You are on page 1of 9

8th International Conference of Modeling and Simulation - MOSIM10 - May 10-12, 2010 - Hammamet - Tunisia

Evaluation and optimization of innovative production systems of goods and services




MGSI - Universit Paris 8

93100 Montreuil - France,,

ABSTRACT: The aim of this paper is to propose an approach that integrates ISO 9001 and Lean-Six Sigma (LSS) into
CMMI-DEV for performance process improvement. Both ISO 9001 and CMMI-DEV are framework guidance that
allows enterprise to meet customer requirements and satisfactions. Six Sigma emphasizes on variation reduction in
processes by problem solving and statistical tools while Lean focuses on eliminating source of wastes and non-value
added. However, there is a lack of providing pattern how to implement ISO 9001 and statistical analysis tools for
collecting data in CMMI-DEV. Furthermore, it is necessary to integrate them for enhancing performance of process.
The proposed approach assists ISO certified enterprise who desires to also use CMMI-DEV to get a better
understanding of the principles and correlation between ISO9001and CMMI-DEV. In the proposed framework, LSS
tool is used to carry out into DMAIC as well as DMAIC-Kaizen approach. An application case study is presented to
demonstrate the capability of this approach.

KEYWORDS: ISO9001: 2000 and 2008, CMMI-DEV, DMAIC-Kaizen, Lean-Six Sigma (LSS)

measure phase, nor analyze phase of DMAIC, while Six

1 INTRODUCTION Sigma alone cannot dramatically improve process speed
or reduce invested capital [Chinvigai et al., 2007 &
The goal of enterprises emphasize on improving product 2009; George, 2002 and McCarty et al., 2006]. ISO
and service quality including cost reduction and faster 90001 is a standard requirement for quality management
delivery to meet customer requirements and gain their systems while CMMI-DEV is a best practice for devel-
satisfaction. It is necessary to adopt appropriately me- opment and maintenance processes. The aim of both
thods such as Lean, ISO 9001:2000/2008, Six Sigma, approaches focuses on the same way and the main con-
CMMI (Capability Maturity Model Integration), etc. texts of both are slightly similar to describe what to do
the reason of the successful stories worldwide. These rather than how to do.
methods are focused on performance process improve-
ment. The similarities and differences principles among Large enterprises i.e. GE, Motorola, Ford, Xerox, Sony,
ISO 9001:2000, Lean, Six Sigma and CMMI-DEV are Honeywell have successfully implemented these me-
presented by Chinvigai et al., (2007 & 2009). Compre- thodologies. SMEs, however are only interested in ISO
hension of these principles through limitation can help us 9001 in particular because the implementation of these
to develop an approach for enhancing process improve- methodologies are high cost and time consuming. In
ment. addition, customers requirement on suppliers compul-
sory qualification on ISO certification. Thats the reason
ISO 9001 is the most popular approach that is imple- why SMEs are only interested to implement ISO9001
mented widely in many enterprises during the last two rather than other approaches. On factual note, SMEs
decade as well as Lean and Six Sigma. Currently, need to integrate these approaches to improve their
CMMI-DEV has been increasingly applied to enterpris- product quality like the large enterprises. Numerous lite-
es. As result, they provide benefits on project perfor- ratures have suggested that Six Sigma that is a good
mance, quality of products and services, particularly choice to integrate with other methods [Wessel &
customer satisfaction [Maral, 2008]. The claim that Six Burcher, 2004].
Sigma (introduced by Mikel Harry in the late 1980s) and
Lean (introduced by Taiichi Ohno in the 1940s) have a Comparison between ISO 9001 and CMMI-DEV has
complementary relationship is universally accepted [El- shown that enterprises are able to decrease the period of
haik & Al-aomar, 2006]. Lean is focused on eliminating implementation. In addition, we propose the model of
or reducing waste (muda) and improving flow by conti- intergraded approach: ISO 9001:2000 Lean Six Sigma
nuous improvement principles while Six Sigma is fo- CMMI-DEV. DMAIC-Kaizen approaches are inte-
cused on reducing variation and improving process by grated for driving in the phase of expansion from ISO
problem solving and statistical tools [Arnheiter & Ma- 9001 to CMMI-DEV. This proposed approach might be
leyeff, 2005]. However, Lean is not realistic in the able to improve further the performance of processes and
MOSIM10 - May 10-12, 2010 - Hammamet - Tunisia

interactions. This paper will also help ISO certified en- principles of quality management system: customer fo-
terprise to comprehen how to expand ISO 9001 to cus; leadership; involvement of people; process ap-
CMMI-DEV. The remaining of this paper is organized proach; system approach to management; continual im-
as follows. Section 2 represents a review of related ap- provement; factual approach to decision making and
proach. Section 3 focuses on developed approach that is mutually beneficial supplier relationship. To implement
elaborated from integration in pervious section. An ap- ISO 9001:2008, enterprises need to understand and drive
plication of case study is presented in section 4 and fol- to meet ISO requirements; create value-added for per-
lowed by the conclusion is the last section. formance process improvement.


2.1 ISO9001:2000 and ISO9001: 2008 CMMI-DEV is based on process approach and consti-
tuted with 22 process areas. It is a group of related ac-
Many enterprises including SMEs have been implement- tivities performed collectively to achieve a set of goal.
ing ISO9001:2000. However, ISO 9001 new version as Process areas cover four categories: process manage-
ISO 9001:2008 is already available which was published ment, project management, engineering and support.
on November 2008. In particular also ISO9001:2000 CMMI-DEV is available in two representations for
certificates will become invalid on November 15, 2010. process improvement: continuous and staged. The conti-
Thus, the enterprises must convert to this new version. nuous representation focuses on process area capability
The principle ISO 9001 between two versions: 2008 and as measure by capability levels whereas the staged repre-
2000 are not changed. ISO 9001:2008 has little or minor sentation focuses on organizational maturity as measured
changes from ISO 9001:2000. No new requirement and by maturity levels [Chrissis M. B. et al., 2003; Persse,
no significant change rather than the clarification of 2006; SEI, 2006]. A continuous representation gives
some points in requirement contexts. In addition, the enterprises the flexibility to select process areas that they
new version has the compatibility ISO 14001: 2004 as need to improve (individual or group of process area)
the Environmental Management Specification standard. while a staged representation applies to the enterprises
We can identify the similarities and differences between processes improvement cut across multiple process area.
ISO 9001 version 2000 and 2008 that is represented in The advantages of each representation are represented in
Table 1. Table 2.

ISO 9001 2000 2008 Continuous Representation Staged Representation

Publication - Will be - Published on November 15, 5. Optimizing 5. Optimizing
invalid on 2008 4. Quantitatively managed 4. Quantitatively managed
November - All audits must be per- 3. Defined 3. Defined
15, 2010 formed this version on No- 2. Managed 2. Managed
vember 15, 2009 1. Performed 1. Initial
Principle - Process approach and PDCA 0. Incomplete 0. N/A
- Apply QMS to meet objective: customer - Optimize capability levels - Optimize maturity levels
requirement and satisfaction - Unable apply to individual - Unable to apply across
- Enhance to clarity and con- process areas. multiple process areas.
sistency with ISO 14001: - Allow improvements of - Summarizes process im-
2004. different processes to be provement results in a
Require- - No new requirements is added: clause 4 8 performed at different rates simple form a single
ments - Clarify some of point in requirements maturity level number
Minor - - Emphasize the important of
Table 2: Comparison of Continuous and Staged
Changed process on the desired out-
puts. representation
- Respect business environ-
ment that influence the de- Based on continuous representation of CMMI-DEV that
sign and QMS. consists of six capability levels: incomplete, performed,
- Clarify some of point in managed, defined, quantitatively managed and optimiz-
some requirements i.e. the ing. The capability dimension directly concerns two
outsourcing process. components: generic goal (GG) and generic practice
Table 1: comparison between ISO 9001: 2000 and 2008 (GP). A generic goal (GG) describes the characteristics
that must be presented to institutionalize the processes
Furthermore, this standard still focused on four main that implement a process area while a generic practice
types of processes: management process; production (GP) is an expected model component. GP provides the
process; measurement process and resources process. It description of an activity that is considered important in
stills emphasize on the quality management system to achieving the associated generic goal. Summary of ge-
meet customer requirement and satisfaction, to manage neric goal (GG) and generic practice (GP) in each capa-
processes through interaction of processes by conti- bility level are represented in Table 3
nuously improving principle in particularly, the eight .
MOSIM10 - May 10-12, 2010 - Hammamet - Tunisia

Generic gold Focus on Generic practices

GG 1: Achieve specific To accomplishes the work GP 1.1: Develop work product and provide services.
goals necessary to produce work.
GG 2: Institutionalize a To maintain, monitor and GP 2.1: Establish an organizational policy.
managed process review the resources, GP 2.2: Establish and maintain the plan for performing the process.
people, output that accom- GP 2.3: Provide adequate resources for performing the process, and
plish produce products. providing the services of the process.
GP 2.4: Assign responsibility and authority for performing the process,
developing the work products, and providing the services of the process.
GP 2.5: Train the people performing or supporting the process as
GP 2.6: Manage configuration
GP 2.7: Identify and involve relevant stakeholders
GP 2.8: Monitor and control the process
GP 2.9: Evaluate selected work products performance and process
GP2.10: Review the activities, status, and result of the process with
higher level management and resolve issue.
GG 3:Institutionalize a To establish organizational GP 3.1: Establish and maintain standard processes that cover the
defined process standardization and dep- processes area.
loyment of the processes. GP 3.2: Collect and measure input-output of process.
GG 4: Institutionalize a To control quality and GP 4.1: Establish and maintain objective for the process in term of prod-
quantitatively managed process by using statistical uct quality, service quality, and process performance.
process and other quantitative tech- GP 4.2: Stabilize sub-process performance by using appropriate statis-
niques. tical and other quantitative techniques.
GG 5:Institutionalize To contribute continuous GP 5.1: Ensure continuous process improvement
an optimizing process improvement innovation to GP 5.2: Correct root cause of problems
meeting quality and process
Table 3: Summary of generic goals (GG) and generic practices (GP) (continue)

process and defined process). We expect this framework

that can help ISO certified enterprises expand to CMMI-
DEV, particularly capability level 4-5.

2.3 Lean versus Six Sigma (LSS)

Lean is introduced by Taiichi Ohno in the 1940s and Six

Sigma is introduced by Mikel Harry in the late 1980s. In
the last two decade, both have been written an incompar-
able success story. Many enterprises apply either Six
Sigma or Lean such as GE, Motorola, Ford, Xerox, So-
ny, Honeywell etc. Lean is a philosophy of continuous
improvements while Six Sigma is a way to meet quality
by measuring ability of enterprise.

Six Sigma emphasizes on three levels: a metric, a me-

thodology, and management systems [Andersson et al.,
Figure 1: Model of correspondences between ISO9001 2006; Arnheiter&Maleyeff, 2005; Linderman et al.,
and CMMI-DEV 2002, McCarty et al., 2006]:
- Metric: Six Sigma focuses on how to apply statis-
Correspondence between ISO 9001 (version 2000 and tical methods for eliminating or reducing defects to
2008) and CMMI-DEV are represented in Figure 1. This not more than 3.4 per million opportunities
figure directly related to four processes of ISO 9001 (DPMO).
(management process, measurement process) and gener- - Methodology: DMAIC is a way of problem solving.
ic goal of capability levels. This model is adapted from DMAIC methodology is most often used to analyze
the comparison between ISO 9001: 2000 and CMMI- problem solving and process improvement. In addi-
DEV [Chinvigai et al., 2009]. This framework helps us tion, there are many tools or techniques that are
to understand and know that ISO requirements cover all used in the each of DMAIC steps. There are many
generic practices of capability in level 2-3 (managed tools and techniques available for DMAIC. Accord-
MOSIM10 - May 10-12, 2010 - Hammamet - Tunisia

ing to Hashmi (2008) and Park et al. (2007) stated technique of Lean for reducing wastes or driving conti-
Six Sigma provides the quantitative analysis tools nuous improvement. In addition, Kaizen is a way of bot-
that are necessary to identify, analyze, control tom-up management.
process performance and evaluate effectiveness.
- Management systems: As a result of Six Sigma as a Numerous literatures represent Lean Six Sigma (LSS)
best practice that bases on problem solving and integration approach [Andersson et al., 2006; Arnheiter
process improvement. Six Sigma management ap- & Maleyeff, 2005; Bendell, 2006; Kumar et al., 2006;
proaches are developed and implemented for break- Furterer & Elshennawy, 2005; Raifsnider & Kurt, 2004].
through improvement in enterprises. This approach As a result of Lean and Six Sigma concepts are slightly
is focused on identifying, quantifying and driving similar in term of their focus on reducing waste or de-
out errors in business processes and in the design of fects and improving customer satisfaction and financial
new products, through leadership, teamwork, cus- results [Andersson et al., 2006]. According to Kumar
tomer-focused metric and control of cost. (2006) suggested that the integration of the two ap-
proaches can achieve much better results than applying a
The core of Lean is a philosophy of continuous im- single approach. In addition, Six Sigma has variety of
provements. This method is focused on eliminating or techniques and tools as well as Lean. Six Sigma tech-
reducing waste (muda) and improving flow by following niques-tools emphasize on problem-solving processes,
the lean principles. Many enterprises, particular Japanese while Lean techniques are applied for reducing the
companies apply Lean for reducing unnecessary waste process waste and increasing process and process inte-
(including the waste of time). However, they do not raction effectiveness through fasting deliveries and
know how to start the project of Lean. There are many shorting lead time [Chinvigai et al., 2007&2009]. How-
tools for helping to start Lean such as 5S, Kaizen, etc. ever, there is no standard framework for Lean-Six Sigma
Frequently, Kaizen is selected to roll out Lean imple- (LSS) implementation [Kumar et al., 2006].
mentation. As a result of Kaizen is an initial popular

Traditional Six Sigma tools D M A I C Traditional Lean tools D M A I C

Affinity diagram x x Value stream mapping (VSM) x
Brainstorming x x x Lead time x
Ishikawa diagram x x x Take time x
CTQ (critical to quality) x Inventory level x
DOE x x Work analyses x
Flow diagram x x x x x Flow analysis x
FMEA x x Scheduling x
Pareto chart x x x SMED x
Process capability x x JIT-Kanban x
Statistical Process Control x x x x Line balance x
SIPOC diagram x x Visual control x
Standardization x Standard work x
Project Scope Contract x Kaizen x
Process mapping x x x x The 5s system x x
CT Matrix SIPOC diagram x Poka yoke x
Simulation x x Identification of the 7 wastes x x
Poka Yoko x
QFD x x
Visual control x
Regression analysis x
Scatter plots x

Table 4: The popular tools of Lean Six Sigma

According to Bendell (2005), some company has applied many sources which are frequently applied in DMAIC
Lean tools as part of Six Sigma while lean consultants phase
have started Six Sigma to be part of the Lean. Often, 2.4 Kaizen
DMAIC methodology is applied to follow problem solv-
ing as well as tools and techniques of Six Sigma can be Kaizen concept is referred as continuing improvement of
used to collect data, identify and analyze root causes. work improvement with the gradualist approach, quality,
According to Hashmi & Baik (2008) and Park et al., technology, and processes throughout process interac-
(2007), Six Sigma provides the quantitative analysis tion, culture, productivity, safety and leadership,
tools which are useful to control process performance throughout everyone in organization. It represents in-
while Lean provides analysis tool. Table 4 compiles the cremental, ongoing progress with small inventions. Kai-
popular tools and techniques of Lean Six Sigma from zen is an important tool in Lean for continuous im-
provement. Kaizen traditional means small, slow and
MOSIM10 - May 10-12, 2010 - Hammamet - Tunisia

incremental minor changes but constant in medium or the ability to speed up that change process and more im-
long-term for improvement processes throughout inte- portantly finalize the solution into standardized
raction of processes. Under umbrella concept of Lean, it processes expeditiously. Kaizen is used to carry out in
is used to drive by Kaizen based on PDCA revolves con- each of DMAIC phase that is represented in figure 2.
tinuously for pursuing a policy of continuous maintain- The framework of integrated ISO 9001:2000/2008
ing and improving standards. Lean Six Sigma CMMI-DEV approach is presented in
Figure 3. This framework represent ISO
3 PROPOSED APPROACH 90001:2000/2008 requirements that cover capability
level 2-3 of CMMI-DEV: managed process and defined
To contribute on performance improvement of enter- process. Lean Six Sigma tools are applied to achieve
prise, we propose an approach that is based on process capability level 4-5: quantitatively process and optimiz-
approach. ISO 9000:2000/2008, CMMI-DEV, Six Sig- ing process.
ma, Lean and Kaizen are integrated in this approach. The
similarities and differences among concepts of these Following this approach, many consultants suggested
approaches [Chinvigai et al., 2007 & 2009] are brought that Kaizen team should compose maximal 5 members
to help develop this proposed approach. of the process target members, processes upstream or
downstream members and completely separate areas,
including customers or suppliers. They should select
simple tools to collect; identify and analyze data in each
step. According to McCarty et al., 2006 suggested that
the work. The observation must use a few simple tools to
D identify and analyze implementation. Nevertheless, man-
agement role is an important to determine area and select
New standard Kaizen members. Consequently, managements respon-
M sibility must support Kaizen team with adequate skills
and training in short time period. However, team might
Time not adequately understand how to apply tools and tech-
niques in short time. In fact, the comprehensive of tech-
Figure 2: Using DMAIC-Kaizen toward to CMMI-DEV niques and tools can help to reduce the time of decision
making for select appropriate tools and techniques.
We apply minor changes in principle that is known as
Kaizen for driving continuous improvement. Kaizen has

Lean-Six Sigma tools


ISO 9001:2000 requirements

Process improvement

Performed Managed Defined Quantitatively Optimizing

process process process process process

Figure 3: Model of intergraded approach: ISO 9001:2000/2008 Lean Six Sigma CMMI-DEV
MOSIM10 - May 10-12, 2010 - Hammamet - Tunisia

The Kaizen team can utilize numerous Six

Sigma tools to apply this phase such as control
charts, visual control, standardization or Poka
Yoko etc. The following of this phase aligns
with GP 4.2, GP 5.1and GP 5.2.


TFKK is a SME company in Thailand that produces

OEM auto parts to automotive industry, particular torque
rod bush. TFKK has approximately 250 employees; sales
amounted to million dollars in annual sales. Some of
TFKKs primary customers are ISUZU, NISSAN, GM
and HONDA. ISO14000, ISO 9001: 2000 and ISO/TS
16949:2002 have been implemented in this company. As
a small company, TFKK had always relied upon day-to-
day, on-the-job solutions to its problems. However,
Figure 4: The model of the integrating of DMAIC into TFKK need to focus towards to ever-changing,
capability level 4-5 increasingly demanding business environment, and the
company has to provide continuity, responsibility and
For capability level 4-5 achievement, we propose, in consistency in managing day-to-day operations. TFKK
figure 4, the DMAIC steps to follow by the Kaizen team: had to establish and maintain a set of standard operating
- Define phase: In this phase, the Kaizen team procedures. Currently, a policy focuses on continuous
must define scope, objective and select a improvement program. Therefore, a pilot Kaizen team is
candidate process for implementation. We may set up for driving this project. Five members of team are
use process modeling as - is to select process appointed that consist of two senior foreman and three
or sub-process (correspondence to GG 3). technicians that concern selected process as assembly of
Possibly CTQ can be applied together with torque rod bush process. This team was conducted under
process modeling in this phase. This phase the guidance of two consultants as production manager
aligns with GP 4.1 and GP 5.1. and senior engineer. Initially, training and education are
- Measure phase: Data of selected process is the best way to provide understanding and utilizing
collected and analyzed on quality problems, techniques and tools.
defects (6), impacts, process performances and
cost. Xiaosong (2008) suggested if the
4.1 Define
enterprise did not have orderly process to record
relative data before data collection, it is
The objective of this program is to improve productivity
necessary to control relative process that is
in assembly of torque rod bush process for responding
introducing the control stage at this moment.
customer requirement that is deployed from the
This phase follows aligns with GP 4.1, GP 5.1,
management and the board. Increasing 36% (15,300
and GP 5.2.
pcs./month) is the ultimate target that is represented in
- Analyze phase: the Kaizen team analyze the
figure 5. Brainstorming session of team members were
collected data from previous phase to identify
conducted to identify the goal. The mission was to
causes. Based on the historical data, the
identify the root cause of problem and reduce operation
influence factors which are found by Six Sigma
time in this process.
analysis tools such as Affinity diagram,
Brainstorming, Ishikawa diagram, DOE,
process control chart, simulation etc. Analyze
phase has correspondence to GP 5.2.
- Improve phase: this phase emphasizes on
identify improvement alternatives that aligns
with GP 5.1. The Kaizen team should discuss
concerned problems and select possible
solutions. Six Sigma tools can be apply in this
phase such as Brainstorming, Ishikawa diagram,
Process mapping, process capability, DOE,
FMEA, etc. However, if possible solutions
cannot meet team objective, this team should
roll back to measure phase again as well as Figure 5: Annual sale of torque rod bush products
analyze phase [Chinvigai et al., 2007].
- Control phase: the phase emphasizes on For diagnosis to find out non-value added, we know that
monitor and control process that is improved. sub-process is a bottle-neck. The next step was to
MOSIM10 - May 10-12, 2010 - Hammamet - Tunisia

determine CTQ as a new cycle time of this process based compare cycle time and CTQ, and we need to focus on
on sale requirement. A new cycle time is calculated as reducing operation time of sub-process A and B because
target production per day = 15,300/25 = 612 pcs./day or both exceeded by 44 sec/pcs. Therefore, the team must
44 sec/pcs. find out a way to improve them. How can the team
resolve the bottle-neck in reducing operation time?
4.2 Measure Initially, the current state of process (as-is) is illustrated
that can assist the team to understand better process that
Fig 6 is shown operation time of sub-processes: A, B and as shown in figure 7.
C (53, 47 and 44 sec/pcs. respectively). To consider we

Figure 6: Classification of operation time in each of sub-processes

Figure 8: Shown cause and effect diagram

4.4 Improve

Figure 7: Current state of bush process

4.3 Analyze

Cause and effect diagram was constructed that is shown

in figure 8. Brainstorming is applied to establish this
diagram in order to identify potential causes that have
been affected.
MOSIM10 - May 10-12, 2010 - Hammamet - Tunisia

Figure 9: Redesign new jig stamp lot/duct cover pressing B, we can reduce time from 47 to 44 sec that is shown in
The principles of ECRS (eliminate, combine, rearrange figure 11(b). Thus, the torque rod bush products can be
and simplify) are used for improving process. The sub- produced to meet target as 612 pcs./day.
process A and B are selected. Jig can be redesigned in
sub-process A. Because of dust cover and stamp lot 4.5 Control
number can be assembled simultaneous that is shown in
figure 9. After redesigning the jig, we can combine This phase is focused on how to maintain the solution
activities that can show the time difference between and promote sustainable process improvement over time.
before and after improvement in figure 10. Therefore, this team must establish new standard by
updated documents (i.e. procedure, work inspection),
including training people.


Initially, this paper describes advantages and limitation

of popular methods: ISO 9001, Lean-Six Sigma (LS)
and CMMI-DEV in order to toward to performance
process improvement. This paper applies LS tools into
DMAIC methodology in order to eliminate and/or
reduce non-value added (activities and variation). This
implies to help ISO certified enterprise, particular SMEs
that desire to setting up CMMI-DEV program. We
compare the similarities and differences between ISO
9001 version 2000 and 2008 that help enterprises to
understand them. In addition, the model of
correspondences between ISO9001 and CMMI-DEV is
represented. It compares between ISO9001:2000/2008
requirements and the generic practices of capability
levels. As well as this paper represent the integrated
approach framework and the model. ISO
9001:2000/2008 requirements correspond cover all CL
2- 3 (managed process and defined process). They help
enterprises to better understand them before expanding
to all capability level of CMMI-DEV. Finally,
demonstration the capability of this approach, an
application case study is presented.


Andersson, R. et al., 2006. Similarities and differences

Figure 10: Sub-process B improvement between TQM six sigma and lean. The TQM Maga-
zine, 18(3), p. 282-296.
Decreasing 12 sec Arnheiter, D. E. and J. Maleyeff, 2005.The integration of
Decreasing 3 sec lean management and Six Sigma. The TQM maga-
zine, 17, p. 5 18.

Bendell, T., 2006. A review and comparison of six sigma

and the lean organizations. The TQM magazine,
18(3), p. 255262.

Berger, A., 1997. Continuous improvement and kaizen:

standardization and organizational designs. Inte-
(a) (b) grated Manufacturing Systems, 8, p. 110 117.

Figure 11: Results of improvement phase (a). redesign Boucher, F. and Croguennec, B. 2009. Comprendre ISO
new jig stamp (b). sub-process B improvement. 9001 : 2008. AFNOR ditions.

For results of evaluation, if we redesign new jig stamp, Chinvigai, Ch. et al., 2007. An approach for enhanc-
operation time is decreased from 53 to 41 sec as 12 sec ing process and process interaction capability. Inter-
(Figure 11(a)). After combine activities of sub-process
MOSIM10 - May 10-12, 2010 - Hammamet - Tunisia

national Conference on Production Research Government: a Framework and a Case Study. Total
(ICPR2007), Valparaiso, Chile. Quality Management, 16(10), p. 1179 1191.

Chinvigai, Ch. et al., 2009. Integrated Six Sigma-CMMI McCarty, T. et al., 2006. The Six Sigma Black Belt
approach in ISO organizations for enhancing process Handbook. McGraw-Hill.
improvement, 7me Congrs International de Gnie
Industriel (CIGI2009), Bigorre, France. Mhamedi, A. El., et al., 2005. Coordination et coopra-
Chrissis, M. B. et al., 2008. CMMI 2e dition : Guide des tion des processus dentreprise : tude de cas indus-
bonnes pratiques pour lamlioration des processus. triels. Conception et Production Intgres, Morocco,
Traduction franaise approuve par le SEI, Pearson p. 1 15.
Park, Y. et al., 2007. A Framework for the Use of Six
Dahlgaard J. J., 2006. Lean production, Six Sigma quali- Sigma Tools in PSP/TSP. 5th International Confe-
ty, TQM and company culture. The TQM magazine, rence on Software Engineering Research - Manage-
18, p. 263 281. ment and Applications, IEEE Computer Society.

El-Haik, B. and R. Al-Aomar, 2006. Simulation-based Persse, J. R., 2006. Process Improvement Essentials.
Lean Six-Sigma and Design for Six-Sigma. Wiley- Oreilly.
Pinet, C., 2009. 10 cls pour russir sa certification ISO
George, L. M., 2002. Lean Six Sigma: Combining Six 9001 : 2008. AFNOR ditions.
Sigma Quality with Lean Speed. McGraw-Hill.
Raifsnider, R. and Kurt, D., 2004. Lean Six Sigma in
Hashmi, S. I. and J. Baik, 2008. Quantitative Process higher education: Applying proven methodologies to
Improvement in XP using Six Sigma Tools. 7th improve quality, remove waste, and quantify opportuni-
IEEE/ACIS International Conference on Computer ties in colleges and universities, White paper, Xerox.
and Information Science. IEEE Computer Society.
SEI Software Engineering Institute, 2006. CMMI-
International Standards Organization, 2000. ISO 9000: DEV: CMMI for development v1.2. CMU/SEI-2006-
2000. 3rd edition, Quality Management Systems. TR-008.

Kumar, M., et al., 2006. Implementing the Lean Sigma Sinthavalai, R., 2006. An Exploratory Study of Introduc-
framework in an Indian SME: a case study. Produc- ing Six Sigma in SMEs. Proceedings of the 7th Asia
tion Planning & Control, 17(4), p. 407 423. Pacific Industrial Engineering and Management Sys-
tems Conference (IEMS2006), Bangkok, Thailand,
Linderman, K. et al., 2003. Six Sigma: a goal theoretic p. 531 538.
perspective. Journal of Operations Management, 21,
p. 193 203. Xiaosong, Z., 2008. Process Integration of Six Sigma
and CMMI. IEEE International Conference on In-
Maral, S., 2008. Blending Scrum practices and CMMI dustrial Informatics, Korea.
project management process areas. Innovations Sys-
tems Software Engineering, 4, p. 1729. Wessel, G. and P. Burcher, 2004. Six Sigma for small
and medium-sized enterprises. The TQM Magazine,
Chrissis M. B. et al., 2003. CMMI guidelines for process 16(4), p. 264-272.
integration and product improvement. Pearson Edu-
Furterer, S. and A. K. Elshennawy, 2005. Implementa-
tion of TQM and Lean Six Sigma Tools in Local