See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/239433603

Managing Six Sigma projects through the integration of Six Sigma and project
management processes

Article  in  International Journal of Six Sigma and Competitive Advantage · January 2009

DOI: 10.1504/IJSSCA.2009.025165

CITATIONS READS

11 767

2 authors, including:

Vittal S. Anantatmula
Western Carolina University
50 PUBLICATIONS   1,222 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Understanding Project Leadership View project

Project leadership View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Vittal S. Anantatmula on 03 May 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Int. J. Six Sigma and Competitive Advantage, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2009 127

Managing Six Sigma projects through the integration

of Six Sigma and project management processes

Jarvis Gray
Western Carolina University,
1509 Clermont Rd, #T-26,
Durham, NC 27713, USA
Email: [email protected]

Vittal Anantatmula*
College of Business,
Western Carolina University,
Cullowhee, NC 28723, USA
Email: [email protected]
*Corresponding author

Abstract: While Six Sigma concepts and tools have established proven
practices and have demonstrated their worth within industry, the variation and
style in which the Six Sigma projects are formulated and executed leaves much
opportunity for continued development. The purpose of this paper is to propose
a practical framework for integrating conventional project management process
groups, as established by the Project Management Institute and Six Sigma
DMAIC methodologies. The goal of the proposed framework is to enhance the
efficiency and effectiveness with which Six Sigma projects are initiated,
planned, executed and closed. The expected results of the paper will introduce
and elaborate on the new model for the integration and application of
Six Sigma and project management methods. This paper will conclude with
recommendations of the future work needed to validate the model.

Keywords: Six Sigma; project management; DMAIC method; process

improvement; project management effectiveness.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Gray, J. and

Anantatmula, V. (2009) ‘Managing Six Sigma projects through the integration
of Six Sigma and project management processes’, Int. J. Six Sigma and
Competitive Advantage, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp.127–143.

Biographical notes: Jarvis Gray graduated with a BS in Industrial Engineering

from the University of Miami and completed his Masters of Project
Management from Western Carolina University. He has worked within the
areas of project management and process improvement for the past 5 years and
he is Six Sigma Black Belt certified.

Vittal Anantatmula is an Assistant Professor of Project Management in the

College of Business, Western Carolina University. He holds BE (Electrical
Engineering) from Andhra University, MBA from IIM-MDI, MS and DSc
in Engineering Management from the George Washington University. His
current research is focused on integrating knowledge management and project
management, knowledge management effectiveness, project management

Copyright © 2009 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

128 J. Gray and V. Anantatmula

performance and leadership. He has more than ten publications in various

international journals. He has co-authored a book, Project Planning Techniques
(with Praviz Rad). He has presented more than 20 papers in prestigious and
international conferences. He is a certified Project Management Professional
and Certified Cost Engineer.

1 Introduction

Far too often, organisational executives and project leaders fail to see the difference
between the project success and the project management success of their Six Sigma
project initiatives. Cooke-Davies (2002) notes the difference as project success being a
measure against the overall objectives of the project and project management success
being a measure against the management of cost, time and quality within the project.
In the context of these definitions, Six Sigma has notably gained its popularity from the
results of its project success, but the evidence of its application in improving the project
management success of Six Sigma projects is not so obvious. We are motivated to
undertake this study because the past research is sparse on this subject.
Research shows that Six Sigma only employs methods for achieving quality
improvement endeavours, but lack the inclusion of specified processes needed to manage
the projects. Although previous studies have concluded that significant relationships
currently exist between Six Sigma and project management toolsets (Kwak and Anbari,
2004). The pertinent question that remains is, why does there continue to be such a huge
lack of integration between functional Six Sigma and project management processes?
Kwak and Anbari’s findings suggest that integration of Six Sigma techniques and project
management methods for Six Sigma projects is desirable, but unfortunately not practiced.
Within mainstream industries, projects are instituted as a means to meeting strategic
objectives and are employed routinely as a common method for accomplishing goals
such as new product development, new services and improving existing processes.
Likewise, the spread of Six Sigma can be found in virtually all areas of business
including service sectors such as banking and healthcare. However, in many undesirable
cases, the level of Six Sigma maturity and implementation within organisations remains
a prime focus for many research efforts; as our experience suggests that organisations
are willing to implement just enough of the Six Sigma toolsets to reach a variety of
organisational achievements, but leave the programme’s development to chance in the
hands of project managers, and it is manifested either as a success or failure.
The purpose of this study is to understand existing disparities in the implementation
of Six Sigma and project management methods and the concluding goal of this effort is
to develop a functional model that integrates accepted project management process
groups and the Six Sigma cycle of define-measure-analyse-improve-control (DMAIC)
in order to improve the project management performance of Six Sigma projects.
Henceforth, in this paper, the integration of these processes will be referred to as the
Six Sigma Project Management (SSPM) model.
The scope of this paper will centre on the established Six Sigma DMAIC
methodology and the suggested project management process model, as outlined in the
PMBOK (PMI, 2004). The vantage point of the paper will deal primarily with the ‘what’
perspective of the SSPM model in terms of the following:
 Integration of Six Sigma and project management processes 129

• What current research has been done to integrate Six Sigma and project
management?
• What are the generic processes and tools available for integration?
• What resources are required to implement the SSPM life cycle?
• What are the basic roles and responsibilities within a SSPM structure?
The succeeding sections of this paper will be organised as follows. In the next section,
we provide background information to present a historical overview and foundational
setting of both Six Sigma and project management disciplines. It is followed by the
literature review and the purpose of the section is to provide a detailed account of the
principles and findings uncovered pertaining to Six Sigma and project management. We
will then present the research methodology that integrates the literature review findings
and survey methods used in support of this study. The survey results section provides a
summary of responses assessed from randomly selected project leaders of Six Sigma
projects, who represent various industry experiences. The discussion section provides an
interpretation of the results assessed within the study and using these results, we will
provide the framework of the proposed model. Finally, the conclusion section highlights
the future work needed to provide a credible meaning to the SSPM model.

2 Background

2.1 Summarised history of Six Sigma

Historically known for its creation within the Motorola Corporation over 20 years ago,
today Six Sigma is recognised as one of the most prominent quality management and
improvement techniques utilised around the world (Ehrlich, 2002). Motorola engineer
William Smith is credited for developing the Six Sigma concept during the 1980s as a
means to improve organisational operations; however, its roots can be traced back over
70 years with the evolution of the industrial quality management movement. Dating back
to the 1920s, Dr. W. Shewhart pioneered the application of statistical quality control
systems for use within industry. Shewhart’s protégée, Dr. W. Deming, was additionally
recognised for his contributions to advancing quality and process improvement methods.
Deming is most notably recognised for founding the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA)
method to continuous quality improvement during the 1940s; an approach that directly
inspired the Six Sigma framework. Further advancements in the quality improvement
field were lead by Dr. J. Juran’s successful application of quality planning and
control principles in project settings during the 1930s; Dr. G. Taguchi’s use of advanced
statistics to manufacturing process designs during the 1950s; Dr. K. Ishikawa’s
progression of root cause analysis techniques during the 1960s; and leading through the
1970s and 80s with Phillip Crosby’s ‘Zero Defects’ approach to quality management.
In the current economy of intense global competition, customer satisfaction is often
translated into developing products faster, cheaper and better (Ehrlich, 2002). Customers
demand high quality products and services at affordable prices. Consequently, quality
management assumes greater importance more than ever. The need to integrate
Six Sigma processes into many business processes and projects is not an option but a
necessity.
130 J. Gray and V. Anantatmula

2.2 Summarised history of project management

Project management, in general terms, can be dated back throughout the history of the
world. This declaration is supported by Andersen and Jessen (2003), who stated,
“…modern societies are typified by their ability and willingness to change. This change
generates needs; these needs are the prerequisites for development.” Often these
developments lead to initiating projects, which, by definition, are associated with change
because projects are new endeavours to meet the fundamental needs of a group, society
or organisation. Human beings have been planning, organising and managing systems –
integral to project management – that have evolved civilisations from the Stone Age,
through the agriculture age, to the industrial age and currently into the technology age.
As a functioning discipline, Stretton proposes that the era of modern project
management is popularly marked as the 1950s (Stretton, 1993). This period realised
the creation of the official position of project managers on assigned construction and
engineering tasks, the creation of sophisticated project scheduling techniques and the
pioneering of project management planning processes. The 1960s experienced the
continued growth of the project management profession through the perpetual evolution
of project management knowledge areas and the establishment of professional
project management organisations. Continuing into the 1970s, project management
began expanding and adapting to industries outside of construction and engineering
environments. The growth of project management into various enterprises gave way to a
substantial development of revolutionary project tools and techniques. Today, through
the promotional efforts of the Project Management Institute and other influential
organisations, project management practices have become a highly respected and
balanced approach for organisations to respond to change and to achieve strategic
undertakings (Stretton, 1993).

2.3 Value of integrating Six Sigma and project management

Six Sigma quality processes focus on minimising defects and achieving high quality by
improving processes that aim towards perfection. On the other hand, project management
processes are designed to accomplish effective and efficient utilisation of resources.
While Six Sigma focuses on end results, project management focuses on improving the
means to accomplish the end results. Logically, combining these two process should lead
to planning, developing and implementing projects efficiently with a high degree of
project performance in mind from the project initiation phase through to its respective
closeout phase. A combined approach is not only desirable but also a necessity and the
need of the hour.

3 Literature review

Through the initial steps of the literature review process, the following topics were
identified as areas that are associated with organisations that look to implement and
achieve high performing Six Sigma and project management programmes: (1) strategy
development and implementation (2) professional training and competencies and
(3) availability of formal project management tools and processes. The structure of the
literature review section will centre on these three areas, as they characterise essential
functions needed to enhance the likelihood of achieving project management success.
 Integration of Six Sigma and project management processes 131

We have considered these three areas for literature review for valid reasons. Strategy
implementation is often achieved using both the Six Sigma and the project management.
Further, both these methodologies demand professional training and competent people to
implement them successfully. Finally, the question of integrating Six Sigma processes
with project management processes is possible when formal project management tools
and processes are in place.

3.1 Strategy development and implementation

Strategic management involves the arranged managerial decisions that determine the
long-term performance of a company (Van Der Merwe, 2001). Developing business
strategy involves the process of envisioning, developing and executing long-term plans
and programmes within an organisation to achieve a competitive advantage. Strategy
development takes into account key organisational objectives, the analysis of current
and future market performances and stakeholder expectations and then lays out a
comprehensible plan for organisational success. It is common to find strategic plans
developed on three distinct platforms within an organisation: (1) the corporate level
(2) the divisional level and (3) the operational level. The overall performance of the
strategic planning and implementation in each of these areas are significantly correlated
with the overall success of the organisation; subsequently impacting the company’s
ability to gain market share within the industry.
Organisation strategy influences the development of its quality policy. Further,
strategic objectives are closely aligned with quality improvement initiatives. From a
strategic perspective, Six Sigma amply fits into a strategy definition (Anbari, 2004), as
the structure of the methodology is well placed to enhance the value of these objectives
and to validate the efforts utilised during the improvement process. For instance, the
DMAIC model – comprising of define, measure, analyse, improve and control in that
order–provides a clear, step-wise approach to implementing quality improvement plans
that will positively influence customer satisfaction.
The intent of Six Sigma, as it relates to organisational strategy, is to help the
company not only achieve its desired performance levels, but also to sustain those levels
for long-term success. Six Sigma’s philosophy of realising near zero defects and
achieving perfection makes the tool ideal for achieving strategic objectives.
Projects are intrinsically linked to strategic development and implementation as they
are aimed to operationalise strategic objectives. Projects are conceived and executed to
develop products, services and to gain operational efficiency by improving operations
and process. Consequently, it is no surprise that business is becoming increasingly
projectised and global spending on projects costs many billions of dollars annually
(Williams, 2005).
Through benchmarking the management of projects, by way of assessing and
evaluating the practices in which projects are managed compared to at set of
predetermined or existing standards, businesses are realising considerable returns within
their project management functions as these toolsets also provide a ‘win-win’ scenario in
strategy development and execution (Hoerl, 1997). The effective application of project
management processes allows for the on-time delivery of products, processes, or
services, which meet pre-determined cost, quality and resource requirements. This in
turn improves the organisation’s competitiveness by meeting customer requirements,
132 J. Gray and V. Anantatmula

increasing market share and capabilities, expanding products and services, boosting
revenue and allowing for the planned time-to-market of the organisations products or
services.
Studies show that tactical implementation is often the most dissipating aspect of
business strategy efforts (Srivannaboon and Milosevic, 2006). Aligning organisational
strategy development and execution with strategic project systems, like Six Sigma or
project management, provides a network of accountability, efficiency and performance
that could be difficult to achieve without them. While research studies suggest that
companies first measure organisational capabilities and competencies (Grant and
Pennypacker, 2006), the successful deployment of these programmes throughout an
organisation or within specific functional areas will have a beneficial and significant
impact on the total performance. Additionally, the successful implementation of
Six Sigma and/or project management will provide the organisation with additional
competencies and capabilities to capitalise on future opportunities.

3.2 Professional training and competencies

One of the most critical functions of any project is building the project organisation.
Ensuring project success requires exceptional project initiation, planning, implementing
and closing efforts from all of the associated team leaders, members and stakeholders.
Detailed below are common characteristics that are essential to the competencies and
training needs for successful Six Sigma and project management facilitation.

3.2.1 Six Sigma competencies

The scope of Six Sigma competencies in this paper will centre only on the Six Sigma
Black Belt and Green Belt project member roles. The term ‘Belts’ is used to represent
Six Sigma project leaders. ‘Black’ Belts generally receive over 20 days of extensive
project training and can spend approximately 80% of their time facilitating Six Sigma
projects; while ‘Green’ Belts will receive an abbreviated version of the training and
spend up to 50% of their time on the project. Due to the rigid, data driven approach of
Six Sigma’s DMAIC methodology, it is necessary that these Six Sigma practitioners are
well versed in the application of statistical analysis and quality management practices.
Black Belts are responsible for leading and executing Six Sigma projects while Green
Belts are trained in a subset of the Six Sigma methodologies and support smaller
activities within a project (SSA, 2002). Although Black Belts typically receive more
extensive analytical training as compared to the Green Belt role, both are expected to
master a wide range of technical tools for problem solving and for developing into
project leaders capable of managing Six Sigma initiatives from start to end. The goal of
Six Sigma training for these roles is to introduce the key concepts and tools required for
the successful implementation of Six Sigma projects. While the process for selecting
qualified Black Belt and Green Belt candidates should be specified by the needs of the
parenting organisation, it is highly recommended that organisations target training
programmes that (1) provides candidates with roadmaps that designate essential tools
into specific phases (2) focuses more on that actual application of tools and processes
versus the theoretical relevance (3) combines the technical training efforts with
sophisticated statistical software programmes and (4) are tailored to meet the specific
business needs of the organisation (Hahn et al., 2001).
 Integration of Six Sigma and project management processes 133

3.2.2 Project management competencies

Crawford (1997) proposes the model shown in Figure 1 to illustrate the impact of project
management competencies on organisational performance:

Figure 1 Impact of project management competencies

Project Project
Project Organizational
Management Management
Performance Performance
Competence Effectiveness

Unlike the Six Sigma approach where extensive training is required, it is not uncommon
in traditional project management for one to receive on-the-job training for much of
one’s career; while others may even refer to themselves as ‘accidental’ project managers.
However, over the past several years, much research has been performed in regards to
developing competent project managers. El-Sabaa’s (2001) study of project manager
competencies found that human skills, organisational skills and technical skills were
crucial requisites for project managers across various industries. A more detailed view of
those skill requirements and capabilities promoted in developing highly proficient project
managers are: leadership and strategic influence, proficiency in task organisation,
planning and directing skills, effective verbal and written communications, problem-
solving, negotiating and conflict management skills and finally balanced theoretical and
operational knowledge sets.
From a Six Sigma perspective, project management is commonly taught as a subset
of the Six Sigma curriculum with the detailed structure of project management phases
being covered at a bare minimum during the training programme. Because every
Six Sigma project goes through similar design phases and thought processes, we argue
that every Six Sigma endeavour, from initiation to close, could be linked with formal
project management processes. As studies show that current trends in implementing
projects will continue to have an impact on the dynamics and operational flow of
organisations (Crawford et al., 2005), the following links have been found to exist
between the developmental structures of the Six Sigma and project management
disciplines: (1) the need for process driven training approaches (2) superior application of
professional knowledge and (3) the critical need for organisational change management
facilitation.
It is imperative that project leaders in both arenas are aware of their role as change
agents for the organisation, as this skill is vital in generating the required support
and buy-in necessary for the project’s success. Lastly, the need for formal education
and training continues to be a value in both disciplines. Professional licensing and
certifications continue to pave the way for advancements within both professions, along
with providing increased career opportunities to those who obtain them.

3.2.3 Availability of formal project tools and processes

Exercising sound problem solving and decision-making skills are necessary for any
company to survive in today’s highly competitive business environments. Similar
to strategy development, leaders must be able to quickly identify problem areas within
134 J. Gray and V. Anantatmula

their organisation and determine appropriate methods to solve them and quantify the
results. The processes and techniques to solve these problems are commonly classified as
‘projects’ (Munns and Bjeirmi, 1996), which are then delegated to employees with
limited resources to manage them. While Barber (2004) offers that projects work to focus
tasks on a planned set of outcomes, what can be improved in this generic approach are:
(1) the application of detailed steps needed to ensure that specific requirements are
captured and executed properly (2) the establishment of accountability for the work to be
done and (3) the confirmed validation and acceptance of applicable findings to allow for
proper decision makings of the company’s future.
Modelled as an evolution of Deming’s classic Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle, the
Six Sigma DMAIC methodology supplies a disciplined, detailed approach to problem
solving, quality improvement and strategic implementation. Illustrated below are the
main steps that summarise the DMAIC cycle (Figure 2):

Figure 2 DMAIC cycle (see online version for colours)

Process Characterization

DEFINE: MEASURE: ANALYZE: IMPROVE: The CONTROL:

The Problem The current The future current state of The gains to the
and Goals system opportunities the system new system

Process Optimization

The goal of DMAIC is not only to improve business systems, as defined by the problem
statement, but also to sustain the improvements into the future. Commonly found within
the conclusion of each of the steps are project tollgates. These customised checkpoints
are used to confirm the accomplishments of project requirements in each of the
respective DMAIC phases. Ultimately, through the process driven DMAIC approach and
tollgate validations, Six Sigma is able to supply project managers with adequate tools and
methods for successful project execution.
In the project management discipline, specified processes are also utilised to provide
efficiency and effectiveness to project management efforts. Also inspired by Deming’s
PDCA model, the PMBOK (PMI, 2004) presents the following cycle as its recommended
process for accomplishing project management (Figure 3):

Figure 3 PMBOK project management processes

Monitor and
Initiating Planning Executing Closing
Control
Processes Processes Processes Processes
Processes

The goal of these project management processes is to provide organisations with a

scalable approach to managing projects that is flexible to meet the needs of various
industries and tasks. The underlying theme in this approach is that proper accountability
and resources must be established in order to achieve the planned results of the project.
The ultimate goal of this model is to allow all functions of the project management effort
to be a conscious, proactive undertaking.
 Integration of Six Sigma and project management processes 135

No matter what approach an organisation chooses for its implementation of company

strategies, project teams will require formal tools and processes to achieve their tasks.
Having standard project management models, such as Six Sigma or formal project
management processes, in place for organisational project leaders is essential for their
success and the overall success of the organisation. Properly leveraging these processes
and techniques throughout the project will increase the likelihood of project success by
(1) allowing for the seamless implementation of project deliverables (2) improving the
coordination of project resources (3) improving project cost management practices and
(4) increasing the value of the project through thorough planning and execution (Kerzner,
2006). Additionally, Czuchry and Yasin (2003) note that project processes managed
by detailed-oriented managers have an increased likelihood for success; as integrating
Six Sigma and project management methodologies often compel project managers to pay
attention to the details.

4 Methodology

We used two research methods for this study. The first methodology chosen for this
study consisted of a literature research and review approach. The literature review
method was selected to assess existing compositions within the areas of project
management and Six Sigma. The literature review method helped us identify the
importance of integrating these two disciplines to improve project management
performance in general and Six Sigma projects in specific.
The second research methodology consists of a survey of 24 Six Sigma project
leaders who are currently engaged in Six Sigma projects. The goal of the survey was to
assess the leaders in the following areas: (1) differentiate between Six Sigma project
success and Six Sigma project management success (2) gauge the necessity of using
specified project management processes and procedures for the Six Sigma projects and
(3) understand the critical challenges in managing Six Sigma projects within their current
organisational models. Results from both research methods are analysed together in the
discussion section.

5 Survey results

The industries represented in this survey include healthcare, information technology

and manufacturing fields. The survey was aimed to differentiate the respondents’
understanding of Six Sigma project success and Six Sigma project management success,
gauge their views on the necessity of using specified project management processes and
procedures in Six Sigma projects; and gain their understanding of the challenges realised
in managing Six Sigma projects.
Results show that 58% of the respondents have a minimum of 2 years experience
in managing Six Sigma projects and the remaining participants have 5–6 years of
experience of managing Six Sigma projects (Figure 4).
136 J. Gray and V. Anantatmula

Figure 4 Experience profile of the respondents (see online version for colours)

Responding to the question about the number of Six Sigma projects managed, results
show that all the respondents managed Six Sigma projects and 42% of them have
extensive experience of managing six or more Six Sigma projects.
Respondents identified three important themes that define Six Sigma project
management success and they are; achieving the project’s mission or charter,
implementing sustainable solutions to identified problems and controlling the
implemented solutions to realised financial gains.
67% of the respondents have experienced six-sigma project failure at least once; they
identified several reasons of failure, which include failure to identify and manage project
stakeholders and their expectations, inadequate project selection process, inability to
align projects with critical organisational priorities, lack of project management
facilitation, lack of leadership, scope creep, availability of project resources and lack of
accountability on the part of project team members. Some of these reasons are common
reasons of project failure for traditional projects as well.
When asked to rate identified factors on their ability to enhance the probability for
achieving project management success, we found that:
• 70% of the project leaders feel that clearly defining the project mission will increase
the chances of achieving project management success
• 65% feel that top management support will impact project management success
• 60% ranked the final product acceptance as critical to achieving project management
success
• 45% of the project leaders feel that project Communication is key for project
management success
• 40% feel that Stakeholder Involvement is key to project management success.
Managing project risks (10%) and project personnel selection (10%) were not considered
as important. Finally, only one in ten felt that post project review is critical to overall
project management success.
 Integration of Six Sigma and project management processes 137

Respondents, when asked about critical challenges to managing Six Sigma projects,
identified factors such as engaging project leadership and managing organisational
politics, having project resources readily available and properly managing them
throughout the life of the project and the overall management of project stakeholders,
project scope and project schedule.
Participants of the study identified seamless and on-time progression of a project to
DMAIC phases, clear communication and effective management of project scope, risks
and stakeholders as important contributors to project success.
To overcome these challenges and reduce the likelihood of project failure, our
research results suggests that reassessing and defining both project objectives, project
scope and original project schedule, enhancing stakeholder management and
communication efforts and improving the project team member selection process and
engaging project leadership are important. Finally, these results support our contention
that integration of the Six Sigma and project management life cycle phases is highly
desirable.

6 Discussion

The overall relevance of using the literature review and survey analysis was to develop a
holistic view of why there needs to be progressive integration of Six Sigma and project
management methodologies. Using both the research methods, we showed that (1) both
Six Sigma and project management were sound tools that adequately align with the
development and implementation of organisational strategies (2) both programmes are
fully capable of developing successful project leaders when formal training is provided
to its respective practitioners and (3) both Six Sigma and project management
provide beneficial returns to the parent organisation when a formal support framework
and processes are implemented. Again, these dynamics characterise organisations
with successfully implemented programmes and are the nuts-and-bolts of achieving
established goals within a project management organisation. Further, both these
processes complement each other as Six Sigma focuses on end results whereas project
management focuses on improving means to meet end results.
Results from the survey analysis were also very telling in terms of illustrating and
compiling the various perspectives of current Six Sigma project leaders who participated
in the study. Findings showed that Six Sigma project leaders share similar views on what
it means to achieve project success within their projects, but all have divergent beliefs of
how project management success applies within the Six Sigma context. The participant
project leaders have also experienced varying degrees of project failure, but all relied
instinctively on basic project management skills and toolsets to change the direction of
failing projects. Results suggest that the existing relationship between Six Sigma and
project management is very synergetic and complementary of each other. Ultimately,
effective implementation of Six Sigma projects requires the effective execution of project
management processes. Based on the feedback provided by the survey participants,
failure to launch formal project management capabilities within a Six Sigma project
environment results in projects that are out of scope, over-run in cost and schedules,
employee team members that are not accountable for their actions and lack the required
support of stakeholders and organisational leaders.
138 J. Gray and V. Anantatmula

In addition to gaining the unbridled support of executive leadership, the combined

results of the literature review and the survey suggest the need for the following areas to
be addressed within an integrated model of Six Sigma and project management methods:
(1) developing a project selection process that objectively rates projects based on clarity
of the defined scope and objectives (2) clear assignment of roles and responsibilities,
along with the appropriate delegation of project activities (3) apt development of
project schedules (4) the overall management of project stakeholders and project risks
and (5) the implementation of project review procedures. All of these matters are
incorporated within the proposed SSPM Model.

7 SSPM framework

Using the research results discussed above, we propose a framework that integrates
Six Sigma and project management processes with a purpose to provide an overview
of the Six Sigma project phases and their respective deliverables. Coronado and
Antony (2002) state that Six Sigma projects must be targeted for process and product
improvements that have direct impacts on financial and operational goals. The objective
of the SSPM approach is to provide a practical methodology to managing Six Sigma
projects that will enhance the likelihood of achieving project management success. Each
of the listed process phases will play a unique role in developing a comprehensive project
management plan for Six Sigma projects. It is expected that the deliverables attained at
the end of each phase will provide a revised edition to the overall Six Sigma Project
Management Plan. Represented in the figure below is a cross walk mapping of the
Six Sigma process areas with the PMBOK process areas, as proposed by the authors of
this study.

Figure 5 Integration of Six Sigma and project management processes

Six Sigma

DEFINE MEASURE ANALYZE IMPROVE CONTROL

HANDOFF
SSPM

CONCEPT & EXECUTE &

INITIATION PLANNING &
DEFINITION CONTROL
EVALUATE
PMBOK

INITIATE PLAN EXECUTE CONTROL CLOSE

7.1 Project concept and definition phase

The objective of this phase is to evaluate the organisational need for a proposed project
and to establish the conceptual framework of the project definition. The goal of this kick-
off phase is to ensure that the project team has fully assessed the identified problem,
understood the preliminary scope of the project and has thoroughly calculated the
 Integration of Six Sigma and project management processes 139

feasibility of the project prior to its official initiation. The Six Sigma methods exercised
within this stage relate directly to the Define phase; as the tools are used to develop
the concepts to begin meeting business needs. The conclusion of the Project Concept
and Definition phase will result in the creation of a preliminary Six Sigma Project
Management Plan.

7.2 Project initiation phase

The next step in the SSPM is the Initiation phase. The objective of the Initiation phase
is to further analyse the project’s scope and validate the opportunity to improve
upon the current business needs. In this phase, the project’s technical and economic
viability is determined by applying of Six Sigma Measure and Analyse techniques. The
completion of these plans will result in an updated version of the Six Sigma Project
Management Plan.

7.3 Project planning phase

The third step of the SSPM is the Planning phase. The Planning phase is essential for
absolute project success, as the objectives of this phase are to thoroughly detail the
solution generation process and the global approach of future efforts and resources
required to implement sustainable improvements within the system. The Six Sigma
methods associated with the improve phase are utilised within this stage of the project.
The completion of these plans will result in an updated version of the Six Sigma Project
Management Plan.

7.4 Project execution and control phase

The fourth phase in the model is the Execution and Control phase. The goal of this phase
is to implement the project, as specified within the developed project plan and achieve
the planned results. Project execution details the actual work to be done on planned tasks
within the project; while project control addresses the systems required to keep the
project moving within the specified boundaries. The Six Sigma techniques that apply in
this phase correspond with the Control phase.

7.5 Project handoff and evaluation phase

The final phase of the SSPM lifecycle is the Handoff and Evaluation phase. The purpose
of the Handoff Phase is to provide a structure for the closing out project activities and the
release of resources. The purpose of the Project Evaluation process is to analyse the
comparison of planned versus actual performances within the project. The goal is to
provide the organisation with learning opportunities that will grow its Six Sigma Project
Management competencies and capabilities. Cooke-Davis (2002) lists ‘learning from
experience’ as final critical success factor for project management. Figure 6, below,
illustrates the SSPM Model and incorporates the relevant outputs of the model.
140 J. Gray and V. Anantatmula

Figure 6 Summary mapping of the SSPM framework and the related outputs (see online version
for colours)

Project Concept & Project Execution & Control Project Handoff & Evaluation
Project Initiation Phase Project Planning Phase
Definition Phase Phase Phase

Project Project
Project Project Control
Project Charter Improvement Closure
Analysis Plan Plan
Preliminary 6s Project Management Plan

Preliminary 6s Project Management Plan

Plan Activities

Updated 6s Project Management Plan

Updated 6s Project Management Plan
Updated 6s Project Management Plan

Updated 6s Project Management Plan

Execute 6s Project Management Plan

Close 6s Project Management Plan

6s Project Management Plan
Preliminary Project
Project Project Change
Project Project
Measurement Implementatio Management
Improvement Handoff Report
Plan n Plan Plan
Plan

Project
Project Control Maintenance Project Final
Plan Plan Report

Project
Change
Management
Plan

Preliminary
Project
Maintenance
Plan

By implementing the SSPM Model within Six Sigma organisations, it is expected

that the following gains can be realised: (1) enhances the likelihood of achieving
both project and project management success of Six Sigma projects (2) enhances the
project’s predictability and the project team’s ability to manage it (3) establishes
accountability, per individual project, within all levels of the Six Sigma organisation
(4) ensures the on-time completion of deliverables and improves the management of
risks within projects (5) promotes the existing Six Sigma culture of the organisation,
while also fostering a project management culture and capabilities and (6) improves the
overall recording and documentation of utilised project management and Six Sigma
methodologies.

8 Conclusion

In conclusion, the goal of the above framework is to enhance the efficiency

and effectiveness in which Six Sigma projects are initiated, planned, executed and
closed. The goal of this integration is to enhance the project management success of
practicing Six Sigma organisations by reducing the variation within the management of
the projects. While Six Sigma continues to increase its popularity for enhancing the
competitiveness of organisations, it can be fair to say that managing these projects is not
the simplest of tasks. In addition to the required DMAIC phases and statistical
applications, these projects incorporate concepts of total quality management (Goh and
Xie, 2004), organisational change management, business process reengineering, conflict
management, stakeholder management, and a choice of other management strategies
required for overall project success. Through the application of the SSPM model, it is
seen that the integration of Six Sigma and project management processes can form a
synergetic relationship. Additional benefits of executing the SSPM model include
(1) enhanced project definition and focus (2) quantifiable cost analyses throughout the
project and (3) clear-cut approach in the realisation of organisational objectives and
success.
 Integration of Six Sigma and project management processes 141

While Kwak et al. (2004) notes that future improvements to Six Sigma methods
revolves around the broad topic of management processes, it is the author’s professional
opinion that the continued evolution of Six Sigma in industry involves the direct
integration of proven project management techniques and standardisation within the
current DMAIC structure. While this proposed model currently lies within a conceptual
phase, the author would provide the following recommendations on future research to
validate this model.

8.1 Integration of business capability models and the SSPM model

The first recommendation is to develop an integrative approach to assess an
organisation’s current capabilities, in relation to it ability to implement the proposed
SSPM Model. Kwak and Anbari (2006) offers that organisations must analyse and
accepts its strengths and weaknesses to properly sustain long-term success through
Six Sigma principles, concepts and tools. Assessing capability and maturity levels will
allow organisations to gain insights on their ability to implement project systems at
various levels (Andersen and Jessen, 2003).

8.2 Testing of SSPM model in real-life environment

The obvious goal of this recommendation is to evaluate and verify the enhanced project
performance of the SSPM model. It is expected that initial testing of the model may
lead to a variety of issue resolutions and future refinements that will aid in achieving
improved Six Sigma project performance. Additionally, the development of standardised
phase inputs and outputs, similar to the format currently used by the PMBOK, would
solidify the efficiency of the model. The author also suggests that the model is validated
and customised to fit adequately within various industries and/or specific to an
organisation’s business model.

8.3 Developing integrated Six Sigma and project management training model
Following the testing and validation of the model, the author suggests the creation of a
training programme that integrates both the Six Sigma and project management
disciplines into one curriculum.

8.4 Better details on the team roles

The final recommendation on the next steps of the SSPM model is to evaluate
the additional Six Sigma and project management roles that were omitted in this
introductory study. These roles include, but are not limited to the following: Project
Sponsor/Champion, Project Process Owner, General Project Team Members, Master
Black Belts and Project Stakeholders/Customer. It is expected that an evaluation of these
roles and responsibilities will have an impact on those of the Black Belt and Green Belt
project managers.
142 J. Gray and V. Anantatmula

References
Andersen, E. and Jessen, S. (2003) ‘Project maturity in organisations’, International Journal of
Project Management, Vol. 21, pp.457–461.
Anbari, F. (2004) ‘A systems approach to Six Sigma quality, innovation and project management,’
Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Systems Thinking, Innovation, Quality,
Entrepreneurship and Environment (STIQE 2004), Maribor, Slovenia, pp.7–12.
Barber, E. (2004) ‘Benchmarking the management of projects: a review of critical thinking’,
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 22, pp.301–307.
Crawford, L. (1997) ‘Global approach to project management competence’, Proceedings of the
1997 AIPM National Conference, AAIPM 24, Gold Coast, Brisbane, pp.220–228.
Crawford, L., Pollack, J. and England, D. (2005) ‘Uncovering the trends in project management:
journal emphases over the last 10 years’, International Journal of Project Management,
Vol. 24, pp.493–505.
Cooke-Davies, T. (2002) ‘The “real” success factors on projects’, International Journal of Project
Management, Vol. 20, p.185–190.
Coronado, R. and Antony, F. (2002) ‘Critical success factors for the successful implementation of
Six Sigma projects in organisations’, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp.92–99.
Czuchry, A. and Yasin, M. (2003) ‘Managing the project management process’,
Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 103, p.39–46.
El-Sabaa, S. (2001) ‘The skills and career path of an effective project manager’, Interntional
Journal of Project Management, Vol. 19, pp.1–7.
Ehrlich, B. H. (2002) Transactional Six Sigma and Lean Servicing, Leveraging Manufacturing
Concepts to Achieve World-Class Service, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Goh, T. and Xie, M. (2004) ‘Improving the Six Sigma paradigm’, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 16,
No. 4, pp.235–240.
PMI (2004) Guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) 3rd ed., Project
Management Institute.
Grant, K. and Pennypacker, J. (2006) ‘Project management maturity: an assessment of project
management capabilities among and between selected industries’, Transactions on
Engineering Management, Vol. 53, pp.59–68.
Hoerl, R. (1997) ‘Six Sigma and the future of the quality profession’, Quality Progress, Vol. 31,
pp.35–42.
Hahn, G., Doganaksoy, N. and Stanard, C. (2001) ‘Statistical Tools for Six Sigma, GE Research
and Development Center, Report #: 2001CRD126.
Kwak, Y. and Anbari, F. (2004) Success Factors in Managing Six Sigma Projects.
Kwak, Y., Wetter, J. and Anbari, F. (2004) Business Process Best Practices: Project Management
or Six Sigma?
Kwak, Y. and Anbari, F. (2006) ‘Benefits, obstacles and future of Six Sigma approach’,
International Journal of Project Management, 26, pp.708–715.
Kerzner, H. (2006) Project Management, a Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling and
Controlling, 9th ed., John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York.
Munns, A. and Bjeirmi, B. (1996) ‘The role of project management in achieving project success’,
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 14, pp.81–87.
Stretton, A. (1993) ‘A short history of modern project management’, PM World Today.
Vol. 9, p.10.
 Integration of Six Sigma and project management processes 143

Srivannaboon, S. and Milosevic, D. (2006) ‘A two-way influence between business strategy and
project management’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 24, pp.493–505.
SSA (2002) The Black Belt Memory Jogger: A Pocket Guide for Six Sigma Success, Six Sigma
Academy (SSA).
Van Der Merwe, A. (2001) ‘Project management and business development: integrating strategy,
structure, processes, and projects’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 20,
pp.400–411.
Williams, T. (2005) ‘Assessing and moving on from the dominant project management discourse in
the light of project overruns’, Transactions of Engineering Management, Vol. 52, No. 4,
pp.497–508.

View publication stats