Is Six Sigma culture bound? A conceptual model and propositions for further inquiry

Abstract

Six Sigma has been developed and refined by American companies in an American culture. As such, it is based on American values and behaviours. This paper suggests that applying Six Sigma in other national cultures may find discrepancies between their cultural values and behaviours and the assumptions of how the Six Sigma process improvement methodology is to be implemented. A conceptual model utilising Hofstede's cultural dimensions is proposed to examine the potential national cultural impact at each stage of the Six Sigma process. Examples of cultural disparities in the Six Sigma methodology are presented utilising Hofstede's dimensions.

Keywords:

• Six Sigma
• national culture

Notes

It is important to note that a company may not need to be global in scope to utilise Six Sigma, though the most public examples come from multinational corporations.

For the earliest works, see for example Haire et al. (1966), Hall (1960), Hofstede (1980), Kroeber and Kluckholn (1952), Ronen and Kraut (1977) and Sirota and Greenwood (1971).

Noting this cultural orientation, most of the following national culture examples will be in contrast to the American cultural condition.

That is, a low collectivism score indicates an individualistic national culture; a low masculinity score reflects a feminine national culture; and a low time orientation score reflects a short-term outlook.