If this box remains here for more than 30 seconds, click this link to try again.
Products & Services »
Best Practice Database
Business Operations » Benchmarking and Quality » Quality » Six Sigma » Program Implementation
Metrics, Graphics, Summary Matrix
Single User: Authorizes use by the person who places the order or for whom the order was placed.
Sitewide: Authorizes use of the report for a geographic site. All people at site can view the report for a year and copies can be printed.
Corporate: Authorizes use for the entire company for a year and copies can be printed. No limitations for usage inside the company.
Non-members: Click here to sign-up for a complimentary tour of
"Trends in Assessing When Different Productivity Approaches Work Best"
While Six Sigma, Lean, Lean Sigma and other productivity improvement approaches continue to yield benefits in manufacturing and supply chain optimization, best-in-class companies also apply such process improvements to other transactional business functions such as sales, marketing, and R&D -- common sources of process waste. Process improvements in these areas aim to drive bottom line growth in seven different business areas: quality improvement, cost reduction, cycle time reduction, cash flow improvement, human effectiveness improvement, new products & innovations, and sales & market growth. This benchmarking exchange reveals current trends in productivity initiatives in 2006 as well as changes since 2003 when data was also collected in a similar survey. The 47-slide presentation examines not only how, where and when leading companies implement Six Sigma, Lean, Lean Sigma, process excellence and other productivity approaches but how effective different productivity approaches are in achieving improvements in the seven business areas. Readers can also view benchmark partner estimates of the value contribution of their productivity initiatives and individual contributors, as well as methods that companies use to evaluate, measure and communicate best practices within their companies. Those in charge of making process improvements should read this study to identify gaps in their own productivity initiatives, identify which tools to use for which purposes and determine effective implementation techniques.
Pharmaceutical; Medical Device; Computer Software; Professional Services; Insurance; Consumer Products; Energy; Entertainment; Manufacturing; Electronics; Consulting; Government; Financial Services; Technology; Chemical; Diversified; Computer Hardware; Computers; High Tech; Transportation; Health Care; Academic; Hospitality
Abbott Laboratories; Becton Dickinson; Kronos; AMStaff Human Resources; Accident Fund Company; ARCELIK; ALSTOM; Century Casinos; Inc.; Becton-Dickinson; CNH America; Cardinal Health; Contract Packaging; Celestica International; Dana Heavy Axle; Ceridian Corporation; Dayton Rogers; City of Calgary; DuPont Teijin Films; Canada; Hughes Network Systems; Dow Chemical; Illinois Growth Enterprises; Eli Lilly; JC Metal Industries; First Data Corporation; JEA; Fujitsu; Kapro Industries; Hewlett-Packard; McQuay International; Janssen Cilag Pharmaceutical; MTR Corp. Ltd; Johnson & Johnson; NISH; Jose Maria Fonseca; Saginaw Valley State University; Kraft Foods; Schneider Electric; Landstar System; Siemens PTD; Marvin Windows and Doors; Synthes USA; MDS Pharma Services; TXU Electric Delivery; MetLife; Vail Resorts; REXAM; Varroc Engineering; Sonoco; Sun Microsystems; Tata Johnson Controls; Unisys; W.R. Grace; Xerox