The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/2040-4166.htm

IJLSS
4,2

Six Sigmas critical success

factors and toolbox

108

Department of Marketing and Operations Research,

University of Macedonia, Edessa, Greece

Vasileios Ismyrlis and Odysseas Moschidis

Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to put forward and classify the critical success factors (CSF)
of Six Sigma implementation, as well as the tools-techniques that it utilizes in all the phases of the
Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control (DMAIC) structured methodology.
Design/methodology/approach A literature review of Six Sigmas CSF has been realized and
also an attempt to connect them with the enablers of European Foundation for Quality Management
(EFQM). A literature review of the tools and techniques utilized follows and a categorization of them
according to the phase of the DMAIC.
Findings The paper has collected a list of 32 CSF which were classified according to the five EFQM
enablers, and the soft-hard differentiation. A list of 39 tools/techniques used in the different phases of
DMAIC and the ISO 13053-1 suggestions has also been referred.
Originality/value The final classifications of CSF and techniques of Six Sigma methodology could
be a valuable tool for Six Sigma academics and professionals to understand and implement the
methodology in the appropriate way.
Keywords Six sigma, Critical success factors, DMAIC, EFQM
Paper type Conceptual paper

International Journal of Lean Six

Sigma
Vol. 4 No. 2, 2013
pp. 108-117
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
2040-4166
DOI 10.1108/20401461311319310

Introduction
Six Sigma is one of the last additions in the field of quality improvement methods
and (or) business process improvements methods. Although it has been implemented
for many years mainly in large manufacturing companies, like Motorola, GE
and Honeywell, it does not have the appropriate response popularity in service
industries and even less in countries outside the USA. Europe for example has given
more emphasis to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) family
standards.
According to Eckes (2001), Six Sigma is the most popular quality improvement
methodology in history. Antony (2006) considers it as a business strategy known as an
imperative for operations and business excellence. Its structured framework for
controlling processes and measuring results with a financial aspect and with the use of
quantitative techniques and tools has drawn the attention from academics and
practitioners. In many cases its business performance achievements are remarkable.
Even better, the ISO (2011), having recognized its great influence, issued the 13053-1
standard Quantitative methods in process improvement Six Sigma, where it tried to
describe the methodology with terms of standardization.
On the other hand, it has been the recipient of much criticism. The reason is because
there is incompleteness in its methodology and serious misconceptions in the literature,
as to what constitutes Six Sigma theory (Aboelmaged, 2010). A reason for this
maybe the fact that it has originated in industry (Antony, 2004) and therefore cannot
have the same impact in all kind of enterprises.

The present study deals with the exploration of the critical success factors (CSF) of
Six Sigma implementation. A total list of 32 factors were collected from the bibliography
and were documented. There was an effort to connect and categorize these factors
with the five enablers of the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM)
model (leadership, strategy, people-staff, partnership and resources, processesproducts-services). A classification in soft and hard factors has also been made. This
attempt to describe and understand its success factors will contribute to look deeper in
its theory.
In addition many of the tools/techniques used in the implementation of Six Sigma
were referred and categorized by phase of define-measure-analyze-improve-control
(DMAIC) which they are used. There was another classification according to proposals
from ISO 13051-1 standard for the utilization of every tool or technique.
The main goal of this paper will be to provide a clearer understanding of the
Six Sigma methodology and resolve some misconceptions that exist in its theory.
Definition of Six Sigma theoretical background
Naturally the term Six Sigma comes from statistics as the Greek letter s (sigma)
symbolizes the standard deviation, namely the dispersion of the data from the
mean average. Number six expresses the accepted level of quality that is six times
the standard deviation. These are some of the reasons why most people, consider
Six Sigma as a purely statistical methodology. The truth is that we cannot ignore the
fact that it also uses many non statistical tools and techniques. In methodologys
practice the term Six Sigma level, means 3.4 defects per million opportunities or success
rate of 99.999660 percent. The assumption is of course that the data follow the
normal distribution and also given that the mean average of a process, tends to
drift by the amount of 1.5 sigma on average from tolerance limit (specification). The
latter acceptance has been made from company Motorola, which had implemented for
the first time and eventually gave birth to the method. Six Sigmas purpose is to reduce
the variance-variability in processes, so to provide to the clients-consumers of the
organization, products or services which are more reliable and with fewer errors.
Moreover, some companies (like airline ones) implement or try to adopt Seven Sigma
level, which means even fewer defects and more satisfied customers.
2.1 Definitions
There are many determinations and definitions of SS (Henderson and Evans, 2000) and
defining it in simple terms is not possible because it consists of problem solving
methodology and focuses on optimisation of financial returns, including culture
change within an organization (Raisinghani et al., 2005). Generally we can say that it is
a method which tries through the registration, analysis and adjustment of processes to
reduce defects-errors and to make the product or service suitable for customers needs,
having as basic requirement the total commitment of management. It gives much
importance in management of processes-procedures, because process considered to be
the fundamental element in organization functioning. Process considered as a network
of activities-actions repeatable, and its cause is to create values to external and internal
customers (Bergman and Klefsjo, 2002). There are also theories and studies that pay
attention to its statistical background and consider it as a statistical approach for
controlling quality (Hahn et al., 2000; Hoerl and Snee, 2002) and others that consider it

Six Sigmas
CSF and toolbox

109

IJLSS
4,2

a management strategy to improve business profitability, improvement in

effectiveness of processes and customer satisfaction (Sanders and Hild, 2000;
Antony and Banuelas, 2001). It is moreover a quality improvement method, which
succeeds in performing positive outcomes not only in manufacturing but in services
companies as well (Antony et al., 2007).

110

2.2 Components of Six Sigma methodology

Basic ingredients of Six Sigma considered to be the following:
(1) The structured model called DMAIC, which is divided into five phases and has
as a purpose to improve already existing processes. Something equivalent is the
plan, do, study, act circle of Deming (1993).
(2) Critical to quality focus, which means focus on the client and those
characteristics of the product which are crucial for its satisfaction.
(3) Design for Six Sigma (DFSS), which is a structured procedure realized in the stage
of designing the product or a process, so to prevent defects-errors-problems.
Also referred as define, measure, analysis, design, verify (DMADV).
(4) The results of its implementation, are usually expressed in financial terms,
such as:
.
cycle times;
.
product quality;
.
product delivery;
.
on hand inventory;
.
usage of space on the production floor;
.
productivity measurement;
.
supplier performance in comparison to organizational need;
.
profitability; and
.
market share.
(5) Existence of an hierarchical belt system, with certified staff (champion, master
black belt, black belt, etc.).
(6) Top-down approach. This means that the attempt of its implementation,
originates with the obligatory commitment and participation of the
management.
(7) Performance metrics. Metrics are utilized to express the performance of the
organization in the processes, and some of them are: sigma level, defects
per million opportunities, rolled throughput yield (Yrt) and defect per unit
(DPU).
A most important ingredient is as referred, the structured method DMAIC, which is
utilized in all the prodedures-processes, considered to be improved. The phases-stages
of the method follow:
(1) Define. Define the characteristics-specifications of product that satisfy the
customer. According to this rule all processes must be error free or have errors
below some limit. Otherwise they must be improved.

(2) Measure. The process to be analyzed, is measured and data is gathered and
compared with specifications defined in phase 1.
(3) Analyze. Data from the measurement phase analyzed to find correlations,
relations, causes, etc.
(4) Improve. Solutions, recommendations and actions to improve the process so as
to achieve the desired performance specifications.
(5) Control. Establishment of standard measures to maintain the performance, and
correct any possible problem, as needed.
Critical success factors
Critical factors are the essential ingredients required for the success of Six Sigma
projects in an organization (Coronado and Antony, 2002). In addition if objectives
associated with these factors are not achieved, the organization will fail with serious
negative consequences in the organization (Rockart, 1979). Companies having
implemented Six Sigma had different results due to the complexity of the methodology,
therefore to have a successive implementation, attention must be drawn to the key
elements of Six Sigma (Coronado and Antony, 2002).
What it must be emphasized is that all the authors having recorded the success
factors, have extracted much elements from one of the quality gurus Deming, who
having mentioned 14 propositions (Deming, 1993) that a company manager should
implement for the improvement of individual and team performance, had made a big
contribution to the construction of the theory followed about quality improvement
systems.
One from the first authors that mentioned success factors for Six Sigma is
Harry in, 2000. The CSF which will be referred in the current study, are implemented
in service firms and industries, and in small, medium and bigger size companies
as well. What differs is the degree of the importance of the factor according to the kind
of organization. Factors are referred with different expressions and manners in
bibliography, but there was an effort to report all of them and as an author is
mentioned the first one that recorded it.
It can be concluded that the most important factors for the implementation of SS are:
management commitment, training, cultural change, importance to financial benefits,
statistical tools and data analysis, linking it to business strategy (Chakrabarty, 2009;
Brady and Allen, 2006; Schon, 2006).
We will refer shortly to the most important of the factors:
(1) Management involvement and commitment. Considered to be the most important
factor, as Six Sigma is a top-down methodology, which means that the attempt
for improvement, begins from the top management and required prequisition
and the participation of leadership in all stages of its implementation.
(2) Appropriate training and education. Six Sigma with the structured role system,
has as a requirement the appropriate and continuous training of the employees
involved in its implementation.
(3) Cultural change. It is the ability of the organization to adopt and implement
easily, new ideas, concepts, methodologies and to be flexible in taking decisions
for continuous improvement.

Six Sigmas
CSF and toolbox

111

IJLSS
4,2

112

(4) Attaching the success to financial benefits. SS implements methods of measuring

performance, after its application, so to represent the success of its
implementation. Financial benefits are such as a measure of expressing the
SS achievement.
(5) Utilization of quality-statistical tools and data analysis. The use of tools and
techniques for cause exploring, data analysis and decision making, considered
to be essential. These tools are not all statistical but there are also analytical or
managerial, like brainstorming, process mapping, etc.
(6) Linking 6s to business strategy. Six Sigma philosophy must be inextricably
connected to the strategy the organization follows, so every action and decision
must be in the appropriate manner defined.
After the literature review a total of 32 factors have arose and are following in Table I.
In Table I there was a separation-segmentation of the factors in two different
categories. One is about the classification in hard and soft, and the other according to
the enablers, which originated from the EFQM (2010) and ultimate Six Sigma models
(Shanin, 2011).
A. Soft-hard, CSF of Six Sigma, can be separated in hard and soft (Kundi, 2005).
The soft ones, relate to behavioral and cultural aspects, management philosophy
and usually deal with human resources, and people aspects such as education,
communication and others.
The hard factors that are easier quantified, accountable and observable, deal with
the main function and structure of Six Sigma methodology, such as the tools and
techniques utilized.
B. Enablers, the EFQM model encompasses nine major criteria in two categories.
The first five criteria are regarded as enablers. The five enablers are used with an
aim to be able to group the CSF and they are: leadership, strategy, people-staff,
partnership and resources, processes-products-services.
A more detailed description of the enablers is realized below:
(1) Leadership. The way the top management develop and facilitate the vision and
mission of the company. This can be achieved with employees encouragement,
but also with the active participation of the management.
(2) Strategy. The way the organization implement its mission and vision.
(3) People-staff. How the company manages and spreads knowledge and assure
maximum effort from all its people to achieve the targets.
(4) Partnership and resources. Successful implementation of cooperation with
external partnerships and appropriate use of resources.
(5) Processes, products/services. Actions according to design, production of
products/services and process improvement regarding these actions.
Statistical/management tools and techniques
Like many others methodologies, Six Sigma is pretty much a collection of tools that
may or may not be relevant for a task at hand. They are all practical methods
employed by qualified employees to handle quality related problems for fostering
performance improvement. Most of the tools have already being used in other
management techniques and as referred above the tools are not only statistical.

Critical success factor

Hard/soft Enabler Author

1.1 Top management involvement and

commitment
1.2 Management of cultural change
1.3 Spirit of innovation in the company
1.4 Attaching the success to financial benefits
1.5 Appropriate training and education of the
staff at all levels
1.6 Focus on customer
1.7 Linking Six Sigma with the suppliers
1.8 Linking Six Sigma to business strategy

Soft

Harry (2000)

Soft
Soft
Soft
Soft

1
1
2
3

Henderson and Evans (2000)

Yun and Chua (2002)
Harry (2000)
Harry (2000)

Soft
Soft
Soft

2
4
2

Soft
Soft

3
3

Harry and Schroeder (2000)

Goldstein (2001)
Antony and Banuelas
(2002)
Henderson and Evans (2000)
Goldstein (2001)

Soft

Pande and Larry (2002)

Soft

Antony et al. (2005)

Soft
Hard

2
5

Byrne (2003)
Bhote (2002)

Soft

Hard

Henderson and Evans

(2000)
Henderson and Evans
(2000)

Soft

Soft

Antony and Banuelas

(2002)
Breyfogle (2003)

Hard
Hard

4
5

Pande and Larry (2002)

Buch and Tolentino (2006)

Soft

Soft
Soft

5
2

Henderson and Evans

(2000)
Zu et al. (2008)
Pande and Larry (2002)

Soft
Soft

2
3

Goldstein (2001)
Schon (2006)

Soft

Cronemyr (2007)

Soft
Soft
Soft
Hard
Soft

2
3
2
2
2

Schon (2006)
Cronemyr (2007)
Schon (2006)
Goldstein (2001)
Schon (2006)

Hard

Harry (2000)

1.9 Linking Six Sigma to human resources

1.10 Effective communication between the
different departments
1.11 Adequate resources for implementing the
system
1.12 Linking the implementation of quality system
to the Information management systems
1.13 Setting measurable goals and objectives
1.14 Implementation of a system to analyze and
measure processes
1.15 Data from measurements is easily obtainable
by all the interested parts
1.16 The implementation of quality improvement
program is realised through an organizational
infrastructure
1.17 Knowledge and understanding of the
methodology and its techniques
1.18 Selection of team members to participate in the
team projects of quality improvement
1.19 Appropriate utilization of the tools/techniques
1.20 Sufficient knowledge of statistics and
statistical methods
1.21 Employees promotion and incentive
compensation tied to the results of SS projects
1.22 Focus on product/service design
1.23 Attention given to both long-term and shortterm targets
1.24 Safe environment
1.25 Importance of the role-participation of the
middle management
1.26 Creation of qualitative goals, such as customer
value
1.27 Knowledge and competence
1.28 Ability to learn from the past
1.29 A uniform language and terminology
1.30 Establish a system to track all projects
1.31 Follow-up and communication of success
stories
1.32 Selection of 6s projects and evaluation

Six Sigmas
CSF and toolbox

113

Table I.
Success factors

IJLSS
4,2

114

Tools is a simple way to solve a problem. Techniques have a broader application from
tools and may include many tools.
Except the registration of the tools and techniques from many sources, the basic
selection was made from the tools and techniques listed in the ISO 13053-1 standard.
Finally, the most commonly used tools and techniques in Six Sigma methodology are listed
in Table II.
In column A there is the suggestion from the ISO 13053-1 standard, for the usefulness
of every tool or technique, where M mandatory, R recommended, S suggested.
A. Usefulness

B. Name of tool/technique

C. Phase of DMAIC

D. Tool or technique

Pareto diagram
Histogram
Run chart
Pies, bar charts
Scatter diagram
Hypothesis tests
Analysis of variance
Regression analysis
Correlation analysis
Design of experiments
Non-parametric tests
Brainstorming
Tree diagram
Cause-effect diagram (fishbone)
Control chart
Flow chart
GANTT chart
Checksheet
Process map
Process capability analysis
SIPOC diagram
SWOT analysis
Voice of the customer
Affinity diagram
Critical to quality matrix
KANO model
Quality function development (QFD)
Benchmarking
Statistical process control (SPC)
Failure mode effect analysis (FMEA)
Mistake proofing (poka yoke)
Six Sigma indicators
Prioritization matrix
Descriptive statistics
Relations diagram
Process decision program chart
Arrow diagram
Matrix diagram
Matrix data analysis

DMAI
A
A
A
A
AI
AI
AI
AI
AI
AI
I
D
A
M
DAI
D
General
DA(I)
DAC
DI
D
D
A
DMIC
D
DAI
MI
MAC
AI
I
DI
D
M
I
I
D
D
D

7qc
7qc
7qc
Tool
7qc
Tool
Tool
Tool
Tool
Technique
Tool
Tool
New
7qc
7qc
Tool
Tool
7qc
Tool
Technique
Technique
Technique
Technique
New
Tool
Tool
Technique
Technique
Technique
Technique
Technique
Tool
Technique
Tool
New
New
New
New
New

R
R
R
R
R
S

R
R

R
RS

S
M
S
R
R
R
RM
M
R
Table II.
Tools and techniques by
group of: suggested
usefulness from ISO
13053-1 (A), phase (C),
tool/technique(D)

In column C there is the phase of the DMAIC method that the tool/technique is used,
where D define, M measure, A analyze, I improve, C control. Some tools
may be used in more than one phase.
In column D, we have the groups: tool, technique and moreover there are some
tools belong to two extra groups, 7qc 7 seven quality control tools (Tague, 2004),
new new management tools (Tague, 2004).

Six Sigmas
CSF and toolbox

115
Conclusions
Six Sigma combines fine elements of many former quality and management initiatives.
The majority of the tools and techniques it utilizes, are not something new in the
theory of quality. Consequently, there is a strong relation of Six Sigma methodology to
all the other quality and management improvement initiatives.
The purpose of this paper was to identify the factors that are crucial in effective
implementation of 6s, factors that have been described by many authors. The
presentation of the factors should help all the interested parts to have an image of
the actions needed to implement the method. The tools and techniques of the
methodology in the different phases of DMAIC were also reported and categorized.
The existence of many factors is an indication of the rather confusing theory of SS.
A step to fill the gap between the theory and the practice of Six Sigma, is to measure
and compare the results from the degree of existence and implementation of these
factors in real situations.
References
Aboelmaged, M.G. (2010), Six Sigma quality: a structured review and implications for future
research, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 27 No. 3,
pp. 268-317.
Antony, J. (2004), Six Sigma in the UK service organizations: results from a pilot survey,
Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 19 No. 8, pp. 1006-1013.
Antony, J. (2006), Six Sigma for service processes, Business Process Management Journal,
Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 234-248.
Antony, J. and Banuelas, R. (2001), A strategy for survival, Manufacturing Engineer, Vol. 80
No. 3, pp. 119-121.
Antony, J. and Banuelas, R. (2002), Key ingredients for the effective implementation of
Six Sigma program, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 20-27.
Antony, J., Kumar, M. and Madu, C.N. (2005), Six Sigma in small and medium-sized UK
manufacturing enterprises: some empirical observations, International Journal of Quality
and Reliability Management, Vol. 22 Nos 8/9, pp. 860-874.
Antony, J., Antony, J.F., Kumar, M. and Cho, R.B. (2007), Six Sigma in service organisations:
benefits, challenges and difficulties, common myths, empirical observations and success
factors, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 24 No. 3,
pp. 294-311.
Bergman, B. and Klefsjo, B. (2002), Quality from Customer Needs to Customer Satisfaction,
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Bhote, K.R. (2002), The Ultimate Six Sigma: Beyond Quality Excellence to Total Business
Excellence, AMACOM/American Management Association, New York, NY.
Brady, J. and Allen, T. (2006), Six Sigma literature: a review and agenda for future research,
Quality and Reliability Engineering International, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 335-367.

IJLSS
4,2

116

Breyfogle, F.W. (2003), Implementing Six Sigma, 2nd ed., Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
Buch, K.K. and Tolentino, A. (2006), Employee expectations for Six Sigma success,
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 28-37.
Byrne, G. (2003), Ensuring optimal success with Six Sigma implementations, Journal of
Organizational Excellence, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 43-50.
Chakrabarty, A. (2009), Six Sigma in service organizations: a conceptual framework based on
aspects of implementation and performance, PhD thesis, University of Singapore.
Coronado, R.B. and Antony, J. (2002), Critical success factors for the successful implementation
of Six Sigma projects in organizations, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 92-99.
Cronemyr, P. (2007), Six Sigma management, PhD thesis, Chalmers University of Technology.
Deming, W.E. (1993), The New Economics, M.I.T. Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Eckes, G. (2001), Making Six Sigma Last: Managing the Balance Between Cultural and Technical
Change, Wiley, New York, NY.
EFQM (2010), The EFQM Excellence Model, European Foundation for Quality Management,
Brussels.
Goldstein, M.D. (2001), Six Sigma program success factors, ASQ Six Sigma Forum Magazine,
Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1-11.
Hahn, G.J., Doganaksoy, N. and Hoerl, R. (2000), The evolution of Six Sigma, Quality
Engineering, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 317-326.
Harry, M. and Schroeder, R. (2000), Six Sigma The Breakthrough Strategy Revolutionizing the
Worlds Top Corporations, Doubleday, New York, NY.
Harry, M.J. (2000), Six Sigma: a breakthrough strategy for probability, Quality Progress, May,
pp. 60-64.
Henderson, K.H. and Evans, J.R. (2000), Successful implementation of Six Sigma: benchmarking
General Electric Company, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 7 No. 4,
pp. 260-281.
Hoerl, R.W. and Snee, R.D. (2002), Statistical Thinking: Improving Business Performance,
Thompson Learning, San Jose, CA.
ISO (2011), ISO 13053-1: Quantitative Methods in Process Improvement Six Sigma Part 1:
DMAIC Methodology, International Standards Organization, Geneva.
Kundi, O. (2005), A study of Six Sigma implementation and critical success factors, paper
presented at Pakistans 9th International Convention on Quality Improvement, Karachi,
Pakistan, November 14-15.
Pande, P. and Larry, H. (2002), What is Six Sigma, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Raisinghani, M.S., Ette, H., Pierce, R., Cannon, G. and Daripaly, P. (2005), Six Sigma: concepts,
tools, and applications, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 105 No. 4,
pp. 491-505.
Rockart, J. (1979), Chief executives define their own information needs, Harvard Business
Review, Vol. 2, pp. 81-92.
Sanders, D. and Hild, C.R. (2000), Six Sigma on business processes: common organizational
issues, Quality Engineering, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 603-610.
Schon, K. (2006), Implementing Six Sigma in a non-American culture, Int. J. Six Sigma and
Competitive Advantage, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 404-428.
Shanin, A. (2011), Integration of EFQM and ultimate Six Sigma: a proposed model,
International Business Research, Vol. 4 No. 1.

Tague, N.R. (2004), The Quality Toolbox, 2nd ed., SQ Quality Press, Milwaukee, WI.
Yun, J.Y. and Chua, R.C.H. (2002), Samsung uses Six Sigma to change its image, Six Sigma
Forum Magazine, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 13-16.
Zu, X., Fredendall, L.D. and Douglas, T.J. (2008), The evolving theory of quality management:
the role of Six Sigma, Journal of Operation Management, Vol. 26.
Further reading
Crosby, P.B. (1979), Quality is Free, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
About the authors
Vasileios Ismyrlis has been an Administrative employee, for the last nine years, in the social
insurance institute IKA-ETAM. He has also two years experience in a bank and has taught
financial lessons in vocational post-secondary education. He graduated with a degree in
Statistics and Insurance Sciences from University of Piraeus. His postgraduate studies are in the
field of Quality Assurance. His current studies are for a PhD in Quality Management and
Multidimensional Statistics, at the Department of Marketing and Operations Management of
University of Macedonia, Greece. Vasileios Ismyrlis is the corresponding author and can be
contacted at: vasismir@uom.gr
Odysseas Moschidis is an Assistant Professor (Applied Statistics with emphasis in Business
Administration) in the Department of Marketing and Operation Management of University of
Macedonia, Greece. He graduated with a degree in Mathematics from Aristotle University of
Thessaloniki. His postgraduate studies are in the field of Applied Statistics and Applied
Mathematics and he holds a Doctors degree in Contribution to the study of scales evaluation
with the method of multidimensional data analysis from the Department of Applied Informatics
of the University of Macedonia, Greece. He has participated in several research projects, working
on the areas of evaluating business data and market research and multidimensional statistical
analysis. His research interests include the areas of scales evaluation, multidimensional
statistical analysis and evaluation of business data and market research. He has authored
chapters and numerous publications in international journals and conferences.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Six Sigmas
CSF and toolbox

117