Gestão & Produção
https://www.gestaoeproducao.com/article/doi/10.1590/0104-530X1506-15
Gestão & Produção
Artigo

Programa Seis Sigma Auto-organizado: modelo da situação atual e necessidades de mudanças

Self-organizing Six Sigma Program: as-is model and need for changes

Lucas Portilho Camargos Gomes; Dani Marcelo Nonato Marques; Fábio Muller Guerrini

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0104-530X1506-15 Gest. Prod., vol.24, n1, p.95-107, 2017
PDF
SciELO
Downloads: 0
Views: 1136

Resumo

Resumo:: A formação de redes colaborativas é uma importante forma das organizações estimularem a inovação, reduzirem custos e transferir conhecimentos. Uma forma particular de rede colaborativa, as redes auto-organizadas, demonstram grande capacidade de promover o aprendizado dos envolvidos, sistematizar o conhecimento e promover a inovação. Já os programas Seis Sigma, adotados por diversas organizações, possuem como objetivo principal a redução da variabilidade de um processo, resultando na redução de custos e melhoria da qualidade. A literatura sobre redes auto-organizadas pouco apresenta sobre a formação destas redes e a literatura sobre Seis Sigma é voltada a métodos estatísticos. Desta forma, o objetivo deste artigo é verificar as mudanças necessárias em um programa Seis Sigma que viabilize o desenvolvimento de uma rede auto-organizada. Como objeto de análise, apresenta-se um estudo de caso junto a uma empresa de grande porte, fabricante de bens de capital agrícolas, na qual se realizou a modelagem do programa Seis Sigma. A partir dos modelos gerados, como resultado, identificou-se um conjunto de mudanças necessárias para que o programa Seis Sigma viabilize uma rede auto-organizada.

Palavras-chave

Rede auto-organizada, Seis Sigma, EKD, Modelagem organizacional

Abstract

Abstract:: The formation of collaborative networks is an important way for organizations to stimulate innovation, reduce costs and transfer knowledge. A particular form of collaborative network - the self-organizing network - has shown great capability to promote the learning of those involved, systematize knowledge and lead to innovation. The Six Sigma programs, adopted by several organizations, have as their main objective the reduction in process variability, thus resulting in lower costs and quality improvement. The literature on self-organizing networks has little on the formation of these types of networks and the literature on Six Sigma is focused on statistical methods. Therefor, the aim of this article is to verify the needs for change in a Six Sigma program that enables the development of a self-organizing network. The case studied was carried out with a large organization, manufacturer of capital goods, where the Six Sigma program modeling was performed. From the generated models, as a result, it was have identified a set of changes needed so that the Six Sigma program can create a self-organizing network.

Keywords

Self-organizing network, Six Sigma, EKD, Enterprise modeling

Referências

Anderson, P. (1999). Complexity theory and organization science. Organization Science, 10(3), 216-232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.3.216.

Andersson, M., Lindgren, R., & Henfridsson, O. (2008). Architectural knowledge in inter-organizational IT innovation. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17(1), 19-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2008.01.002.

Banuelas, R., Antony, J., & Brace, M. (2005). An application of Six Sigma to reduce waste. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 21(6), 553-570. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/qre.669.

Bell, J., Den Ouden, B., & Ziggers, G. W. (2006). Dynamics of cooperation: at the brink of irrelevance. Journal of Management Studies, 43(7), 1607-1619. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00653.x.

Bennett, N., & Kidwell, R. E. (2001). The provision of effort in self-designing work groups: the case of collaborative research. Small Group Research, 32(6), 727-744. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104649640103200603.

Bubenko, J., Persson, A., Stirna, J. (2001). EKD user guide Elektra. Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm University. Research report.

Buch, K., & Tolentino, A. (2006). Employee perceptions of the rewards associated with six sigma. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 19(3), 356-364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09534810610668355.

Calia, R. C., Guerrini, F. M., & Castro, M. (2009). The impact of Six Sigma in the performance of a Pollution Prevention program. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(15), 1303-1310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.05.001.

Camarinha-Matos, L. M., & Abreu, A. (2007). Performance indicators for collaborative networks based on collaboration benefits. Production Planning and Control, 18(7), 592-609. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09537280701546880.

Chakravorty, S. S. (2009). Six Sigma programs: an implementation model. International Journal of Production Economics, 119(1), 1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.01.003.

Corning, P. A. (1995). Synergy and self-organization in the evolution of complex-systems. Systems Research, 12(2), 89-121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.3850120204.

Crowston, K., Li, Q., Wei, K., Eseryel, U. Y., & Howison, J. (2007). Self-organization of teams for free/libre open source software development. Information and Software Technology, 49(6), 564-575. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2007.02.004.

Dora, M., & Gellynck, X. (2015). Lean Six Sigma Implementation in a Food Processing SME: a case study. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 31(7), 1151-1159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/qre.1852.

Dutta, B., Ghosal, S., & Ray, D. (2005). Farsighted network formation. Journal of Economic Theory, 122(2), 143-164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jet.2004.05.001.

Easton, G. S., & Rosenzweig, E. D. (2015). Team leader esperience in improvement teams: a social network perspective. Journal of Operations Management, 37(1), 13-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2015.05.001.

Eschenbächer, J., Seifert, M., & Thoben, K.-D. (2011). Improving distributed innovation processes in virtual organisations through the evaluation of collaboration intensities. Production Planning and Control, 22(5-6), 473-487. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2010.536620.

Espinosa, A., & Porter, T. (2011). Sustainability, complexity and learning: Insights from complex systems approaches. The Learning Organization, 18(1), 54-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09696471111096000.

Gutiérrez, L. J. G., Bustinza, O. F., & Molina, V. B. (2012). Six sigma, absorptive capacity and organisational learning orientation. International Journal of Production Research, 50(3), 661-675. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2010.543175.

Hahn, G. J. (2005). Six sigma: 20 key lessons learned. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 21(3), 225-233. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/qre.636.

Hahn, G. J., Hill, W. J., Hoerl, R. W., & Zinkgraf, S. A. (1999). The impact of six sigma improvement: a glimpse into the future of statistics. The American Statistician, 53(3), 208-215.

Jarratt, D., & Ceric, A. (2015). The complexity of trust in business collaborations. Australasian Marketing Journal, 23(1), 2-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2014.10.002.

Kash, D. E., & Rycoft, R. (2000). W. Patterns of innovating complex technologies: a framework for adaptive network strategies. Research Policy, 29(7-8), 819-831. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00107-4.

Kash, D. E., & Rycroft, R. (2002). Emerging patterns of complex technological innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 69(6), 581-606. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1625(01)00171-8.

Koziolek, S., & Derlukiewicz, D. (2012). Method of assessing the quality of the design process of construction equipment with the use of DFSS (design for Six Sigma). Automation in Construction, 22, 223-232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2011.07.006.

Kwak, Y. H., & Anbari, F. T. (2006). Benefits, obstacles, and future of six sigma approach. Technovation, 26(5-6), 708-715. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2004.10.003.

Laux, C., Johnson, M., & Cada, P. (2014). Project Barriers to Green Belts through critical succes factors. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 6(2), 138-160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS-02-2014-0006.

Lee, Y., Lee, I. W., & Feiock, R. C. (2012). Interorganizational collaboration networks in economic development policy: an exponential random graph model analysis. Policy Studies Journal: the Journal of the Policy Studies Organization, 40(3), 547-573. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2012.00464.x.

Linderman, K., Schroeder, R., Zaheer, S., & Choo, A. (2003). Six Sigma: a goal-theoretic perspective. Journal of Operations Management, 21(2), 193-203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(02)00087-6.

Marconi, M. A., & Lakatos, E. M. (2000). Metodologia científica. São Paulo: Atlas.

Mertins, K., & Jochem, R. (2005). Architectures, methods and tools for enterprise engineering. International Journal of Production Economics, 98(2), 179-188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.05.024.

Nurcan, S., & Rolland, C. (2003). A multi-method for defining the organizational change. Information and Software Technology, 45(2), 61-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0950-5849(02)00162-3.

Parker, D. W., Holesgrove, M., & Pathak, R. (2015). Improving productivity with self-organised teams and agile leadership. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 64(1), 112-128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-10-2013-0178.

Patterson, A., Bonissone, P., & Pavese, M. (2005). Six sigma applied throughout the lifecycle of an automated decision system. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 21(3), 275-292. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/qre.629.

Provan, K. G., Fish, A., & Sydow, J. (2007). Interorganizational networks at the network level: a review of the empirical literature on whole networks. Journal of Management, 33(3), 479-516. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206307302554.

Quinn, J. B., Anderson, P., & Finkelstein, S. (1996). Managing professional intellect: making the most of the best. Harvard Business Review, 74(2), 71-80. PMid:10156468.

Rolland, C., Nurcan, S., & Grosz, G. (2000). A decision-making pattern for guiding the enterprise knowledge development process. Information and Software Technology, 42(5), 313-331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0950-5849(99)00089-0.

Rycroft, R. W., & Kash, D. E. (2004). Self-organizing innovation networks: implications for globalization. Technovation, 24(3), 187-197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(03)00092-0.

Scherrer-Rathje, M., Arnoscht, J., Egri, P., Braun, E., Csaji, B. C., & Schuh, G. (2009). A generic model to handle complexity in collaborative networks. In Proceedings of Picmet 09 - Technology Management in the Age of Fundamental Change. Portland: IEEE.

Schroeder, R. G., Linderman, K., Liedtke, C., & Choo, A. S. (2008). Six Sigma: definition and underlying theory. Journal of Operations Management, 26(4), 536-554. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2007.06.007.

Schuh, G., Monostori, L., Csaji, B. C., & Doring, S. (2008). Complexity-based modeling of reconfigurable collaborations in production industry. Cirp Annals-Manufacturing Technology, 57(1), 445-450. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2008.03.013.

Siakas, K. V., Nisioti, K. S., Voutsa, E. A., & Gellen, M. (2006). Integrating Six Sigma with CMMI for High Quality Software. In Proceeding of the 14th Software Quality Management Conference. Cheltenham: British Computer Society.

Vany, A. D. (1996). Information, chance, and evolution: alchian and the economics of self-organization. Economic Inquiry, 34(3), 427-443. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1996.tb01387.x.

Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34(10), 1608-1618. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.08.002.

Yin, R. K. (2010). Estudo de caso: planejamento e métodos. Porto Alegre: Bookman.
 

59a0586e0e8825d30e8ca1a7 gp Articles
Links & Downloads
1806-9649 (Eletrônico) 0104-530X (Impresso)
Gest. Prod. ©2025 Todos os direitos reservados.

Gest. Prod.

Share this page
Page Sections