| This research is empirically designed to investigate three objectives: (1) What are the vital components for the successful implementation of Six Sigma and to what extent are U.S. companies using these vital components? (2) What performance indicators do U.S. companies utilize to evaluate implementation results? and (3) Are there relationships between vital components and performance? To achieve these research objectives, a postal survey was sent to each of the companies identified in the 2011 U.S. Fortune 500 list; 54 completed questionnaires were returned within seven weeks, reflecting a response rate of 10.93 percent. However, only 51 companies who responded were implementing and applying Six Sigma strategies. Based on primarily descriptive statistics, the analysis found that leadership commitment to Six Sigma and upper management commitment to quality through Six Sigma were highly rated for the successful implementation of Six Sigma. In addition, most companies rated highly use of the following performance indicators for evaluating implementation results: difference between implementation costs and benefits, reduction in defects per million opportunities, and improvement in company processes. The hypothesis testing results discovered that there was a positive relationship between linking Six Sigma to human resources and productivity. The additional hypothesis testing results also demonstrated the following positive relationships in the implementation of Six Sigma: leadership and management practice and normalized profit margin (NPM), leadership and management practice and normalized return on assets (NRA). Also, in the implementation of Six Sigma (duration of 4 years or more), leadership and management practice and normalized profit margin (NPM), and in the implementation of Six Sigma (duration of 4 years or more), leadership and management practice and normalized return on assets (NRA). |
