Literature Review Concerning the Comparison of the Systems

Abstract

A few authors have investigated two, three or four of the mentioned systems but no authors have compared JTQC, TQM, Deming's system, Lean, BPR and Six Sigma at the same time. Very few articles analysed Deming's system trying to compare it with other systems; the only interesting articles have been written by Gitlow (1994, 1995). Gitlow compared JTQC and Deming's system in detail, finding several points of agreement and disagreement between the two systems. Unfortunately the author limited his research to the two systems. Martinez-Lorente et al. (1998) compared American and Japanese TQC with TQM. The paper is an interesting analysis of differences between American and Japanese ways of implementing the systems. For the authors the differences are linked to culture, politics and company philosophy. The professionalism and specialisation, high turnover rates, easy layoffs and short-term profits of the Taylor's system are the external factors that have created a different approach in the USA. Ricondo and Viles (2005) wrote the most extensive paper in terms of com-parisons. Lean, Six Sigma, TQM, reengineering (BPR) and learning organisation are compared at the same time. In an interesting way they found that many quality tools and techniques are shared by all the approaches, such as the seven basic tools, the seven management tools, Statistical Process Control (SPC), bench-marking, teamwork and brainstorming, to mention the most important. The authors also found that each system has its own specific tools and techniques such as kanban for Lean Organisation, Information Technology (IT) tools for BPR and statistical tools for TQM and Six Sigma. Dahlgaard and Dahlgaard-Park (2006) tried to compare the principles and results of Lean Production, Six Sigma quality and TQM. Some foregone conclu-sions emerged such as Lean and TQM had developed from Japanese practices. In a more original way the authors claim that Lean Production and Six Sigma are new alternative TQM roadmaps, even if there is not any specific validation of this issue in the paper. More recently Johannsen (2011) wrote a paper dedicated to state-of-the-art integration in quality management and pointed out that there is a lack of guidelines A. Chiarini, From Total Quality Control to Lean Six Sigma, SpringerBriefs in Business, DOI: 10.1007/978-88-470-2658-2_3, Ó The Author(s) 2012 9 for integrating Lean Management, Six Sigma and TQM. The results are more a research agenda for the future than a point of view concerning what are the common characteristics and the differences. To sum up, the authors have analysed some, but not all, of the systems, iden-tifying differences in terms of origin, culture, tools and techniques and other factors. However, there is a lack of an accurate comparison among all the six systems in order to understand the common results and critical implementation factors, their differences and whether some of them can be an alternative to the others.