These kinds of behavior could
be claimed as obstacles to be successful to work as a team.
To build a team-working environment, data collected from participants of this research have
shown that most of them used similar strategies. Policy deployment and objective targets
were established to promote team working and employees participation. Policy is utilized as
a guide for employees to follow. Policy allows employees to be very aware of their role and
responsibilities within the company.
Next, is how to handle "Team working" with regards to Thai's culture obstacles in order to be
successful when working as a team, thus the team leader is required to have strong leadership
abilities. It was mentioned by research participants that a Black belt who works as the team
leader needs to demonstrate strong leadership skills. The team leader's role is to encourage
29
employee participation and contribution to the team during meeting, brain storming or
implementing period. Leadership of Team leader or Black belt is considered when recruited
Black belts.
"Activities base" was found in most of them. To promote Six-Sigma team working, many of
the companies have internal and external Six Sigma team competition. Six-Sigma project
competition was used in many companies to motivate, and to recognize, their employees and
also to help promote the Thai working environment, "Fun" and "Work" concept.
The next strategy is motivation and recognition programs focusing on a team working
concept. Most of them provided both monetary or non monetary recognition programs such
as linkage to annual bonus, money award for team competition winning, traveling to
participate in regional Six-Sigma project competition, extra score for annual salary adjustment
or Horner certified.
The above mentioned could be summarized as following;
Specify clearly in company policy and deploy to the whole organization.
Achieving target was set and communicated.
Create "Activity base" to promote Six-Sigma implementation and combine with
"Fun" and "Work" concept.
Provide proper motivation and recognition program to support team working
especially team recognition instead of individual recognition.
Team leader is required to demonstrate strong leadership skills
Research Question 4;
Can performance-based promotion and an individual recognition system be used with Thai
people or Thai manufacturing?
Company A
Company A has a recognition system for both individuals and groups to promote Six-Sigma
activity. For the individual recognition question, the company had promoted team activities
by establishing an internal competition among teams to determine who the best savings team
is. The winning team will get money award, traveling abroad and Horner certified and the
30
company also provided a thank you party for all working groups. However, individual
recognition is also provided to promote Six-Sigma implementation. The achieving Black belt,
or Black belt who certified, will get company stock option.
Regarding recognition, Company A's participant commented that the company should
provide both individual and group motivation. Individual recognition is to encourage key
person as Black belt and group recognition is to promote team working.
When it comes to the research question regarding promotion, it used a performance based
promotion program.
Company A has a parent company in USA. Management style has been following the parent
company or American management culture style. There is no question about using a
performance based promotion system. Employees are familiar with the performance based
recognition systems.
As a point of interest, according to interview data, Company A did not clearly specify that a
certified Black belt would get promotion. However, to successfully promote Six-Sigma into
its company, Company A has a policy that clearly mentions the requirements for being
promoted to the executive management level. It is mandatory for him/her to perform as Black
belt before being considered for promotion. In this case, he/she is not required to be Black
belt for a two year period as is considered mandatory for a normal Black belt.
Company B
Company B did not use a purely performance based promotion as did the American company.
There will be a combination between performance based and seniority based promotion in its
organization. They do not link Six-Sigma achievement to a promotion scheme at this time.
Company B's participant commented that if promotion were linked to achieving success in
Six-Sigma implementation, it could be problematic. It could create difficulty simply because
it is not considered fair for those who can not be trained as a Black belt.
With regards to a recognition system to promote Six-Sigma implementation, this is such a
sensitive issue here that no individual recognition program was provided. Certified Black
belts or achieving Black belts were not given any special reward as Company A and other
companies provided. This Company tries to promote team working and group motivation
31
instead. Also to avoid de-motivation of those who are not in the working team yet, the
company tried to use non-monetary rewards for their recognition program. A certificate or
plaque was used to recognize its employees. It is confirmed by interviewee that recognition
and motivation is an important, but sensitive, issue so they will focus on groups instead of
individuals.
Company C
Company C fully supported its Six-Sigma implementation by providing an individual
recognition system. Black belts who succeeded in Six-Sigma projects will get stock options,
as well as a chance to receive a promotion. However, Company C found some problems
when promoting successful Black Belts. The immediate manager would sometimes disagree
with the promotion. The immediate manager refers to the fact that the Black belt has to run
Six-Sigma projects and is removed from the normal working assignment for a period of two
years. The immediate manager thought that Black belts did not contribute to their own
function during their 2 years of participation in Six-Sigma project
However, in this case, it does not mean they are against the "Performance Based Promotion"
but believe the Black belts have out of the mainstream working environment for too long a
period of time.
One thing that should be highlighted is that recognition programs provided to individuals
only. It is in direct contrast with other companies which provide both individual and team
recognition programs. Recognition program will provide only key persons who run the
projects such as Black belts or Project champions. Others members in the Six-Sigma project
team will not get any recognition. The implementation was treated as a normal working
condition that everyone has to participate in and drive them to successful completion guided
by corporate policy.
Company D
Company D agreed that to be successful in Six-Sigma implementation, the company has to
motivate its employee by linkage to position promotion. However, it does not mean that all
who participate in a successful Six-Sigma Black belt position will be promoted. Those that
do receive a promotion have to have been part of a Six-Sigma project previously. Company
32
D used "Performance Base Promotion" combined with "Seniority Based Promotion",
therefore, "Performance Based Promotion" was accepted by their employees.
For a recognition program, Company D provided both individual and team recognition. For
instance, successful Black belt will get a stock option from the company and for team
recognition the company linked an annual bonus to achieving successful Six-Sigma results for
all its employees. Company D's strategy to support and to motivate key persons, such as
successful black belts, individually is considered. In the meantime, team motivation is also
important for success so Company D used both an individual and group recognition program.
Company E
To encourage people to participate in Six-Sigma implementation, this company has
recognized its employees in both a monetary and non-monetary manner. However, this
company has focused on team recognition more than individual recognition to avoid
individual conflict. The reason for this type of recognition program is that they would like all
employees to participate in or support the implementation. For instance, the company
provided internal project competitions and the winner will get a money award. The winning
teams will also be motivated by sending them to participate in outside competitions, both in
Thailand and abroad.
However, individual recognition is also provided. Individuals who contribute to Six-Sigma
activity will be considered for receiving an extra score for their annual performance review.
This review is linked to an annual salary increase. Company E still saw some benefits to
motivating their employees, both individually, and with group recognition.
Company F
To promote Six-Sigma implementation, Company F has also provided a recognition system.
However, the company recognition program is provided for individuals only. For instance, a
Black belt who succeeded in a Six-Sigma project will get company stock options. This
participant claimed that individual recognition created a problem at this facility. For this
reason company stock options provided were treated as low profile or in a highly confidential
manner. Regarding no group recognition, workers who were involved in the project were not
being fully supportive. These employees are not seeing any benefit for themselves. To obtain
33
better support from the employees, Company F's interviewee commented that team
motivation and recognition need to be considered.
"Performance Based Promotion" in this company is unofficially used. Company F did not
clearly state that successful Black belt's will get promotion. However, based on internal
performance, management tries to promote successful Black belts whenever a position
becomes available. This company also used a "Seniority Based Promotion" combined with
"Performance Based Promotion" which could be the reason they do it in a low profile
approach.
Discussion
There are two questions in this research question; can performance-based promotion and an
individual recognition system be used with Thai people or Thai manufacturing?
"Performance Based Promotion", as most successful American companies used, could be
claimed as a possible approach for use in the Thai working environment. In each instance a
promotion scheme is outlined in each company policy. It can be purely performance based or
combined with a seniority based promotion.
With regard to individual and group recognition, from data analysis, all of the participants
used recognition systems to motivate or encourage its employees for Six-Sigma
implementation. However, most of them used a team recognition program instead of
individual recognition. For instance, participants provided internal Six-Sigma project
competitions or linked Six-Sigma achievement to annual bonus payments. Individual
recognition was also found in some companies but they avoided using cash awards. Two of
the companies supported individual recognition by giving company stock options. However,
these were treated in a highly confidential manner. This purpose is to avoid de-motivation
and to get better support by others. Group motivation and recognition were widely used for
most of them.
In conclusion, recognition is very important to encourage employees and team recognition is
the most preferable choice from these participants. However for individual recognition, it has
been used in some cases, but it was treated as sensitive issue.
34
Conclusion
In regard to researcher questions and data analysis, Thai's culture does have an implication on
Six-Sigma implementation in Thai manufacturing; Thai's culture created obstacles to "Result
Oriented", "Team Working" and "Individual Recognition System". However, there is no
problem on 'outbox thinking or changing environment" and "Performance Based Promotion".
From these research results, it can be summarized that in successful Six-Sigma
implementation most of the participants have adapted their management approach as follows;
Clearly state in the company policy that everyone in the organization has to be a part
of Six-Sigma implementation.
The policy can be a clear set of directions the company would like employees to read,
understand, follow and comply with. Participation of all employees is one of the key
success factors. The policy could be utilized as a management communication tool to
get involvement from all of their employees. Most of the companies already have
policies which clearly state that all employees have to be a part of Six-Sigma
implementation.
Setting Objective targets, clear responsibility and deployment from top to floor level.
To get commitment from Thai people with better follow up performance and results,
objective target deployment is very important. It must be very structured and properly
deployed from top to floor level. This can be a valuable management tool to support
and create "Result Orientation" value for Thai's working environment.
Created efficient follow up system with close monitoring by top management.
As Thai values found in literature review pointed out, Thai's focus more on activities
than results. Thai's will put high priority on its activity even if they sometimes lose
control of the results or keep on track. All of the participants confirmed that a reliable
performance monitoring and follow up system is very important and must be provided
to them. Top management is required for close follow up and review of the results to
35
make sure that everything is on track and also sustainable after project post. These
actions could promote "Result Orientations" for Thai's working environment.
Process owner should be involved from the beginning of improvement phase.
To avoid resistance to change from Thai employees, it was recommended that
involvement of workers, or process owners, should begin in the early stages during the
objective target setting and improvement phase. Involving workers early on has
enabled the company to obtain a commitment from workers effectively reducing the
workers resistance to change.
Built up Black belt leadership to lead implementation working group.
To build team work in Thai's working environment, project leader such as Black belt
is a key factor. Input from literature review and interview found it is difficult for Thai
people to contribute and participate during a project meeting due to Thai's culture.
Therefore, as project leader, Black belt must utilize his strong leadership skills to
encourage participation, as well as garner support for the project.
Create "Activity base" and combine with "Fun" and "Work" concept to promote Six-
Sigma implementation.
As found in literature review; Kaisith, 1981 research report that most Thai workers
have a concept of "Fun" and "Work" with the activities being combined. This was
found in many cases from research participants companies.
Motivate employees by providing recognition program with team or group.
Recognition is very important to encourage employees and team recognition is the
most preferable choice from these participants. Many of them used monetary reward
such as linking the successful results with their annual bonus for all employees.
However, for individual recognition, has also been used by providing company stock
options for key person; Black belts being the primary recipient, but it was treated as an
extremely sensitive issue or highly confidential in some cases.
36
Adaptation could be summarized and presented as follows;
Table 1 Adaptation to Thai's culture.
Literature - Culture Implication
Breakthrough methodology and Result
orientation in Six-Sigma methodology could
not be used with Thai people or Thai
Manufacturing.
"Team Work" could be an obstacle to Six-
Sigma implementation
"Performance-based promotion" and
"Individual recognition system" could not be
used with Thai people
Adaptation to Thai's culture
State clearly in company policy that
everyone in organization has to be a part of
Six-Sigma implementation.
Setting Objective targets, clear responsibility
and deployment from top to floor level.
Created efficient follow up system with
close monitoring by top management.
Motivation by linking the achieved results
to compensation program; bonus both-individual and group.
Continuous use of "Top Down and Results
Orientation" approach until it becomes
corporate culture
Create "Activity base" and combine with
"Fun" and "Work" concept to promote team
working
Built up Black belt leadership to lead
implementation working group.
Motivate employees by providing
recognition program with both a monetary
and non-monetary award with a focus on
team motivation.
37
Limitation of this research
There are limitations in this research. For instance, limitations due to sample size; the number
of factories implementing Six-Sigma in Thailand is too small. The numbers of companies,
which are qualified in this research target, do not exceed 10. Next, most of the participants
are American subsidized companies, therefore, they have more or less absorbed their parent
corporate culture to its organization, or they are familiar with American working culture.
The series interview methodology from this research was also limited for data collection;
there is a limited source of data. It is difficult to rigor data from only one source of data.
To complete the research on this topic, researcher will further examine each case study to
provide detailed data of how successful each firm's implementation was.
To avoid American culture bias to Thai Manufacturing, a Pure Thai Company will be
selected. The next research aims to deeply study "how Thai company implementing Six-
Sigma was achieved in Thai's working culture". Case study research methodology would be
excellent method in which to obtain a more in-depth data collection. The adaptation to Thai's
culture found in this research will be used as the basis for the next research questions.
38
Reference
Aeppel, T., 1999, "More, More, More: Rust-Belt Factory Lifts Productivity, and Staff Finds
It's No Picnic --- At Westinghouse Air Brake, Workers Trade Boredom For Tough Juggling
Act --- A Hard-Earned $1.50 Bonus" Wall Street Journal; New York; May 18, 1999, pp Al.
Berg, B.L., 1998, Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences, 3rd ed., Allyn &
Bacon, Boston, MA.
Banuelas, R., Antony, J., 2002, "Critical Success Factors for the successful implementation of
six sigma projects in organizations", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 14, November 2, 2002, p92-
99.
Conlin, M., 1998, "Revealed at Last: The secret of Jack Welch's Success", Forbes, Vol. 161,
Issue 2, p 44, 1998.
Comm, C., Mathaisal, D, 2000, "A Paradigm for Benchmarking Lean Initiatives For Quality
Improvement", Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol.7, No.2, 2000, pp 118-127,
MCB University Press, 1463-5771.
Creswell, J, 2001, "America's elite factories" Fortune; New York; volume 144, Sep 3, 2001,
pp 206A-206L
Deming, E., 1982, "Out of the Crisis", The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London,
England.
Dawne, C., 2001, "Six Sigma", Industrial Management, Computer world, /5/2001, Vol. 35,
Issue 10, pp38.
Dawson, C., 2001, "Machete Time", Business Week; New York; April 9, 2001;
Hasek, G., 2000 "Extraordinary extrusions ", Industry Week; Cleveland; Oct 16, 2000,
Volume 249, Issue 17, pp 79-80.
39
Henderson, K., Evans, J., 2000, "Successful Implementation of Six Sigma: Benchmarking
General Electric Company", Benchmarking: An international Journal, Vol. 7, No. 4, 2000, pp.
260-281, MCB University Press, 1463-5771.
Hofstede, G, 1980, Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-related
Values, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.
Ingle, S. and Roe, W. (2001), "Six Sigma black belt implementation", The TQM Magazine,
Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 273-80, ISSN 0954-478x.
Kaisith, P, 1981, "Working Culture of Thai people", Srinakarintharawirote University, HD
4904.
Klefsjo, B., Wiklund, H., Edgeman, R., 2001, "Six Sigma Seem As A Methodology For Total
Quality Management, Measuring Business Excellence, 5,1, 2001, pp 31-35, MCM University
Press, 1368-3047.
Kleine, R.E. III, Kernan, J.B., 1991, "Contextual influences on the meanings ascribed to
ordinary consumption objects ", Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 311-24.
Kochan, A., 1998, "European Associate Editor for Assembly Automation" Assembly
Automation, May 29, 1998, Vol. 18, Issue 2. Pp 132-137.
Komin, S., 1991, Psychology of the Thai People: Values and Behavioral Patterns, National
Institute of Development Administration, Bangkok.
Lebow J., 1999, "The last Word on Lean Manufacturing", TIE Solutions, September 1999.
McCampbell, A., Jongpipitporn, C., Umar, I., Ungaree, S., 1999, "Seniority-based promotion
in Thailand: it's time to change", Career Development International, Volume 4 Number 6
1999 pp. 318-320, Copyright CD MCB University Press ISSN 1362-0436
McClenahen, J., 2002, "ITT's Value Champion", Industrial Week/IW, May 2002, Vol. 251,
Issue 4, p 44, 4p.
Murphy, T., 1998, "Close enough to perfect", World's Auto World, Vol. 34, No.8, August.
40
Pang, C., Roberts, D., Sutton, J., 1988, "Do Business In China The Art of War?,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management Volume 10 Number 7-1998,
pp.272-282 Copyright © MCB University Press ISSN 0959-6119
Smith, D., Blakeslee, J., 2002, "The New Strategy Six Sigma" T & D, 15357740, September
2002, Vol. 56, Issue 9.
Thilmany, J., 2000, "Lean manufacturing increases production" Mechanical Engineering;
New York; Jul 2000, Volume 122, Issue 7, p16.
Tse, D.K., Wong, J.K., Tan, C.T., 1988, "Toward some standardized cross-cultural
consumption values", Advances in Consumer Research, 15, 387-95.
Yin, R K., 1994, Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 2nd ed., Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
41
Appendix 1 Interview Questions
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
International Graduate School of Management
Research Title: "Key success factors in implementing Six-Sigma in Thailand:
Views of the companies implementing Six-Sigma"
Researcher: Mr. Naruepont Pongcharoen/DBA intake 4
The following are the research questions;
What is the objective for your company to implement the Six-Sigma?
How long has your company been implementing the Six-Sigr& methodology?
What is your Six-Sigma organization or structure?
What is your achieving target and how do you measure it?
What are the implementation steps of Six-Sigma implementation?
Do you think your company is successful in Six-Sigma implementation and the
reasons why?
Does Breakthrough methodology in Six-Sigma methodology can be used with
Thai people or Thai Manufacturing?
What is a role of top management in your Six-Sigma implementation?
Does Management approach focusing on "Result orientation" is can be used with
Thais workers or Thai Manufacturing?
Does "Out Box" thinking concept and "Changing" environment can be
implemented in Thais culture?
How do you get involvement and commitment from your people?
How those companies built "Team works" to support Six-Sigma implementation?
Are your people cooperating with the implementation?
What is your recognition system to support Six-Sigma implementation?
Does performance based promotion and Individual recognition system can be
used with Thai people or Thai manufacturing?
42
What are the difficulties found during the implementation period?
What do you think are the key success factor of Six-Sigma implementation in your
company?
What is your opinion on Six-Sigma implementation in Thailand?
43
Appendix 2
Six-Sigma Methodology
Six-Sigma Methodology is consist of 4 phases; Define, Measure, Analyzes, Improve and
Control (DMAIC). The details of purpose and the out come of each step are as follows;
DEFINE:
The purpose of the Define Phase is to further refine the Six-Sigma project team's
understanding of the problem. In addition, the project team will use the define phase to get
organized, determine roles and responsibilities, establish goals and milestones, and review
process steps (Six Sigma Academy, 2000). The project selection has to prioritize which
existing process will have top priority for improvement, and that the selected project will
enable maximum leverage and customer satisfaction (Wyper, B., Harrison A., 2000). This is
much the same as McClenahen, J., 2002; Wyper, B., Harrison A., 2000 mentioned, which
related to appropriate selection of projects, problem definition, and defining the metrics with
their baseline and entitlement (optimal) levels.
MEASURE:
Establish techniques for collecting data about current performance (Six Sigma Academy,
2000), and also to measure the capacity of the current process (Wyper, B., Harrison A., 2000),
then highlight improvement project opportunities.
Upon completing the measure phase (Six Sigma Academy, 2000), project teams will have a:
Plan for collecting data that specifies the data type and collection technique.
Validated measurement system that ensures accuracy and consistency.
Sufficient sample of data for analysis.
Set of preliminary analysis results that provide project direction.
Baseline measurementl of current performance.
I In Six Sigma methodology, baseline measurement is validated measurement database before improving (Six-Sigma Academy, 2000).
44
This is similar to other problem solving techniques. Before starting any improvement actions,
we must know where we are now, and what we should do next. In Six-Sigma methodology,
the current performance has to be measured, and recorded, by the project team. The data
collecting in this phase can be easily used to compare the process performance before, and
after, implementation. It is the way to measure the success of improvement action. So Six-
sigma could not be the abstract but every thing is tangible.
ANALYZE:
Analyze the preliminary data to document current performance (baseline process capability),
and to begin identifying root causes of defects, and their impact. (McClenahen, J., 2002). The
Analyze Phase allows the project team to further target improvement opportunities by taking
a close look at the data (Six Sigma Academy, 2000).
Upon completion of the analyze phase (Six Sigma Academy, 2000), project team members
should be able to answer:
What was the approach to analyzing the data?
What was the improvement opportunity?
What is the root causes contributing to the improvement opportunity?
How was the data analyzed to identify sources of variation?
Did analysis result in any changes to the problem statement or scope?
The way to solve the problem is to determine what the root causes are, and should not be
considered based on the symptoms. One good thing about Six-Sigma methodology is that it
focuses on process improvement instead of on a fixing the finished product concept. The
process has to be able to produce a defect free product. It is a more proactive approach when
compared to the previous quality assurance inspection concept.
IMPROVE:
The purpose of the Improve Phase (Six Sigma Academy, 2000) is to:
Generate Ideas
Design, Pilot, and Implement improvements
Validate Improvements
45
Improve--determine how to intervene in the process to significantly reduce the defect levels.
Several rounds of improvements may be required. Recently, special emphasis has been given
to reducing variability (McClenahen, J., 2002).
As an outcome of the Analyze Phase, Six-Sigma project team members should have a strong
understanding of the factors impacting their project, including:
Key Process Input Variables (KPIV) the vital few "Xs" that impact the "Y"2.
Sources of Variation where the greatest degree of variation exists.
Even though, in this phase, there will be a lot of statistical tools being used, Six-Sigma also
uses a working team; brainstorming to seek problem solving actions. It is similar to the
Quality Control Circle (QCC) in the Japanese approach, or small group activity in Kaizen, but
in Six-Sigma it is more precise in facts (data), rather than using people's feelings, or common
sense, for decision-making.
CONTROL:
The purpose of the Control Phase (Six Sigma Academy, 2000) is to institutionalize
process/product improvements, and monitor ongoing performance. Following the Improve
Phase, the Project Team needs to transition control of the process back to the Process Owner.
Performance parameters
Corrective measures
Referring to McClenahen, 2002; Control, once the desired improvements have been made, put
a system into place to ensure the improvements are sustained, even though significant
resources may no longer be focused on the problem.
2 A fundamental formula used in 6-Sigma is that "Y" is a function of "X."Y = (f) X, in mathematical terminology, "Y" is the dependent variable while "X" is the independent variable.Expressed in another way, "Y" is an output resulting from a number of inputs or "Xs."
46
Table of Abbreviations
CEO Chief Executive Officer
DMPO Defect Per Million Opportunity
DFT Demand Flow Technology
ISO International Standard Organization
JIT Just In Time
PDCA Plan, Do, Control and Action
QCC Quality Control Circle
SPC Statistic Process Control
SMG Small Group Activity
TGW Things Go Wrong
TPM Total Productive Maintenance
TQM Total Quality Management
US United States
USA United States of America
47
Implementation of Six-Sigma in Thailand:Experiences of Six-Sigma Implementation
By: Mr. Naruepont Pongcharoen
Master of Public and Private Management (Bangkok Thailand), 1998
International Graduate School of ManagementDivision of Business and Enterprise
University of South Australia
Submitted on this 17 of December in the year 2005for the partial requirements of the degree of
Doctor of Business Administration
Table of contents
Page
Abstract I
Title 2
Introduction 2
Literature Review and Finding in Second Research Paper 3
Research Questions 11
Research Methodology 11
Sampling Unit and Data Collection 12
Participant Back Ground 14
Six-Sigma Organization 15
Six-Sigma Implementation Phases 16
Six-Sigma Activity 17
Data Analysis and Discussion 18
Conclusion and Recommendation 25
Matrix Model 29
Six-Sigma Implementation Model for Thai Manufacturing 30
Reference 31
Appendixl Six-Sigma Methodology 32
Table 1. Adaptation to Thai's Culture 26
Table of Abbreviations 36
Abstract
Literature review reveals that Six-Sigma methodology was developed by an American
engineer who worked for Motorola since 1980. This methodology was acknowledged and
embarked by other American companies when General Electric Company introduced Six-
Sigma to its organization. However, the difference in culture could be attributed to the fact
that they each utilize a different form of management characteristics, organization
behavior, decision marking, philosophy, and business strategy. Thai culture and American
culture has many differences when compared to each other. Thai culture implications to
Six-Sigma implementation in Thai manufacturing were studied in the second research. The
second research found that Thai culture did have adverse implications and that those
successful in implementing Six-Sigma were required to adapt their management approach.
With regards to limitations of that research; most of participants are American subsidized
companies. Researcher would like to do future study by selecting a purely Thai
organization to reduce the American culture bias. One Thai factory was selected and an in-
depth case study was used as the research methodology. The research was carried out over
a 4 month period of time, focusing on each step of the implementation process. Research
started with interviews of Top management, and the Project deployment manager, to see
the overview of the company's implementation of Six-Sigma. Researcher also surveyed the
plant to observe the company's working environment. The next step was document review
to gather more secondary data, as well as to interview concerned people such as Black
belts, process owners and workers to get different opinions about what has to be done. For
rigor data, observation and participation is also being performed for data collection. The
management approaches used to create successful implementation of Six-Sigma in the Thai
cultural environment was reported in the discussion and conclusion of this reports findings.
1
Title
Implementation of Six-Sigma in Thailand: Experiences of Six-Sigma Implementation
Introduction
Research portfolio's first paper literature review reveals that Six-Sigma methodology was
developed by an American engineer who worked for Motorola since 1980. There was
acknowledgement and embarkation of Six-Sigma by other American companies when GE
introduced Six-Sigma to its organization. Six-Sigma methodology supported those
American companies to increase their quality and or productivity.
It is also found that culture becomes a framework for molding organizational behavior,
(Pang, Roberts, Sutton, 1988). This difference in culture could be attributed to the fact that
they each utilize a different form of management characteristics, organization behavior,
decision making, philosophy, and business strategy. Thai culture and American culture are
vastly different from each other. The question arises that if Thai manufacturers were to
introduce Six-Sigma into their organizations, would the Thai culture cause obstacles or
have negative implications affecting implementation.
Researcher has studied in research portfolio's second paper, the following research
questions; what are the Thai culture implications on successful implementation of Six-
Sigma and, if any, how those companies are managing them. The second research paper
used a series interview approach as a research methodology. Semi constructive
questionnaires were used to interview top management of the selected companies. The
results of this research were reported in the previous research paper. The limitation of that
research was that most of the participants are American subsidized companies. Therefore,
they have more or less absorbed their parent corporate culture into its organization, or they
are familiar with the American working culture.
Regarding the limitation of the second research paper, researcher will do supplementary
research and a case study will be deployed as the research methodology. The aim of this
study is to describe and explain how, and why, the selected unit performed. A purely Thai
company will be selected to participate in this research. The research questions will be
2
based on the results found in the second research paper. The research questions, for the
selected Thai company, are designed to enhance understanding of how and why the
company implemented and managed to address those questions in order to achieve
successful Six-Sigma implementation. Case study research can be helpful to provide a clear
descriptive and explanation designed to promote understanding of its implementation.
Results of this research can be used as an example for other Thai manufacturers who plan
to introduce Six-Sigma.
Literature Review and Finding in Second Research Paper
The first research paper in this research portfolio is a review of literature; this review of
literature aims to reveal knowledge of the Six-Sigma process; definition, revolution,
methodology and what are the key success factors of Six-Sigma implementation in the
United States? 9 Key Success factors were found from literature review; Top management
involvement and commitment; Breakthrough management characteristics;
Communication; Training; Organization infrastructure and resources allocation; Process
Improvement; Link Six-Sigma to Human Resources Management; Personal Qualification
and Tracking and follow up system when implemented in successful American company.
Literature review also reveals that the Thai culture did have an implication on Six-Sigma
implementation due to Thai culture serving as a framework for shaping and guiding the
thoughts, the actions, and practices as well as the creativity of its members. It is
transmitted, learned, and shared. Cultures, or people characteristics, are a pattern of
people behavior and performance. International culture was divided by two contexts;
"High Context Culture" and "Low Context Culture". Context is defined in this case in
terms of how individuals and their society seek information and knowledge. People in
each group have similarity in characteristics. American culture was claimed as "Low
Context Culture" and in the mean time; Thai culture was claimed as "High Context
Culture" (Hall, 1960, 1976, 1990).
It made quite clear the fact that Thai's and American's differ in culture. Thai and
American cultures were further studied and it was found that Thai and American cultures
are different in many dimensions as studied by Dr. Greet Hostede (Hostede, 1980); Thai
people have a much more collectivist culture, Thai's have high power distance, Thai's are
3
fairly comfortable with uncertainty, but less than USA, and Thailand is much more
oriented toward Feminine values. Researcher has been further studying the Thai culture.
The purpose of this study is to see whether or not the Thai culture creates obstacles, or has
implications on Six-Sigma implementation. Thus, pertinent Thai culture characteristics
could be concluded as follows;
Smooth Interpersonal Relationship Orientation culture. This orientation is
characterized by the preference for a non-assertive, polite and humble type of
personality, as well as the preference for relaxed, and pleasant interaction which
accounts for the "smiling" and "friendly" aspects of the Thai people.
Thai's are characterized as being self-admiring. They would like to work in an
individual manner so they can do what they want and also that the job or
organization should be less controlled and not adhere strictly to the rules. Thai's are
characterized as having, no work discipline and claimed to be less efficient when
working in a team.
Thai people are characterized as not being straightforward, ambitious and/or having
aggressive personalities similar to the western countries, although still highly
capable. They are not tolerant and are hardly ever successful. However, if
management approaches with "Soft" and "Polite" it will often guarantee cooperation.
Thai's value "Face Saving". Thai's always use soft approaches or indirect ways to
solve their problems. If the case concerns individuals Thai's do not like to strike
hard at the point.
Most Thai people are characterized as having the "Criticize Avoidance" value. They
try to avoid conflict. They will keep quiet, make no comments, or will not debate
when working in teams as a result of "Grateful Relationship Orientation" and
"Smooth Interpersonal Relationship Orientation" values.
Most Thai's are more flexible with good responsiveness to the situation.
4
Most Thai people believe that things are difficult to change. The result is less
innovative thinking and fewer corporation changes.
Thai's are characterized as having the "Inter-dependence" value resulting in the
desire to see a return when they make any contribution or actions.
Regarding the cultural differences between Thai's and American's, the ways used for
successful implementation of Six-Sigma in the United States might not be the same, or be
successful, when used in Thailand. The question is "What implications does the Thai
culture have on Six-Sigma implementation."
Management Characteristics and Management Approach
Top management is the most influenced by the successful implementation of Six-Sigma.
It not only requires involvement and strong commitment from top management as found in
literature review, but also includes a proper management approach. Top down and
breakthrough management approach is a key for successful implementation. Each Six-
Sigma Project must directly improve the bottom line financial results. From a managerial
point of view, Six-Sigma focuses on "End" more than "Mean" by utilizing a breakthrough
management approach. This management approach is called "Result Oriented". Close
follow up and monitoring with aggressive drive force is considered normal practice for a
"Result Oriented" approach resulting in strong working pressure for all concerned
employees.
Literature review reveals that Thai people are not characterized with straightforward,
ambitious, and aggressive personalities. They are not tolerant and are hardly ever
successful. Thai workers prefer management approaches that are "Soft" and "Polite"
(Kaisith, 1981; Komin, 1991). The question is whether the aggressive approach manner
utilized in Six-Sigma breakthrough management can be used in the Thai working
environment or not?
5
Thai workers also have a concept of "Fun" and "Work" in combination (Kaisith, 1981;
Komin, 1991). Thai's always focus on activity or what is called "Activity based"
management aiming to get support from their employees. This culture characteristic
allows most of the Thai workforce to focus more on activities rather than results. Again,
will close follow up and monitoring with aggressive drive force from top management, as
required in "Result orientation", be usable for Thai workers or not?
Process Improvement
Process management is radically different from other approaches to management. It is
often counter intuitive, demanding a totally new way of thinking for those involved. As
opposed to performance management, which focuses on efforts to motivate employees,
process management looks at controlling the process and not solely at controlling
employees. Process management regards the entire organization as one system that is
composed of a number of processes, in which the human element is only one of several
factors affecting the outcome. Only by continually improving all critical processes can the
organization continue to prosper. A manufacturing organization is a system composed of
vast numbers of processes and means a shift to a more cross-functional view of the
organization. In this cross functional view it is important to look at the major processes as
they cross departmental boundaries. Recruitment, budgeting and purchasing, for example,
are processes that are usually the primary responsibility of a specific department, yet they
often involve and affect people from several departments. A process view shows the need
for co-ordination and co-operative management and communication. It also entails
defining the process owner to establish accountability for process development; defining
and monitoring critical processes, quality measures, and customer requirements.
Six-Sigma methodology is aimed at improving the process that can create defect
opportunities. Manufacturing process improvement, in the sense of Six-Sigma
methodology, is that the working team must seek out where, and what, factors of the
process or input can be deviated resulting in defect. Once these areas are localized, the
working team must then try to determine ways in which to improve and then control that
process. Essentially this requires the Six-Sigma project team to utilize "Out Box Thinking"
to seek new ways, or new methods, of working. Concerned persons such as process
6
owners or working teams have to open their minds and be ready to embrace change.
However, Thai's culture is in direct contrast with this concept. Regarding the study of
Thai culture, most Thai people believe that it is too difficult to change that which has
always been considered acceptable as Religion-Psychical Orientation of Thai's value. As
earlier mention, more than 90% of Thai's believe in Buddhism religion. One result of
Buddhist teaching is that Thai's believe things, which occur in their lives, are dependent
on their karma and thus, cannot be changed. Thai's are considered to be more flexible
with a good responsiveness to any given situation (Komin, 1991). Therefore, when
something happens, or goes wrong in any given situation, instead of trying to solve the
problem, they prefer to adapt themselves to the situation instead of making changes. The
result is less innovative thinking and fewer corporate changes. This particular aspect of the
Thai culture could be an obstacle to successful implementation of Six-Sigma in terms of
"Outbox Thinking" or "Changing" environment.
Team Work
Six-Sigma projects require all work to be performed as a team. Six-Sigma methodology
has 5 phases; to "Define" where the problem area is and what the problem is; "Measure" is
to collect all concerned data; "Analyze" the collected data; "Improve" seeking for
improvement; and "Control" last phase to keep maintained (details see appendix 1).
Teamwork is strongly needed for all Six-Sigma projects. The best solution to any problem
always comes from a variety of knowledgeable opinions; diversity in individual
experience or individual competency. Brain storming and open discussion is also a key
word in "Team Work". Once the best solution is selected, members in the team need to
put forth great effort to complete those tasks. This concept is also in direct contrast with
Thai's culture. Thai's are characterized as being less efficient when working in teams.
Most Thai people have also been characterized as having the "Criticize Avoidance" value
and "Smooth Interpersonal Relationship Orientation" (Komin, 1991). These culture
characteristics, in essence, identify most Thai's as a conflict avoidance culture who do not
want to confront each other even if they disagree. When they are in a group of working,
they will keep quiet, make no comments, and will not debate to defend their position. The
consequence of these culture or value patterns is that Thai's are claimed to be less
effective and efficient when working as a team.
7
Link Six-Sigma to Human Resources Management
Many successful cases in American companies linked Six-Sigma to Human Resources
Management. For instance, linkage with promotion and recognition systems; anyone that
would like to get a promotion must be involved in a Six-Sigma project or must be certified
as a Black belt. Another practice is the recognition system, stock options are provided to
Champion or Black belt's who are involved in Six-Sigma implementation. However,
Thai's culture gives importance to seniority with such programs as "Seniority Based
Promotion" to advance employees (McCampbell, Jongpipitporn, Umar, Ungaree, 1999).
Moreover, Thai's are characterized as having an "inter-dependence" value resulting in their
aim to see a return whenever they make contributions or actions.
Moreover, recognition systems used in successful US manufacturing companies found that
promotion or recognition is done individually, for the key person only; Champion or Black
belt. Thai's culture was characterized as having the "Inter-dependence" value (Komin,
1991). The inter-dependence value with regards to Thai's mean interactions between, and
among, Thai people is of a give and take nature. Even though Thai's give something to
others, it does not mean they will not demand a return for their generosity. However, it is
normal in Thai's culture that the one who takes will return the favor in some way or
another. In the case of Six-Sigma implementation, if recognition is provided for some key
persons only, workers who participate in the team and do not receive any benefits, would
create trouble for the company as they try to encourage Thai workers to support this
implementation.
It could be concluded that Thai's and American's have very different cultures that more or
less indicate a successful Six-Sigma implementation. Many Thai manufacturers embarked
this methodology to their organization and claim to have been successful. The question for
the successful companies is "how those companies are practicing or managing Six-Sigma
in the Thai environment." The research questions are as follows;
1. Can Breakthrough methodology and Result orientation in Six-Sigma methodology
be used with Thai people or Thai Manufacturing?
8
Can "Out Box" thinking concept and "Changing" environment be implemented in
Thai's culture?
How did those companies build "Team Work" to support Six-Sigma
implementation?
Is performance-based promotion and Individual recognition system being used with
Thai people or Thai manufacturing?
In regard to researcher questions and data analysis, Thai's culture does have an implication
on Six-Sigma implementation in Thai manufacturing; Thai's culture created obstacles to
"Result Oriented", "Team Working" and "Individual Recognition System". However,
there is no problem on 'outbox thinking or changing environment" and "Performance
Based Promotion". From these research results, it can be summarized that in successful
Six-Sigma implementation mosti: of the participants have adapted their management
approach as follows;
Clearly state in the company policy that everyone in the organization has to be a
part of Six-Sigma implementation.
The policy can be a clear set of directions the company would like employees to
read, understand, follow and comply with. Participation of all employees is one of
the key success factors. The policy could be utilized as a management
communication tool to get involvement from all of their employees. Most of the
companies already have policies which clearly state that all employees have to be a
part of Six-Sigma implementation.
Setting Objective targets, clear responsibility and deployment from top to floor
level.
To get commitment from Thai people with better follow up performance and
results, objective target deployment is very important. It must be very structured
and properly deployed from top to floor level. This can be a valuable management
9
tool to support and create "Result Orientation" value for Thai's working
environment.
Created efficient follow up system with close monitoring by top management.
As Thai values found in literature review pointed out, Thai's focus more on
activities than results. Thai's will put high priority on its activity even if they
sometimes lose control of the results or keep on track. All of the participants
confirmed that a reliable performance monitoring and follow up system is very
important and must be provided to them. Top management is required for close
follow up and review of the results to make sure that everything is on track and
also sustainable after project post. These actions could promote "Result
Orientations" for Thai's working environment.
Process owner should be involved from the beginning of improvement phase.
To avoid resistance to change from Thai employees, it was recommended that
involvement of workers, or process owners, should begin in the early stages during
the objective target setting and improvement phase. Involving workers early on
has enabled the company to obtain a commitment from workers effectively
reducing the workers resistance to change.
Built up Black belt leadership to lead implementation working group.
To build team work in Thai's working environment, project leader such as Black
belt is a key factor. Input from literature review and interview found it is difficult
for Thai people to contribute and participate during a project meeting due to Thai's
culture. Therefore, as project leader, Black belt must utilize his strong leadership
skills to encourage participation, as well as garner support for the project.
Create "Activity base" and combine with "Fun" and "Work" concept to promote
Six-Sigma implementation.
10
As found in literature review; Kaisith, 1981 research report that most Thai workers
have a concept of "Fun" and "Work" with the activities being combined. This was
also found in many cases from research participants companies.
7. Motivate employees by providing recognition program with team or group.
Recognition is very important to encourage employees and team recognition is the
most preferable choice from these participants. Many of the companies used
monetary rewards such as linking the successful results with their annual bonus for
all employees. However, for individual recognition, some companies have also
used rewards such as providing company stock options for key person; Black belt
but it was treated as a highly sensitive issue or highly confidential in some cases.
Research questions
Regarding the limitation in the second research paper and to clearly understand the research
topic, this research aim is to study "How and Why" this successful factory performs or
manages its organization in Thai culture environments. The results of the second research
paper found that most of the successful Thai companies used the six items approach, as
above mentioned, to its employees to achieve Six-Sigma implementation. Thus, researcher
will use the seven items found in the management approach in the second research paper as
key questions for this research. This case study will describe or explain the selected factory
management of the six items found.
Research methodology
One of the limitations found when researcher did the portfolio second research paper was
that the series interview research methodology was a limited data collection in that time
and it is only one single source of data collecting. For the most part data collecting is the
opinion of project leaders or top management. It is difficult to collect all details of its
activities. One case study research methodology will be deployed for this research. The
aim of this study is to describe and explain; how and why the selected unit was performed
11
and why they were not successful in the first phase and how they adapt themselves for
success later.
Case study is designed to be descriptive or explanatory because the Case study's unique
strength is its ability to deal with a full variety of evidence; documents, artifacts, interviews
and observations. Case study research methodology is also good (Yin, 1994);
To explain the causal links in real-life interventions that is too complex;
To describe an intervention and real life context in which it occurred;
Can illustrate certain topics within an evaluation;
To explore those situations in which the intervention being evaluated has no
clear, single set of outcomes;
Be a "meta-evaluation".
Sampling unit and Data collection
Another limitation found in the second research paper was that even though selected
participants were Thai factories located in Thailand and managed by Thai management, 5
of the 6 participants were subsidized by American mother companies. It could be claimed
that there will be an adaptation of working pattern, management style or corporate culture
which transfers from their mother companies. The Six-Sigma implementation may be easy
for them to adapt its organization. To reduce the above bias and American management
culture influence, the sampling unit was selected from the participants in the research
portfolio paper two due to the fact that it is an authentic, local, Thai company.
The research was carried out over a 4 month period, focusing on the steps of
implementation. Research started by interviewing Top management and the Project
deployment manager to see the overview of its implementation and surveyed the plant to
see the working environment. Document review for secondary data collection to see all
Six-Sigma related activities was obtained then as well. Next, researcher conducted
interviews with concerned people such as Black belts, process owners and workers to
obtain different opinions or a different aspect of the process. Finally, in order to obtain
rigor data, observation and participation are also being performed for the data collection
12
areas such as participation in Six-Sigma Black belt training, new employee orientation and
Six-Sigma project meeting.
Data collection can be summarized as follows;
Interview
To complete data collecting, interviewees were divided into 4 groups;
Management consists of Quality Director and Six-Sigma project manager;
Supervisor group or process owners;
Black belts;
Operators or workers
To rigor data, the groups were classified by position, responsibility, or tasks. The reason
for classifying the group, as described above, is due to the fact that the researcher would
like to have different opinions or points of view from each group. Each group was selected
and classified in different levels involving each step of the Six-Sigma implementation. For
instance, management level; to understand what the views of management is when looking
from the top. Also studied, due to their level of involvement with policy and object setting,
is top management. The Six-Sigma project manager is the middle man between top
management and the working team and can provide a different perspective. The project
manager also plays an important role in the success of the Six-Sigma project
implementation. Line supervisors and workers are the team responsible for improving
results and sustaining them during and after post project. There is a large amount of data
that can be collected from these 5 groups. The number of each group is not over 5 persons
as this number is neither too big nor too small for rigor data.
Document review
Review of the concerned documents is historical data collection. Many events or evidences
can be proven by the documents such as Six-Sigma's implementation master plan, Six-
Sigma Company procedure, Six-Sigma training scope, Six-Sigma training record, and
monitoring system. Researcher can use related documents to cross check the data collected
from all interviews and observations.
13
Observation
Inspired by interviews and document review, researcher also collected data by means of a
plant tour, participation in Six-Sigma project meetings and observations on how they
communicated to their employees via a poster campaign as well as intranet Six-Sigma web
site access. Participation of researcher can easily explain the causal links in real-life
interventions.
Participant Background
The participant is a local Thai company and is a public company that is located outside
Bangkok. The company was founded 20 years ago with currently approximately 1200
employees. The objective of the management in introducing Six-Sigma to the factory was
to initiate a cultural change within the organization. It was expected to improve
continuously as a breakthrough style. jn 1999, when Six-Sigma was originally brought into
use within the organization, it was at the request of their purchasing companies. This
company is a computer parts manufacturer. The purchaser required the Thai company's
products to be of very high quality and reliability. Purchasing companies specified their
requirements and asked the factory to embark Six-Sigma methodology into its organization
in order to meet those requirements. The purchased felt this would help ensure that the
factory's product quality was good and reliable. Since the factory did not originate Six-
Sigma it was, therefore, not successful at all. During that time, the company hired one
experienced Black belt to run the project. There was no Six-Sigma organizational structure
and no clear policy. As a result, Six-Sigma could not garner support from others including
management, process owners and workers who had been appointed to be a part of the
project team. Later in 2001, there was a change in management, a new Chief Executive
Officer (CEO), who was motivated to implement Six-Sigma projects in the factory. The
new CEO was American and had been working with Six-Sigma methodology before
joining the Thai Company. He established a new company strategy to promote Six-Sigma
implementation. A management representative was hired and acted as the Six-Sigma
project deployment manager. The formal Six-Sigma organization and road map to success
was established (see Six-Sigma organization, Six-Sigma implementation phases and Six-
Sigma activity plan on following page). Presently, the factory has carried out Six-Sigma
for over 4 years already and has claimed to be successful in implementing Six-Sigma.
14
The factory restarted the project by considering the organization of Six-Sigma first as
above mentioned. The CEO was the chairman of the Six-Sigma steering committee. Top
management had a major role in driving the project into success. The Executive Champion
was a representative of the CEO in setting targets while Head of Departments and Sections
were included in the Six-Sigma organization. Belt colors were used to define the role and
duty of each person in the Six-Sigma organization such as Master Black Belt, Black Belt,
Green Belt, or Brown Belt.
Six-Sigma Organization
,She Sligna,
CFO Exec: CI-tampon idagter Black B
Green Belt
Ex Brown
Six Sigma Organization
All Errployees
To measure the project's success, it considered factors from major activities in each of the
4 phases; launch planning, implementation, institutionalizing and sustaining. Their project
was scheduled to be completed within the year 2005.
15
/F197
flifffr/91
cUa)
52!)u)
rip yillpfirpoM
piligillf
/1F r
.
011uif'/111.0I II
y
I
IlayI
Ykytigyy:/yill:.//,,,i,/c,),
1,:
y, ly,,,,y,o,,:v:).11q=
,..11i,.cidU
lt.'11l';'1
....go14E
wfri,111,'
14:b.,4::::::.:,...
/#11.*/),.:,_,1,4:gclrSgrfc14
,,, fcAyl
i 1I
'//'
/
9t11 I It111",:::7a.
?1,1/i,.,':V
,..,.:CO
Az',171/4117441tiihdiffilli11111
/I
P1-/14,,t-.11111/111,,,,K
AE
relopyit I /An
Li ,.
I%
,',/,44': i :ai'1 lig iliallitialti
lamod ,
.L
L,E
izEN
IA ,fi,
7/117/fri
z0
czt
a.,
Cc
cn
"c7:1
a)c47.3...I
czt
a.,
Six-Sigma activity
Six-Sigma activity was plan and follow milestone also indicated as follows;
17
(;oal \'I ilestojie ctivij
All managers and salary employees trained in Six Sigma
Overview
All Hourly employees trained in Six Sigma Overs jew
No of training to be delivered by Champion, only 10% of
the Champion to be selected for this task
No of training to bi. delivered by Steering Committee
No of training to he delivered by BB ( only 10% of BB to
be selected for this task
No of training pLr person to be delivtred by GB to be
selected for this task )
Average training hours per salary employee per year
Average training hours per hourl employte per year
I PrOnr
Clip. / (lip.
r :.ffi
Jl)plies
I KR
/ Kit
to
( iK
X
I in
Rep.
X
I
o
:'
Minimum project in queue
Require Problem statement, definition, estimate of
annualized saving and approval
Quality of project in queue is detcrmined b} a minimum of
70% project being succssfull) corn leti.d and movtd to the
realization phase
No project in waiting list for more than a year
-.
I .
Graduated BB can ork simultaneousl 2 to 3 projects
Graduated GB can work simultaneously I to 2 projects
.
______________ X
A ''
.,.
BB must update thi, status of tht,ir projeits against plan and
metrics
GB must update the status of their project against plan and
metrics
FinancL Rep must sign oft project bdore moving from
Measure or Analyze to lmproe Phase
r
CE
X
X X
I
Minimum net saving value per BBs propect per year
Minimum net saving value per CBs protcu per sear
Quantity of project per 'ear per BB
Quantity of project per scar per BB
X
X
. 'j
X
X
X
X
Maximum number of project with Soft' saving
Oerall net saving value per bear
The measurement of each Six-Sigma project's success was not yet readily concerned with
cash items. This is quite different in successful American companies in the U.S.A., as
found in literature review, where emphasis is placed on cost saving. However, the project
deployment manager cited that, at the present time, it is under consideration by Top
management to measure the success results by cash saving.
Data Analysis and Discussion
Regarding the findings in the second research paper, the companies have been successful
by implementing 6 major approaches for Thai's working culture;
1. Establish Six-Sigma company policy and state clearly in the policy that everyone in the
organization has to be a part of Six-Sigma implementation.
Policy can be directions for which the company would like employees to do, to follow and
comply with. Regarding result findings in the second research paper, participation and
cooperation of all employees in Six-Sigma implementation is also one of the key success
factors. The policy is a management tools which can be utilized to obtain involvement of
their employees. Most successful Thai companies have a policy statement of Six-Sigma.
The policy clearly states that all employees have to be a part of Six-Sigma implementation.
Policy statement has to be properly communicated to its employees.
Input from workers who participated in the research interview claimed that they put a high
level of effort into supporting the Six-Sigma implementation. They did this even though
there are no extra benefits for participation, because it is clearly stated in the company
policy they are required to participate in Six-Sigma. They have committed to working hard
to support Six-Sigma activities.
It is proof that a clear policy and proper communication to all employees is an important
factor in gaining employees cooperation and full hands support. Further evidence was
found that illustrated how important it is to have a Six-Sigma policy statement and proper
communication; Management cited that the original attempt to integrate Six-Sigma in year
2000 into their company resulted in unsuccessful implementation due to the lack of
commitment or cooperation by their employees. Management confirmed the
18
implementation was run by a small group of people. One person was appointed to be Black
belt, was sent out for training, and then brought back to run the Six-Sigma project. The
remainder of the employees did not understand the concept of Six-Sigma or why and how
employees have to get involved.
Recently, a Six-Sigma policy statement was generated and communicated thru many
channels. New employees will be briefed about the Six-Sigma policy, and its concept,
during their orientation session. A two hour training program on the Six-Sigma concept,
methodology, and benefits were provided for all employees. However, information and
knowledge will be different according to specific groups of employees. A Six-Sigma
poster was presented on the information boards that could be found in many common areas
such as in the corridor, canteen or other working areas that reinforced the Six-Sigma
concept. The factory also created a Six-Sigma web site and placed pages on the Six-Sigma
policy in their company intranet that employees could access at anytime.
Interviewees alsoalso expressed comments tha a better understanding of the benefits from the
Six-Sigma project created more cooperation from the workers. Since Six-Sigma can
improve their product quality or increase productivity, it also reflected improved their
performance.
2. Setting objective targets, clear responsibility and deployment from top to floor level.
Regarding literature review it was revealed that Thai people are not characterized with
straightforward, ambitious and aggressive personalities. Thai workers prefer management
approaches that are "Soft" and "Polite". Thai workers have a concept of "Fun" and "Work"
in combination with more focus on activities rather than on results (Komin, 1991). For this
kind of value, it could be claimed that "Mean" is more important than "End". It seems to be
in direct conflict with the key success factors in implementing Six-Sigma. One of the key
success factors in implementing Six-Sigma requires a management approach that focuses
on the bottom line result, also known as "Results orientation".
As previously stated regarding Thai values found in literature review, Thai's will put high
priority on their activity's which can sometimes result in a loss of control of the results or
being able to keep on track. Results from the second research found that all of the
19
participants confirmed that performance monitoring and follow system is extremely
important and that the company needs to provide them. Top management is required for
close follow up and reviewing of the result to make sure that everything is kept on track
and also remains sustainable after project post. These actions could promote "Result
Orientations" for Thai's working environment.
In this case the company also set Six-Sigma objective targets, roles and responsibility and
delegated each function to support the result oriented goals. First, a well defined Six-
Sigma structure was established to make clear each person's responsibility since the early
implementation attempt did not achieve the desired objectives. The CEO was the chairman
of the Six-Sigma steering committee. Top management had a major role in driving the
project into success. The Executive Champion was a representative of the CEO in setting
targets while Head of Departments and Sections were included in the Six-Sigma
organization. Belt colors were used to define the role and duty of each person in the Six-
Sigma organization such as Master Black Belt, Black Belt, Green Belt, or Brown Belt.
The implementation master plan was set and the project achievement was created and
finally deployed down to floor level. The target objective can be linked to each
management function. Their performance will be reflected by the Six-Sigma results.
Each function's objective targets would support each task focusing on the results thus
making it easy for them, and top management, to measure the performance. The target
could be the milestone to follow and monitor to determine the success in implementing
Six-Sigma.
3. Create efficient follow up system with close monitoring by top management.
Again, company management cited that no follow-up system was established in the
original Six-Sigma implementation attempt. Management found it difficult to allocate
resources for close follow up. One Black belt ran the project alone and reported to the
immediate manager. Not having an effective follow up system resulted in a general area
of weakness in the drive to success.
20
After identifying the weak points in the original implementation attempt, as well as to
guarantee achievement of targeted results, the factory has changed its strategy by creating
their own design for a Six-Sigma data base. The Six-Sigma data base can provide all
required information to support management decisions, create proper actions and follow
up to achieve the target goals. These support tools are not only for management, all
employees can access this data base via company intranet and the Six-Sigma web site.
This is beneficial for everyone to update them on a regular basis.
Similar to key success factors found when literature was reviewed, top management follow
up and driving forward is one of the successful factors. Top management follow up in this
company was done in two different ways. First, top management accessed its Six-sigma
web page to monitor the movement, update the project status, and review its performance.
Moreover, a quarterly management follow up meeting was also established. Project
performance was reviewed in the meeting comparing the objective targets and the results.
These actions can support the "Results orientation" approach in the Thai working
environment.
4. Process owner should be involved from the beginning of improvement phase
Regarding literature review of Thai culture it was revealed that most Thai people believe
that things are difficult to change (Komin, 1991). This results in less innovative thinking.
When participants were interviewed in research portfolio paper two, it was found that they
were not consensual, namely, some found difficulty while others did not. The group
answer that there is no culture implication to Six-Sigma implementation was because its
methodology can show the facts by using the real data. If people clearly understand what
is expected from them, there should not be any question of support from the workers. This
company had different opinions from other groups, these groups found a cultural
implication; workers were resistant to change. However they solved the problem by
involving the worker at the beginning of the project start.
This question was asked of workers who participated in this research. They confirmed that
there is no longer a question of changing here. They also claim that Six-Sigma
methodology can provide all the data to prove why we need to change and what the
consequence is. Changing can improve their product quality or increase their productivity.
Many Six-Sigma projects have now proven the success of implementation with their
21
productivity improvement. In addition, at the end of a project, the workers performance is
also well recognized by their boss. Workers, here, have been involved in the Six-Sigma
project from the start and therefore are able to have a positive impact on the improvement
phase. As a result, the workers are better equipped to better control the process after
project post resulting in better product quality and/or increased productivity. Therefore,
there is no question of how to sustain the results accordingly.
5. Built up Black belt leadership to lead implementation working group.
With regard to literature review, Thai's are characterized as being self-admiring (Komin,
1991). They would like to work in an individual manner so they can do what they want.
Thai's are characterized as having no work discipline and claimed to be less efficient when
working as a team. The importance of a Six-Sigma project is team working, especially in
defining problems and improving phases. It can be misleading of improvement if the data
was incorrectly interpreted or information is incomplete.
Research participants confirm that the Black belt is an important role in encouraging them
to work as a team. A Black belt requires strong leadership. The Black belt was selected
by a committee which consists of a Senior Black belt and an area manager. The criteria
for Black belt selection are basic knowledge of statistic techniques and leadership.
Leadership is a primary consideration when hiring a new Black belt candidate but
leadership training is provided for all of them.
However, another key issue was not found in the second research paper. Both middle
management and Black belts claimed that for Thai people, the employee relationship is
just as important as leadership. Having a stronger relationship among groups, results in
better team work and working environments. They commented that a Black belt should
have a chance to select team members or that a Black belt has worked in that area before.
This issue is supported by Komin, 1991's study, Komin which describes Thai relationship
culture "This orientation is characterized by the preference for a non-assertive, polite and
humble type of personality, as well as the preference for relaxed, and pleasant interaction
which accounts for the "Smiling" and Friendly" aspects of the Thai people."
22
Create "Activity base" and combine with "Fun" and "Work" concept to promote Six-
Sigma implementation.
As mentioned in second research paper, and found in literature review, Thai workers have
a concept of "Fun" and "Work" with the activities being combined ; Kaisith, 1981. This
concept was also found in many cases from research participants companies during the
second research paper. To support company activity as Six-Sigma project, most of Thai's
companies, which participated in the research, used "Activity Based" promotion.
Activities could combine a "Fun" and "work" approach. Also found in this research was
that The Company supported having an internal project team presentation event. Teams
can have a chance to show their performance or results to all colleagues.
Moreover, the Company also promotes Six-Sigma activities by having internal company
project competition. The competition is set up as a big event and tries to involve their
employees as much as possible. Both monetary and non monetary rewards were providing
to encourage and motivate its employees.
Motivate employees by providing a recognition program
One of the facts found during research was that this factory provided a recognition
program with both monetary and non monetary awards. However, the recognition
program promoted a team more than an individual. For instance, there was no special
recognition program for key person such as Black belt when compared to American
company usage. Literature review revealed that in GE's case, if someone wants to be
considered for promotion, he/she must be Green belt trained, or in Green belt training.
The awarding of stock options is linked with an individual's specific Six-Sigma
performance (Smith, Blakeslee, 2002).
For team motivation, this factory provided a Six-Sigma project competition. Each team
has to present their projects and outcomes. Voting has been used for the winner.
Monetary awards will be presented to the winning team. However, individual recognition
is still used to encourage their employees and not only for the key persons such as
American companies do. An extra score for performance review will be added for the
ones who participate in Six-Sigma activities. Both management and worker levels also
23
commented that if the company would have the recognition scheme to promote Six-Sigma,
they prefer to have a program for teams more than individuals but that they could not
avoid individual recognition as well.
As already mentioned, findings in literature identified that successful American companies
used individual awards, such as stock options, linked to Six-Sigma performance results.
However, this was not found for this factory. Even though they did not receive special
recognition, and also lost their opportunity to be promoted from their usual position due to
the fact that a Black belt has to leave their normal duty for duration of 2 years for this
company, they were still very happy to work in this position due to the importance of the
role. It could be explained that "Thai's are characterized by the highest "Ego" value of
being independent-being oneself with a very high value of self-esteem" (Komin, 1991).
Black belts claimed that they are so proud to be selected as Black belts, because only a few
people have the opportunity here, that any other lost opportunity is unimportant. It could
be claimed that this is another form of recognition for them; socially recognized.
24
Conclusion and Recommendations
AS finding in the literature review "The ring of management" which was studied by
Schultz, 1994; environment management or culture cannot be ignored when introducing
process improvement and Six-Sigma methodologies into Thai organizations or others
culture. Many improvement and change strategies have failed because of the lack of
understanding and attention to Cultural issues. "Environment / culture management"
circumscribes, indicating the absolute necessity of creating the organizational climate. If
the organizational climate or culture fails to support Six-Sigma, the other efforts will die.
Environment / culture management provides focus on the human elements that are
necessary for improvement and change. Separate this human element from the tools and
methodologies and the transformation will fail to materialize. Historically, organizational
change and improvement efforts have focused primarily on structural or technical change.
These efforts, however, are often unsuccessful, because they fail to recognize that
organizational, structural and technical systems are dynamically linked with human
behavior and culture (Persico, 1992). William Scherkenbach holds the same theory
(Scherkenbach, 1991).
Review of literature revealed that Thai's culture has an implication on Six-Sigma
implementation in Thai manufacturing. However, research results of the second research
paper found that not all management approaches have implications to Six-Sigma
implementation when compared to the literature. Thai's culture obstacles have an impact
in the categories of "Result Oriented", "Team Working" and "Individual Recognition
System". However, there is no problem for Thai people on "outbox thinking or changing
environment" and "Performance Based Promotion". To achieve success in Six-Sigma
implementation, most of the participants in Thai manufacturing companies have adapted
their management approaches, or seek ways of approaching them in order to be more
compatible with the Thai's working culture.
25
Learning from 6 Successful Thai companies the adaptation could be summarized and
presented as follows;
Table 1 Adaptation to Thai's culture
Literature - Culture Implication
Breakthrough methodology and Result
orientation in Six-Sigma methodology could
not be used with Thai people or Thai
Manufacturing.
"Team Work" could be an obstacle to Six-
Sigma implementation
"Performance-based promotion" and
"Individual recognition system" could not be
used with Thai people
Adaptation to Thai's culture
State clearly in company policy that
everyone in organization has to be a part of
Six-Sigma implementation.
Setting Objective targets, clear
responsibility and deployment from top to
floor level.
Created efficient follow up system with
close monitoring by top management.
Motivation by linking the achieved
results to compensation program; bonus
both individual and group.
Continuous use of "Top Down and Results
Orientation" approach until it becomes
corporate culture
Create "Activity base" and combine with
"Fun" and "Work" concept to promote
team working
Built up Black belt leadership to lead
implementation working group.
Motivate employees by providing
recognition program with both a monetary
and non-monetary award with a focus on
team motivation.
26
Regarding the limitation of data collection in the second research paper the researcher has
investigated further to fulfill the study of this topic. A purely Thai company was selected
to avoid American culture bias. An in-depth case study was deployed as the research
methodology. The Participant Company was selected in the second research portfolio.
With regards to the results from the second research paper, the first two years of Six-
Sigma's implementation of this Thai Company was not successful. Company management
cited that no commitment and lack of employee cooperation were found. Management
controlled implementation and support was very weak. Also implementation was not
approached in a constructive manner.
Lesson learned from those 6 implementing firms, management approaches have been
adapted as shown and summary in shown in table 1 above. To make it clear, or easier to
understand; what are common practices in implementing Six-Sigma in Thai culture
environment. Researcher will group all similarities in management adaptation in a major
activity called "Module". The module will sequence them in similar steps of the Six-sigma
implementation as launched by most of the participant's order of performance. Starting
from policy deployment and ending up with recognition to maintain or sustain them.
Module 1: Policy and Communication
Establish clear Six-Sigma company policy and provide an effective communication system
to everyone in the organization. Policy and communication will create understanding of
why this method, what will be gained and what are their roles and responsibilities.
Consequently, there will be cooperation and commitment from employees.
Module 2: Achieving Target and Delegation
Result orientation could be a possible method for the Thai working culture. However,
target and specific responsible person or functions have to be clearly outlined even though
Thai people focus on activity more than the result or give importance to "Mean" more than
"End". Target setting will support Thai management and encourage their employees to
evaluate the achievement, their effort to get the job done, and make it easy to communicate
to their colleagues. Achieving Target and Delegation to each function encouraged
27
employees to focus more on "Result orientation" and "Top down" as important approaches
from a Six-Sigma methodology standpoint.
Module 3: Effective monitoring and evaluating system
The factory has to provide an effective system to support Thai management evaluation of
its performances and support them to allocate resources and decision making. Thai culture
is characterized as "Fun and Pleasure Oriented" which accurately reflects the way Thai
people work. Thai management also tried to find the activity that created a "Fun and
Pleasure" environment. Frequently they look over the results for effective monitoring and
evaluation system, therefore this is seen as an important management tool. Effective
monitoring and evaluating system also needs an effective management control mechanism
such as monthly or quarter reviews, which should be clearly specified.
Module 4: Leadership and Personnel Relationship
Key persons such as Black belt or Six-Sigma project leaders are required to have strong
leadership skills and good employee relations with their team members. Ego Orientation,
Criticism-Avoidance, and Value Grateful Relationship Orientation attributed to the Thai
culture could be the key obstacle to allowing Thai people to have an efficient way to work
as a team. The good relationship among their team members is as important as the
leadership of team leader or Black belt.
Module 5: Create "Activity base" and combine with "Fun" and "Work" concept to promote
Six-Sigma implementation.
"Fun and Pleasure Orientation" value of Thais culture, as study by Kaisith, 1981. His
research report referred that most Thai workers have a concept of "Fun" and "Work" with
the activities being combined. To get employees involvement or participation from Six-
Sigma implementation, The Company must consider having activities to support this
concept, such as internal project competition and big presentation event as found from the
researches. The activities could be combining the "Fun" and "Work" concept.
28
Module 6: Group motivation and recognition
Motivation or recognition programs could be monetary or non monetary. It is most
preferable for the successful Thai companies to utilize both an individual and a team
recognition program. florner certification, a non monetary recognition system can also be
used for promoting them.
Matrix Model
Many practical engineers or management may look at Six-Sigma methodology as another
normal approach to Process improvement. However, a major key success factor found in
the implementation process is people, both management and workers. Culture created the
working pattern of the people as found in the literature review. Thus to successfully
implement Six-Sigma in different cultures working patterns of people is an important
consideration.
American culture was claimed as a low context culture, while Thai culture was claimed to
be a high context culture. In the second paper of the research portfolio offers support that
adaptation in the management approach has to be done. Successful Six-Sigma
implementation does not only include understanding its methodology but involving Human
Resource management is also important.
Researcher would like to present lessons learned from these research findings to whoever is
interested in introducing Six-Sigma methodology to its Thai manufacturing environment.
Matrix model for Successful Six-sigma implementation was developed from findings in
research paper 1, 2 and 3.
Matrix will be presented in three dimension; Management; Operation and Recognition
approaches. First the management, operations and recognition has to be considered. Then
each approach needs a vehicle to convey them to get the output. The final step is the
ultimate outcome.
29
,
voy\MM
pmaa
4,10440A4
,cot-orpi-,0""\\M
,V=
.0vA,
,,,w,ovs,v,--
0C
IS
44.71 t0C
epC
L>
CE
44 sEcrt
0.E
,t;',
1=4
mtA
ttv,'!
kArcA
t.,,.sxVZ
#X
"x""44YA
T
.:1=: 73
'co.
.,
N'A
CI:M
OM
VN
,
kl!,\VA
V
\tk-
E0
Schultz, L.E, 1994, Profiles in Quality, QR., ISBN 0-527-76238-5Smith, D., Blakeslee, J.,
2002, "The New Strategy Six Sigma" T & D, 15357740, September 2002, Vol. 56, Issue
9.
Smith, D., Blakeslee, J., 2002, "The New Strategy Six Sigma" T & D, 15357740,
September 2002, Vol. 56, Issue 9.
32
Appendix 1
Six-Sigma Methodology
Six-Sigma Methodology is consist of 5 phases; Define, Measure, Analyzes, Improve and
Control (DMAIC). The details of purpose and the out come of each step are as follows;
DEFINE:
The purpose of the Define Phase is to further refine the Six-Sigma project team's
understanding of the problem. In addition, the project team will use the define phase to get
organized, determine roles and responsibilities, establish goals and milestones, and review
process steps (Six Sigma Academy, 2000). The project selection has to prioritize which
existing process will have top priority for improvement, and that the selected project will
enable maximum leverage and customer satisfaction (Wyper, B., Harrison A., 2000). This
is much the same as McClenahen, J., 2002; Wyper, B., Harrison A., 2000 mentioned,
which related to appropriate selection of projects, problem definition, and defining the
metrics with their baseline and entitlement (optimal) levels.
MEASURE:
Establish techniques for collecting data about current performance (Six Sigma Academy,
2000), and also to measure the capacity of the current process (Wyper, B., Harrison A.,
2000), then highlight improvement project opportunities.
Upon completing the measure phase (Six Sigma Academy, 2000), project teams will have
a:
Plan for collecting data that specifies the data type and collection technique.
Validated measurement system that ensures accuracy and consistency.
Sufficient sample of data for analysis.
Set of preliminary analysis results that provide project direction.
33
Baseline measurement' of current performance.
This is similar to other problem solving techniques. Before starting any improvement
actions, we must know where we are now, and what we should do next. In Six-Sigma
methodology, the current performance has to be measured, and recorded, by the project
team. The data collecting in this phase can be easily used to compare the process
performance before, and after, implementation. It is the way to measure the success of
improvement action. So Six-sigma could not be the abstract but every thing is tangible.
ANALYZE:
Analyze the preliminary data to document current performance (baseline process
capability), and to begin identifying root causes of defects, and their impact. (McClenahen,
J., 2002). The Analyze Phase allows the project team to further target improvement
opportunities by taking a close look at the data (Six Sigma Academy, 2000).
Upon completion of the analyze phase (Six Sigma Academy, 2000), project team members
should be able to answer:
What was the approach to analyzing the data?
What was the improvement opportunity?
What is the root causes contributing to the improvement opportunity?
How was the data analyzed to identify sources of variation?
Did analysis result in any changes to the problem statement or scope?
The way to solve the problem is to determine what the root causes are, and should not be
considered based on the symptoms. One good thing about Six-Sigma methodology is that
it focuses on process improvement instead of on a fixing the finished product concept.
The process has to be able to produce a defect free product. It is a more proactive
approach when compared to the previous quality assurance inspection concept.
In Six Sigma methodology, baseline measurement is validated measurement database before improving(Six-Sigma Academy, 2000).
34
IMPROVE:
The purpose of the Improve Phase (Six Sigma Academy, 2000) is to:
Generate Ideas
Design, Pilot, and Implement improvements
Validate Improvements
Improve--determine how to intervene in the process to significantly reduce the defect
levels. Several rounds of improvements may be required. Recently, special emphasis has
been given to reducing variability (McClenahen, J., 2002).
As an outcome of the Analyze Phase, Six-Sigma project team members should have a
strong understanding of the factors impacting their project, including:
Key Process Input Variables (KPIV) the vital few "Xs" that impact they512.
Sources of Variation where the greatest degree of variation exists.
Even though, in this phase, there will be a lot of statistical tools being used, Six-Sigma
also uses a working team; brainstorming to seek problem solving actions. It is similar to
the Quality Control Circle (QCC) in the Japanese approach, or small group activity in
Kaizen, but in Six-Sigma it is more precise in facts (data), rather than using people's
feelings, or common sense, for decision-making.
CONTROL:
The purpose of the Control Phase (Six Sigma Academy, 2000) is to institutionalize
process/product improvements, and monitor ongoing performance. Following the Improve
Phase, the Project Team needs to transition control of the process back to the Process
Owner.
2 A fundamental formula used in 6-Sigma is that "Y" is a function of "X."Y = (f) X, in mathematical terminology, "Y" is the dependent variable while "X" is the independentvariable. Expressed in another way, "Y" is an output resulting from a number of inputs or "Xs."
35
Performance parameters
Corrective measures
Referring to McClenahen, 2002; Control, once the desired improvements have been made,
put a system into place to ensure the improvements are sustained, even though significant
resources may no longer be focused on the problem.
36
Table of Abbreviations
CEO Chief Executive Officer
DMAIC Define, Measure, Analyzes, Improve and Control
DMPO Defect Per Million Opportunity
KPIV Key Process Input Variables
GE General Electric Company
QCC Quality Control Circle
TPM Total Productive maiantenance
US United States
USA United States of America
37