An Analytic Comparison of Quality Management Methodologies

Thaleia Dima – Department of Financial and Management Engineering, University of the Aegean, Kountouriotou, 41, 82100, Chios, Greece

Michail Glykas – Department of Financial and Management Engineering, University of the Aegean, Kountouriotou, 41, 82100, Chios, Greece

Abstract: The purpose of this study is to compare the Six Sigma methodol­ogy and the RADAR matrix, which are used to improve the continuous qual­ity improvement of products, services, and processes in different organ­izations. An analytic comparison of these two methodologies is provided, highlighting the key requirements, similarities, differences, and limitations in their application. Regardless of the mission, needs, and demands every organization has, it is necessary to determine the proper way and a com­bination of methodologies and techniques for its implementation process.

RADAR matrix or “RADAR-logic” provides a structured approach for the evaluation of organizational Results, Approach, Deployment, Assessment, and Review.

Six Sigma methodology is a systematic and disciplined approach to product or service design, including all organizational functions, that aims to reduce defects and improve processes within the final product/service.

Both Six Sigma methodology and RADAR-logic are complex, demanding, and powerful methodologies, and as a result, more time and resources are needed, for their appropriate implementation.

LIMEN Conference

9th International Scientific-Business Conference – LIMEN 2023 – Leadership, Innovation, Management and Economics: Integrated Politics of Research – CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, Hybrid (Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria), December 7, 2023

LIMEN Conference Proceedings published by the Association of Economists and Managers of the Balkans, Belgrade, Serbia

LIMEN Conference 2023 Conference Proceedings: ISBN 978-86-80194-78-3, ISSN 2683-6149, DOI: https://doi.org/10.31410/LIMEN.2023

Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission. 

References

Amar, K., & Davis, D. (2008). A Review of Six Sigma Implementation Framework and Related Liter­ature. In Proceedings of the International Multi Conference of Engineering and Computer Sci­entist (Vol. II, pp. 61-908). Hong Kong.

Andersson, R., Eriksson, H., & Torstensson, H. (2006). Similarities and differences between TQM, six sigma and lean. The TQM Magazine, 18(3), 282-296.

Antony, J., & Banuelas, R. (2001). Six Sigma: A Business Strategy for Manufacturing Organizations. Manufacturing Engineering, 8(3), 119-121.

Breyfogle III, F. W. (2003). Implementing six sigma: smarter solutions using statistical methods. John Wiley & Sons.

Goh, T., & Xie, M. (2004). Improving on the Six Sigma Paradigm. The TQM Magazine, 16(4), 235-240.

Harry, M., & Schroeder, R. (2000). Six Sigma: The Breakthrough Management Strategy Revolution­izing The World’s Top Corporations. Doubleday.

Kuei, C., & Madu, C. (2003). Customer-Centric Six Sigma Quality & Reliability Management. Inter­national Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 20(8), 954-964.

Sokovic, M., Pavletic, D., & Pipan, K. K. (2010). Quality Improvement Methodologies – PDCA Cycle, RADAR Matrix, DMAIC and DFSS. Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering, 46, 476-483. Retrieved from https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:16093281 

Thakore, R., Dave, R., Parsana, T., & Solanki, A. (2014). A review: six sigma implementation prac­tice in manufacturing industries. International Journal of Engineering Research and Applica­tions, 4(11), 63-69.

Voelkel, J. G. (2002). Something’s missing – An Education in Statistical Methods will Make Employ­ees more Valuable to Six Sigma Corporations. Quality Progress, pp. 98-101.