Environmental Impact Assessment Review 83 (2020) 106396

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/eiar

Green Lean Six Sigma for sustainable development: Integration and T

framework
⁎
Mahender Singh Kaswan, Rajeev Rathi
School of Mechanical Engineering, Lovely Professional University, 144411 Phagwara, Punjab, India

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The sustainable oriented demand, globalized competition, and governmental policies on climate change have
Lean enforced the industries to adopt sustainable practices. Green Lean Six Sigma (GLS) is an eco-friendly approach
Six sigma that mitigates carbon footprints and produces high specifications products. But to implement the GLS program, it
Lean six sigma is indispensable to integrate individual Green, Lean, and Six Sigma approaches in unique GLS methodology.
Green lean six sigma
Moreover, there exists no GLS framework that can be applied irrespective of the size, type, and culture of the
Sustainability
organization. So, the present work deals with the integration and development of the GLS framework. The
integration of the GLS was proposed based on theoretical elements, and the framework was developed based on
DMAIC approach. It has found that enablers, toolset, and implementation methods supplement the integration of
GLS. The proposed framework provides a path for GLS implementation through an appropriate selection of the
project. Besides, it has identified that unique GLS indices and toolset are required to estimate various sustain-
ability measures and execute selected GLS projects. The present study will facilitate the organizations to have
readiness for the implementation of a sustainable GLS approach through a detailed understanding of integration
and GLS framework.

1. Introduction sustainable methods of production and consumption (Bond and Dusík,

2019; Duarte and Cruz-Machado, 2019). Since the last few decades,
The increased awareness about sustainability and demands for eco- many ideas and approaches have developed like Lean, Green, Six
friendly products has forced the industrial organizations to rethink their Sigma, etc. (Bhat et al., 2014; Garza-Reyes et al., 2018) to produce the
business operations (Siegel et al., 2019). Industries are adopting the top quality products.
traditional methods of manufacturing and fossil fuels in most of the But, an individual approach is not able to address all the issues
world (Siegel et al., 2019). The manufacturing industries in developed inclusively related to sustainability (Pandey et al., 2018). So, an in-
nations release four times carbon dioxide as compared to the devel- tegrated approach is needed that reduces wastes, variations, and miti-
oping countries (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change, 2018). gates negative environmental impacts (Kaswan and Rathi, 2019). GLS is
The existing policies on climate change reveal that the average surface an inclusive approach that reduces environmental emissions through
temperature of the earth will increase to 3 °C until the end of this 3′R (reduce, reuse, and recycle) (Sreedharan and Raju, 2016). Fig. 1
century (IPCC, 2018). This temperature increase is far away from the depicts a GLS model.
ambitious target of the Paris agreement that aims to limit it up to 2 °C GLS consists of three unique approaches viz., Green, Lean, and Six
(Kaswan and Rathi, 2019). The risk associated with climate will in- Sigma that increase profitability dynamics through reduced emissions,
crease in the offing due to increased hazard frequency and more vul- wastes, and rework (Kumar et al., 2016). Lean advocates for the sys-
nerable population. Therefore for the welfare of society and ecological tematic removal of wastes through perfection at all levels within the
protection, industries must include green technologies in their opera- organization (Panwar et al., 2018; Zhu et al., 2018). Green technology
tions. The existence of modern industries depends upon their compe- reduces the negative environmental impact of the product by making it
tence to change with the external environment (Kaswan and Rathi, more ecofriendly (Deif, 2011; Garza-Reyes, 2015). Six Sigma reduces
2020). So, to remain sustainable in the market, industrial organizations variations in the process that leads to reduced rejection of products
must develop and implement low carbon emission technologies. As a (Kumaravadivel and Natarajan, 2013). But, combined Green Lean Six
result, the organizations are spending enormous capital to devise Sigma is capable of producing a product that is not only of high quality

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (R. Rathi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106396
Received 11 November 2019; Received in revised form 24 March 2020
Available online 29 April 2020
0195-9255/ © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
M.S. Kaswan and R. Rathi Environmental Impact Assessment Review 83 (2020) 106396

2014; Abdulmalek and Rajgopal, 2007). The implementation of green

Reduce the emissions
Reduce the wastes technologies can overcome this limitation of the Lean. Green tech-
nology adds to Lean as it reduces negative environmental impacts and
other associated wastes (Dües et al., 2013). It is a sustainable tech-
Green Lean Six nology that reduces global warming, acidification, etc. within the entire
Green Sigma supply chain (Singh and Basak, 2018;Sureeyatanapas et al., 2018).
Green technology, although it reduces environmental emissions, it is
not able to reduce the lean wastes (Siegel et al., 2019). So, there is a
Six need for a combined Green Lean (GL) approach that not only minimizes
Lean Sigma lean wastes but also reduces the carbon footprint. There is a good deal
of similarities between the two methods based on waste reduction
Reduce the process techniques and management practices (Bergmiller and McCright,
variations 2009). Table 1 indicates the lean and green view towards various lean
wastes.
Fig. 1. GLS model. There are also some limitations of the combined GL approach re-
ported in the literature (Farias et al., 2019). GL does not use statistical
and low cost but also eco-friendly (Hussain et al., 2019). GLS combines tools for the reduction of variations in the process, although it reduces
the wastes of Lean and Green in the define phase of Six Sigma's DMAIC wastes and emissions (Sharma et al., 2017). GL approach is not capable
methodology. The measurement phase of GLS, various wastes, and the of producing the product of high specifications even though it reduces
current state of the system are measured. Subsequently, the reasons for wastes and emissions (Garza-Reyes, 2015b). So, there is a vast need to
the associated wastes and emissions are found out and investigated. device an approach that constitutes of tools and techniques to overcome
After that, the possible solutions are found out for the improvement in these limitations (Sagnak and Kazancoglu, 2016;Sun et al., 2017). Six
the various dimensions of organizational sustainability. After that, the Sigma is a statistical data-driven approach that works project by project
best solution is implemented, and the performance is recorded for and incorporates qualified tools that can supplement GL methodology
further development. In the literature, there is substantial evidence of (Sreedharan et al., 2018). Motorola pioneered six Sigma in 1987, and
integration and framework of Lean and Green, Lean, and Six Sigma. But since then, it is being adopted widely by manufacturing and service
the literature lacks enough evidence on the integration and framework organizations (Antony et al., 2012Rathi et al., 2016b). The principle
of GLS. There exist few studies pertain to the GLS framework, but the idea behind Six Sigma is that if the imperfections can be measured, then
concerned organizations faced challenges to execute the same due to the solution can be planned to eliminate them (Silich et al., 2012;Singh
the generic nature of the framework (Sony and Naik, 2019). Moreover, and Khanduja, 2014). It is a statistical approach that reduces defects up
in the literature, there exists no study on the GLS framework that can be to 3.4 per million opportunities (Ramanan et al., 2014; Rathi et al.,
applied irrespective of the size, type, and culture of the organization. 2016a). The Six Sigma methodology, although it reduces variations, it
For this, the present study provides integration and framework of GLS does not reduce wastes and emissions (Garza-Reyes, 2015a). So, from
for achieving excellence in productivity and environmental sustain- the comprehensive discussion on Green, Lean, and Six Sigma, it can be
ability. deduced that each approach has some uniqueness and some limitations.
The current manuscript has divided into six sections, including the Each of the Green, Lean, and Six Sigma supplements another method,
introduction. The 2nd section depicts the literature review and research and that leads to the evolution of the combined Green Lean Six Sigma
gaps. The 3rd section represents the integration GLS model. The fra- (Garza-Reyes et al., 2016). GLS is an approach of sustainable develop-
mework of GLS has presented in the 4th section of the manuscript. The ment that delivers high-quality eco-friendly products through the re-
5th section enumerates results and discussion of the present work. The duction of wastes, emissions, and defects (Kaswan and Rathi, 2019).
final section of the paper represents the conclusion of the current re- Although the evolution of GLS, very few pursuits have made for the
search work. realization of this sustainable approach in industrial organizations. The
main reasons for the same can attribute to lack of Green, Lean, and Six
Sigma integration and implementation frameworks. Besides, in the lit-
1.1. Research objectives erature, there exists no framework that is applicable irrespective of size,
type, and culture of the organization. Table 2 represents the significant
The objectives of the present research work may be summarized as findings and the limitations of the work done to date on GLS.
follows:
2.1. Research gaps
• To integrate Green, Lean, and Six Sigma through conceptual simi-
larities and common characteristics. There exist a few studies pertain to the GLS framework, but the
• Construct the GLS framework and provide the associated toolsets at implementing organizations faced challenges to execute the same due
each stage of the implementation. to the generic nature of the frameworks (Sony and Naik, 2019). The
• To facilitate the industrial personnel for incremental implementa- literature lacks evidence of a comprehensive GLS framework that ap-
tion of GLS through a systematic understanding of GLS. plies to different processes, organizational cultures, and sectors. In the
research, there is also no evidence on the integration of Green, Lean,
2. Literature review and Six Sigma based on the common characteristics. Therefore, the
proclivity towards sustainable practices, together with a lack of
The history of GLS traced back to the development of Lean philo- knowledge base of green technologies, provides impetus and direction
sophy. The lean concept was devised in Japan after the second world for the present research work.
war to compete with the mass production system of the USA. (Bhamu
and Singh Sangwan, 2014; Duarte and Cruz-Machado, 2019). The 3. Integration of Green Lean Six Sigma
modern concept of lean manufacturing came from the Toyota Produc-
tion System (TPS), pioneered by Japanese engineers Taiichi Ohno and The GLS has received due attention in recent years because of its
Shigeo Shingo (Kaswan et al., 2019). The lean approach reduces wastes; ability to enhance productivity, profitability, and mitigate environ-
it is not able to reduce the adverse environmental effects (Aggogeri, mental concerns (Sony and Naik, 2019). The Green, Lean, and Six

2
M.S. Kaswan and R. Rathi Environmental Impact Assessment Review 83 (2020) 106396

Fig. 2. Integration model of GLS.

work proposes a theoretical integration model of the GLS based on the

Green Lean Six Sigma project combination of theoretical elements. Fig. 2 depicts an integrated GLS
Step 1 identification model. The integration model's main aim is to describe the essential
facts required for industrial organizations to improve sustainable per-
formance. The proposed model represents the conceptual similarities
between the three approaches. The enablers' works as the key inputs
Step 2 Assessment of the current level of that stimulate the integration of GLS while the performances in trade-
the project
off serve as output. The challenges for the GLS integration are the
constraints that restrict the organizational pursuits to improve the
sustainability dynamics. The tools and associated GLS frameworks
Root out the main cause of the considered as the supporting mechanism that supports the integration
Step 3
problem or inefficiency and implementation of GLS.

4. The framework of Green Lean Six Sigma

Find out and apply the possible
Step 4 Lean and Six Sigma methodologies are being widely used by the
best solution
industrial organization to reduce wastes and process variations. But,
due to increased awareness about sustainability and strict government
policies, the industries have to shift operation dynamics towards sus-
Step 5 Sustain the best solution tainable ones. This demand for the incorporation of the Green tech-
nology in the Lean Six Sigma that leads to the development of a novel
approach: Green Lean Six Sigma. But to execute inclusive GLS, there is a
need for a dedicated framework that provides stepwise guidelines to
Fig. 3. GLS framework.
achieve sustainability. In the literature, no study has found to GLS
framework that can be adopted by both service and manufacturing
Sigma are three distinct approaches, but they are synergetic as they organizations. The present study depicts a DMAIC (define, measure,
jointly focus on waste reduction and effective utilization of resources analyze, improve, and control) based GLS framework (Fig. 3) that can
(Kumar et al., 2015). Consequently, the universal principles and tool- be adopted by all business organizations. The proposed GLS framework
sets of these approaches can be integrated under the umbrella of a has executed through the following five steps:
single approach called Green Lean Six Sigma. GLS is a comprehensive
approach that aims to achieve improvements in the process, finance,
4.1. Step 1: Green Lean Six Sigma project identification
operations, and emissions (Pandey et al., 2018). The integration of the
Green, Lean, and Six Sigma can be viewed as a new prospect to the
The first step of the GLS framework is to select an appropriate
industrial organizations for improvement in sustainability. Banawi and
project based on the level of wastes, defects, environmental-related
Bilec (2014) found that the organizations that have applied the GLS
emissions, and voice of customers. GLS is a project-based approach and
have achieved better performances than those implemented individual
is executed project by project in an incremental way by covering each
approaches.
department or section individually. The project is classified as a parti-
In the literature, no structured and complete method for the in-
cular section or division that is selected for the initiation of GLS. The
tegration of the Green, Lean, and Six Sigma has found. The present
literature also reveals that 40% of six sigma projects have failed due to

3
M.S. Kaswan and R. Rathi Environmental Impact Assessment Review 83 (2020) 106396

inappropriate project selection (Gupta et al., 2019). The execution of 4.4. Step 4: Find and implement the best possible solution
GLS demands substantial investment and structural changes in the or-
ganization. So, it is imperative to select an appropriate GLS project that Once the leading causes for wastes and inefficiency have found out,
exhibits the highest scope for sustainability improvement. For this, a potential solutions are proposed, tested, and the best solution is applied
comprehensive study of the various sections of the industry is con- to ride out the prominent reasons. The confirmed cause and effect re-
ducted. The detailed study of the entire industry provides wastes, de- lationship (from analyzing phase) are used at this stage to find a wide
fects, and associated environmental emission levels pertain to different spectrum of potential solutions. The solutions provided at this stage
segments of the industry. The matrices are formulated for wastes level, may be upcycling, anaerobic digestion (AD), refuses derived fuel (RDF),
defects, and different emissions corresponding to the various sections. recirculation or recycling of water, etc. In this step, high creativity is
The prioritization of different matrices is done in the next sub-step to desired from the organizational personnel. The potential solutions (al-
select a project that exhibits the highest potential for sustainability ternatives) are fleshed out, criteria are developed, and the solutions are
improvement. Eco QFD and critical to quality (CTQ) tools translate evaluated to search for the best solution. All the sources of information
sustainably oriented customer demands in technical and environmental like a stakeholder, customers, project sponsors, and staff are used to
attributes that serve as a vital tool for project selection. So, based on the determine the evaluation criteria. The criteria like CTQs, business-re-
current needs of customers, together with business and environmental lated, regulatory, and others are considered at this juncture. To eval-
concerns, an appropriate project is selected. After the identification of a uate the solutions against criteria tools like solution matrix, pugh ma-
proper project, a charter is prepared based on the scope, schedule, and trix, and design of experiments (DOE), LCA, etc.are used. The pugh
team members of the identified project. matrix determines the strengths and weaknesses of the potential solu-
tions so that strengths can be preserved and deficiencies addressed.
Here, the practitioner should be open to alter or combine solutions for
4.2. Step 2: Assessment of the current level of the project the selection of the best solution. DOE is used in this step to find out the
optimal settings for combinations of factors. After selecting the best
The second step of the GLS framework deals with the estimation of possible solution, existing VSM is revised to reflect what the process
the current level of the system or project under consideration. Here the will look like after the changes are made. The estimation of time-saving,
performance of the selected GLS project is measured against the several improved quality and other associated quality measures are also made
indices of Green, Lean, and Six Sigma. Based on the collected data and with improved VSM. The best solution is now launched as a pilot so-
facts, the standard deviation, sigma level, and Cpk of the project are lution. The tasks to perform are documented, and pilot participants are
estimated using the statistical tools. Besides, the estimation of CO2 trained in various aspects of the best solution. Now, the pilot solution is
consumption, green energy coefficient, material consumption, etc. are implemented in the selected section of the concerned industry.
made using Green technology tools like life cycle assessment (LCA). To
assess the current level of various associated wastes, the value stream 4.5. Step 5: Sustain the best solution
mapping (VSM) serves as a useful lean tool. VSM provides an estimate
of cycle time and material consumption across the different stages and This step deals with sustain or controls the best solution if the
provides a check against normal consumption of time and money. It has substantial improvement is recorded by the existing system or process
a notable feature of the data table that organizes process-related data under consideration. The entire process is re-evaluated using VSM and
like time, material, money, etc. Furthermore, life cycle assessment LCA to find out the level of waste and emissions reduction. In this step,
(LCA) is used in the measurement process to evaluate the environ- various observations, data collection, and control charts are used to re-
mental impact of each subprocess in different environmental impact assess the sigma level, Cpk, water, electricity, material consumption, etc.
categories. The combined VSM and LCA lead to the quantification of If re-assessed performance parameters is better than in the measuring
various lean and green wastes that provides the source for further im- step, then the selected solution is sustained. Otherwise, the Out of
provement. Control Action Plan (OCAP) is initiated to select an appropriate solu-
tion. Once a potential solution for the pilot project has sustained for a
long duration, the same is commenced in other sections of the industry.
4.3. Step 3: Root out the leading causes of problem or inefficiency The comprehensive implementation of GLS in the industry leads to
improved sustainability and increased reputation at a global platform
The next stage of the GLS framework pertains to find out the leading through the delivery of eco-friendly products.
causes related to high-level wastes, emissions, and defects in the se-
lected project. In this step, first, value-added and non-value-added ac- 5. Results and discussion
tivities are identified both from the customers and business point of
view. After that, the process cycle efficiency is determined to compare Green Lean approach has widely used by industrial organizations;
with world-class benchmarks to find out how much improvement is comparatively, very few pursuits have made for the realization of the
needed. Meanwhile, the complete analysis of the project is made to GLS approach (Kumar et al., 2016; Hussain et al., 2019). GLS is in its
identify bottlenecks points and constraints in the selected project. After evolution phase, and the organizations are reluctant to adopt this ap-
the comprehensive, detailed analysis of the project under consideration, proach due to resistive culture and fear of pragmatic shifts in its work
then the possible reasons for the wastes, emission, variations, and de- methods. The comprehensive discussion on enablers, barriers, and
fects are found out. The tools like brainstorming, cause and effect toolset facilitates the integration of Green, Lean, and Six Sigma.
analysis (C& E), failure mode effect analysis (FMEA), five whys analysis, Moreover, the presented GLS framework will assist the organization in
life cycle impact assessment, etc. are used at this juncture to find out the implementing sustainable GLS for improved productivity and profit-
potential causes for the observed defects. Once the possible causes have ability.
explored, the search is now confined to find out the few prominent Once the integration of GLS has established cohesively, one can
reasons for project inefficiencies. The tools like Pareto chart, hypothesis easily correlate the different functionality of all these modern meth-
testing, principal component analysis (PCA), regression analysis, and odologies. Enablers are readiness measures for an organization to im-
brainstorming are used at this point to find the critical root causes. So, plement a new approach (Laureani and Antony, 2012). The facilitators
this step results in the exploration of the leading causes of inefficiencies have considered change methods that lead to the successful im-
that need to undertake for improving the current project or system plementation of a new strategy (Näslund, 2013). Table 3 depicts the
under consideration. enablers for the adoption of GLS.

4
M.S. Kaswan and R. Rathi Environmental Impact Assessment Review 83 (2020) 106396

It has found that top management support, teamwork, and organi- increases productivity but also reduces negative environmental im-
zation readiness are the most critical factors for the successful im- pacts. This goodwill ultimately enhances organization image on the
plementation of GLS (Pandey et al., 2018; Kaswan and Rathi, 2020). global platform. But, a combination of these philosophies required
The management commitment, a thorough understanding of the GLS considerable pursuits to identify standard tools and synergy among
tools, and useful data assimilation lead to improved sustainability them. Currently, most organizations want to integrate clean technolo-
through effective implementation of the GLS program. gies within their existing process improvement methods to contribute
The barriers are critical failure factors (CFF) that hinder the pro- towards a healthier environment. Significant challenges with the or-
gress or make it difficult for an organization to achieve set goals. These ganizations, those wish to embed green concept within Lean Six Sigma
are specified managerial and technical challenges that hinder the or- is non-availability of a proper road map. The researchers found that
ganizations from achieving desired targets (Gamal Aboelmaged, 2011). organizations are facing difficulty to implement and integrate Green,
The organization needs to identify fundamental problems or obstacles Lean, and Six Sigma for performance improvement (Cherrafi et al.,
in their way of success, within a particular time frame to take compe- 2017). Banwai and Bilec (2014) represented a framework to improve
titive advantages over competitors. Table 4 indicates the barriers that efficiency and reduce various associated wastes. But the presented
hinder the execution of the GLS program. framework was confined to a particular industry together; it did not
The comprehensive study pertains to GLS barriers reveals that the provide how it realized through DMAIC approach. Cherrafi et al. (2017)
most common challenge for the implementation of GLS is the lack of proposed a framework of GLS for improvement in economic and en-
standard metrics and assessment procedures. Besides, the lack of top vironmental sustainability. But the proposed framework realization was
management support is reported by many studies as one of the sig- difficult for the new industries that want to implement GLS. Cluzel et al.
nificant barriers for the GLS execution. The collaborative learning and (2010) presented an eco-friendly methodology to integrate Green and
linking of GLS to business objectives have found as substantial in- Lean Six Sigma, but the stepwise realization of the method followed
itiatives for GLS success. The GLS toolset supplements the integration was found difficult. The current research provides an integration of GLS
snd implementation of GLS. The GLS tools have considered as principles based on the theoretical elements and provides a detailed DMAIC based
or concepts that have the potential to identify, remove wastes, and framework. The proposed framework works as a pilot framework for
leads to optimum utilization of resources. After the analysis of thirteen the realization in a single section or department of the organization.
research articles pertains to GLS, it has observed that industrials orga- The same framework can be extended within the entire organization
nizations use different tools according to the diverse needs and their after its successful execution as a pilot project. The authors presented a
size. But, particular tools appear more than others and, therefore, more conceptual integration of Green Lean Six Sigma that guides profes-
frequently used by organizations that use this integrated GLS approach. sionals to adopt GLS culture in their organizations. The presented fra-
The tools of GLS have been examined through the radar chart, as shown mework shows the combination of Lean and Green matrices at every
in Fig. 4. The SIPOC chart and environmental value stream mapping step, which has ignored in earlier work. Lean and Green measures work
(EVSM) have found as the most widely used with more than 90% (11/ as prospective areas for project selection in the first step of the GLS
13). Besides, the other most commonly used tools found to be: process framework. To assess the current state of the system, in the second step
capability, reverse logistics, and cause and effect diagram (C&E). Out of of GLS implementation tools like EVSM, LCA is used. The potential
the thirteen enlisted articles of GLS, the majority relies on the lean tools causes for wastes are found in the third step of the framework using
to achieve both lean and green objectives. Therefore the industrial or- tools like LCA and conventional statistical tools. To find out the possible
ganizations are mostly banking on lean tools to meet environmental solutions in the improvement phase of framework tools like life cycle
concerns. To address the societal dimension of sustainability, only a few interpretation, environmental VSM, 5′S, kaizen, etc. are used. In the last
applications of community engagement and local sourcing tools have step of the GLS implementation, VSM and LCA are used to measure the
found. improvement made. The adopted GLS implementation method is sus-
The significance of GLS is increasing continuously due to its positive tained for a longer duration if the gains made are substantial than the
effects on quality determinates like productivity, VOC, and sustain- previous state of the system or project under contemplation.
ability. The literature reveals that the GLS integration not only

Green Lean Six Sigma tools

SIPOC Diagram
Community engagement 12 Training
Local soucing Project Charter
10
5'S Pareto Analysis
8
Process Sigma Calculation 6 Environmental VSM

4
Control chart Process Capability
2
Prioritization matrix 0 FMEA

Reverse logistics Cause and effect diagram

DOE Employee

Process Capability ANOVA

Consumption analysis TPM
LCA AHP
BWM

Fig. 4. Radar chart of Green Lean Six Sigma tool. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this
article.)

5
M.S. Kaswan and R. Rathi Environmental Impact Assessment Review 83 (2020) 106396

5.1. Implications 6. Conclusion

There is a need to scale up the global response to GHGs mitigation The GLS has recognized as an inclusive approach that reduces ne-
through eco-friendly business operations and intergovernmental en- gative environmental impacts and delivers high specification products.
vironmental policies (COP 25). GLS strategy reduces wastes and GHGs Organizations must understand critical elements and implementation
emissions through the inclusion of 3′R in industrial organizations. The methods of GLS to meet the sustainable oriented customer demand. The
present study encourages practitioners to adopt the GLS program integration of the GLS has been presented based on theoretical ele-
through a comprehensive understanding of integration measures and ments: enablers, barriers, and toolset. The enablers stimulate GLS in-
implementation framework. The manufacturing sector is abode by en- tegration, and barriers work as a hindrance in the integration of GLS.
vironmental regulations to reduce GHGs emissions. The integration of The associated tools and implementation methods supplement the in-
GLS provides systematic knowledge and, the framework provides the tegration of the GLS. The top management support and teamwork have
direction for the implementation of this approach. The practitioner may been found as the most significant enablers for the organization's pre-
use the results of the present study to develop a thorough knowledge paredness to implement GLS. Moreover, to execute GLS in industrial
base of this sustainable development approach. The framework will organizations, a unique DMAIC based framework has been presented in
facilitate industrial organizations for the effective utilization of the this work. The proposed framework provides a systematic path for GLS
resources and material that leads to reduced emissions. The present execution right from project identification to assessment of improve-
research provides the motivational view to industrial managers to re- ment of the system under consideration. The stepwise framework has
look, source, and incorporating sustainability through pertinently care supplemented with GLS tools that facilitate the industrial mangers to
of the society and environment. The researchers can utilize the insights execute this sustainable approach irrespective of size, type, and culture
from this study to strengthen their knowledge base on the assessment of the industry.
and direction view towards sustainability through the adoption of GLS. The main limitation of the present research work is that the GLS
The present work facilitates the industrialists and environmentalists framework has not tested pragmatically. This limitation provides the
to initiate sustainable business practices like GLS that leads to lesser impetus for future research to implement GLS in different industrial
environmental degradation through reduce, reuse, and recycle (3′R). sectors. Future research can also focus on the role of GLS for sustain-
Globally, the society will be benefitted from the present research in ability enhancement through industry 4.0 and modeling and in-
terms of reduced emissions and wastes through the logical im- vestigation of GLS barriers.
plementation of GLS.

Appendix A. Appendices

Table 1
Lean and Green concept view's towards wastes.

S. Type of waste Lean view Green view Citation

no.

1 Inventory Increased inventory, hide problems, and dis- If the inventory is there, it needs storage. The store will need light/ Freitas et al. (2017), Sunder
courage communication. chilling that will consume energy. (2016)
2 Transportation Results in more in process inventory. Transportation leads to the use of fossil or other forms of energy. Verrier et al. (2014)
3 Defects Anything not up to the specification. The consumed raw material needs space for rework and recycling that (Gijo and Rao, 2005), Freitas
leads to increased energy utilization. et al. (2017)
4 Overproduction Will remain in-store as inventory. There may be possible spoilage that will lead to an unhealthy ambiance Chiarini (2014), Wong and Wong
within the industry. (2014)
5 Waiting Not utilization of full capacity. The energy is wasted in heating, lighting during downtime. Azevedo et al. (2012), Marco-
Ferreira et al. (2019)
6 Over-processing Produce more than the requirement. The production of extra products leads to wastage of energy Sunder (2013)Rathi et al., 2017
7 Underutilized The full potential of the team not utilized. Staff creativity not harnessed to discover new ways for the reduction of Cudney and Elrod (2010), Nordin
staff wastes. et al. (2012)

Table 2
Major study pertains to GLS.

S. Authors Years Main findings Main limitations

no.

1 Zamri et al. 2013 Proposed model for integration of GLS with financial performance. The integration and framework of GLS not represented.
2 Banwai and Bilec 2014 Developed GLS modular framework for the construction. The model did not apply to all the industrial sectors and took consider-
able time.
3 Garza-Reyes 2015 The authors identified the need for the convergence of Green and The proposed framework lacks the application of assessment tools at
Lean Six Sigma. different stages.
4 Kumar et al. 2016 Identified barriers in the Six Sigma product development process The model not validated using other techniques
using ISM.
5 Sagnak and 2016 Proposed the model to embed Green Lean in Six Sigma. The framework of GLS execution not presented.
Kazancoglu
6 Cherrafi et al. 2017 Proposed the model to integrate Lean, Green, and Six Sigma. The conceptual similarity and framework of implementation not pre-
sented.
7 Sreedharan et al. 2018 Developed a GLS model for the public sector. The model lacks the realization of the model and assessment of various
green lean wastes
8 Pandey et al. 2018 Identified GLS enablers for business organizations. The enablers not identified for a particular sector, and no framework
developed.
(continued on next page)

6
M.S. Kaswan and R. Rathi Environmental Impact Assessment Review 83 (2020) 106396

Table 2 (continued)

S. Authors Years Main findings Main limitations

no.

9 Kaswan and Rathi 2019 GLS enablers modeled through ISM and MICMAC. The model has not validated using other techniques
10 Hussain et al. 2019 GLS barriers identified in the construction sector. The framework of GLS and modeling not presented

Table 3
Enablers of Green Lean Six Sigma.

S. Success factors Description References

no.

1 Customer satisfaction Customer satisfaction is of the utmost importance for any organization to remain Smith et al. (2018)
competitive in the market.
2 Organizational learning Every employee should be familiar with the entire system so that one can put his/her keen Sreedharan et al. (2018),(Ben
efforts for organizational success. Ruben et al., 2017)
3 Integration across the stages of the pro- The concept of concurrent engineering and integration at various stages of product Carvalho et al. (2011), Kaswan and
duct development cycle development is essential to develop a reliable product. Rathi (2019)
4 Culture and communication Organizational must develop a culture of continuous improvement, cooperation, and a two- Coronado and Antony (2002),
way flow of information. (Dubey et al., 2016)
5 Top management support Top management support is essential to introduce new technology and any major change- Laureani and Antony (2018),
over within the organization. Kaswan and Rathi (2019)
6 Strategic relationship with the supplier A reliable supplier is essential so that raw material and other items have delivered within Siegel et al. (2019)
the time frame.
7 Data and metrics Data collection and performance metrics are quintessential for the success of the GLS Habidin and Yusof (2012), (Antony
program as they provide a basis for comparisons. et al., 2018a)
8 Teamwork To achieve the targets of GLS, all members of the organizations should work as a team. Antony et al. (2016), Kaswan and
Rathi (2019)
9 Risk management Champions of any business take the risk and introduce new concept before the competitors Siegel et al. (2019)
to grab any opportunity available in the market.
10 Organizational readiness to implement The enterprise must be in a position to introduce GLS in their system as it requires a haul Cherrafi et al. (2017)
GLS changeover.
11 Linking GLS to business strategy The linkage between organizational strategy and the GLS approach leads to achieving Abu Bakar et al. (2015)
corporate sustainability.

Table 4
Barriers of Green Lean Six Sigma.

S. Barriers Description References

no.

1 Inappropriate Lean and Green areas identification Successful GLS implementation demands for the selection of a particular shop/ Al Zaabi et al. (2013), Kumar et al.
area that have the maximum potential for sustainability improvement. (2016)
2 Resistance to change Traditional practices of manufacturing are being adopted by most of the Abdullah et al. (2016), Bhattacharya
industries, and they exhibit resistance to the new approach. et al. (2019)
3 Lack of environmental knowledge Comprehensive environmental knowledge, together with the effects of process Mathiyazhagan et al. (2013), Al
parameters on ecology, is vital for GLS success. Zaabi et al. (2013)
4 Wrong GLS tool section The success of GLS highly depends on the selection of proper tools. Albliwi et al. (2014), (Green Jr et al.,
2012), Hussain et al. (2019)
5 Un-optimized transportation system The un-optimized transportation system leads to more environmental emissions. Kumar et al. (2016)
6 Lack of management support and ineffectiveness Top management support and active participation are necessary for GLS success as Kumar et al. (2016), Albliwi et al.
the absolute authority to release the orderlies with management. (2014)
7 The obliviousness of re-engineering Complete understanding of various approaches of reengineering is quite essential Al Zaabi et al. (2013), (Agrawal
for effective GLS project implementation within a particular organization. et al., 2016), (Ben Ruben et al.,
2018)
8 Unawareness of various GLS strategies To implement GLS, a thorough understanding of different GLS strategies and their Kumar et al. (2016), Al Zaabi et al.
pros and cons are indispensable. (2013)
9 Lack of synergy between continuous improvement Coherence between objectives and CI is required for the GLS project so that (), Albliwi et al. (2014), Cherrafi
and strategic objectives of the organization desired results can achieve within the required time frame. et al. (2019)
10 Poor organizational culture The learning, ready to adopt, and continuous improvement of corporate culture Hussain et al. (2019)
facilitate GLS implementation.
11 Economic constraints GLS implementation brings paradigm shifts in the concerned industry, so there is a Henriques and Catarino (2016)
need for finance to incorporate changes.
12 Lack of standardization and standard scheduling Standardization brings a specialty in the system that leads to a reduction in Banawi and Bilec (2014)
procedures rework, waste, and emissions.

References (4), 683–709.

Abdulmalek, F.A., Rajgopal, J., 2007. Analyzing the benefits of lean manufacturing and
value stream mapping via simulation: A process sector case study. Int. J. Prod. Econ.
Abdullah, M., Zailani, S., Iranmanesh, M., Jayaraman, K., 2016. Barriers to green in- 107 (1), 223–236.
novation initiatives among manufacturers: The Malaysian case. Rev. Manag. Sci. 10 Abu Bakar, F.A., Subari, K., Mohd Daril, M.A., 2015. Critical success factors of Lean Six

7
M.S. Kaswan and R. Rathi Environmental Impact Assessment Review 83 (2020) 106396

Sigma deployment: A current review. Int. J. Lean Six Sigma 6 (4), 339–348. Garza-Reyes, J.A., Al-Balushi, M., Antony, J., Kumar, V., 2016. A Lean Six Sigma fra-
Aggogeri, F., 2014. Lean thinking to change healthcare organizations: A case study to mework for the reduction of ship loading commercial time in the iron ore pelletizing
reduce waste and redesign services. Eur. J. Cross-Cult. Compet. Manag. 3 (3–4), industry. Prod. Plan. Control 27 (13), 1092–1111.
196–211. Garza-Reyes, J.A., Yu, M., Kumar, V., Upadhyay, A., 2018. Total quality environmental
Agrawal, S., Singh, R.K., Murtaza, Q., 2016. Prioritizing critical success factors for reverse management: Adoption status in the Chinese manufacturing sector. TQM J. 30 (1),
logistics implementation using the fuzzy-TOPSIS methodology. J. Indust. Eng. Int. 12 2–19.
(1), 15–27. Gijo, E.V., Rao, T.S., 2005. Six Sigma implementation–hurdles and more hurdles. Total
Al Zaabi, S., Al Dhaheri, N., Diabat, A., 2013. Analysis of interaction between the barriers Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 16 (6), 721–725.
for the implementation of sustainable supply chain management. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Green Jr., K.W., Zelbst, P.J., Meacham, J., Bhadauria, V.S., 2012. Green supply chain
Technol. 68 (1–4), 895–905. management practices: Impact on performance. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 17 (3),
Albliwi, S., Antony, J., Abdul Halim Lim, S., Van der Wiele, T., 2014. Critical failure 290–305.
factors of Lean Six Sigma: A systematic literature review. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. Gupta, S.K., Gunasekaran, A., Antony, J., Gupta, S., Bag, S., Roubaud, D., 2019.
31 (9), 1012–1030. Systematic literature review of project failures: Current trends and scope for future
Antony, J., Gijo, E.V., Childe, S.J., 2012. A case study in Six Sigma methodology: research. Comput. Ind. Eng. 127, 274–285.
Manufacturing quality improvement and guidance for managers. Prod. Plan. Control Habidin, N.F., Yusof, S.M., 2012. Relationship between lean six sigma, environmental
23 (8), 624–640. management systems, and organizational performance in the Malaysian automotive
Antony, J., Setijono, D., Dahlgaard, J.J., 2016. Lean Six Sigma and innovation–an ex- industry. Int. J. Automot. Technol. 13 (7), 1119–1125.
ploratory study among UK organizations. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 27 (1–2), Henriques, J., Catarino, J., 2016. Motivating towards energy efficiency in small and
124–140. medium enterprises. J. Clean. Prod. 139, 42–50.
Antony, J., Gupta, S., Sunder, M., V., & Gijo, E. V., 2018a. Ten commandments of Lean Six Hussain, K., He, Z., Ahmad, N., Iqbal, M., 2019. Green, Lean, Six Sigma barriers at a
Sigma: A practitioners’ perspective. Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag. 67 (6), glance: A case from the construction sector of Pakistan. Build. Environ. 106225.
1033–1044. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2018. Global warming of 1.5° C: An IPCC
Azevedo, S.G., Carvalho, H., Duarte, S., Cruz-Machado, V., 2012. Influence of green and special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5° C above pre-industrial levels
lean upstream supply chain management practices on business sustainability. IEEE and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways. In: The Context of
Trans. Eng. Manag. 59 (4), 753–765. Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable
Banawi, A., Bilec, M.M., 2014. A framework to improve construction processes: Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Integrating Lean, Green, and Six Sigma. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 14 (1), 45–55. Change.
Ben Ruben, R., Vinodh, S., Asokan, P., 2017. Implementation of Lean Six Sigma frame- Kaswan, M.S., Rathi, R., 2019. Analysis and modeling the enablers of Green Lean Six
work with environmental considerations in an Indian automotive component man- Sigma implementation using interpretive structural Modeling. J. Clean. Prod. 231,
ufacturing firm: A case study. Prod. Plan. Control 28 (15), 1193–1211. 1182–1191.
Ben Ruben, R., Vinodh, S., Asokan, P., 2018. ISM and fuzzy MICMAC application for Kaswan, M.S., Rathi, R., 2020. Investigating the enablers associated with implementation
analysis of Lean Six Sigma barriers with environmental considerations. Int. J. Lean of Green Lean Six Sigma in manufacturing sector using Best Worst Method. Clean
Six Sigma 9 (1), 64–90. Technol. Environ. Policy 1–12.
Bergmiller, G.G., McCright, P.R., 2009, May. Parallel models for lean and green opera- Kaswan, M.S., Rathi, R., Singh, M., 2019. Just in time elements extraction and prior-
tions. In: Proceedings of the 2009 Industrial Engineering Research Conference. The itization for health care unit using decision-making approach. Int. J. Qual. Reliab.
University of South Florida and Zero Waste Operations Research and Consulting, pp. Manage. 36 (7), 1243–1263.
1138–1143. Kumar, S., Kumar, N., Haleem, A., 2015. Conceptualization of sustainable Green Lean Six
Bhamu, J., Singh Sangwan, K., 2014. Lean manufacturing: Literature review and research Sigma: An empirical analysis. Int. J. Bus. Excell. 8 (2), 210–250.
issues. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 34 (7), 876–940. Kumar, S., Luthra, S., Govindan, K., Kumar, N., Haleem, A., 2016. Barriers in Green Lean
Bhat, S., Gijo, E.V., Jnanesh, N.A., 2014. Application of Lean Six Sigma methodology in Six Sigma product development process: An ISM approach. Prod. Plan. Control 27
the registration process of a hospital. Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag. 63 (5), (7–8), 604–620.
613–643. Kumaravadivel, A., Natarajan, U., 2013. Application of six-sigma DMAIC methodology to
Bhattacharya, A., Nand, A., Castka, P., 2019. Lean-green integration and its impact on sand-casting process with response surface methodology. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol.
sustainability performance: A critical review. J. Clean. Prod. 117697. 69 (5–8), 1403–1420.
Bond, A., Dusík, J., 2019. Impact assessment for the twenty-first century–rising to the Laureani, A., Antony, J., 2012. Critical success factors for the effective implementation of
challenge. Impact Assess. Project Appr. 1–6. lean sigma: Results from an empirical study and agenda for future research. Int. J.
Carvalho, H., Duarte, S., Cruz Machado, V., 2011. Lean, agile, resilient and green: di- Lean Six Sigma 3 (4), 274–283.
vergencies and synergies. Intern. J. Lean Six Sigma 2 (2), 151–179. Laureani, A., Antony, J., 2018. Leadership–A Critical Success Factor for the Effective
Cherrafi, A., Elfezazi, S., Govindan, K., Garza-Reyes, J.A., Benhida, K., Mokhlis, A., 2017. Implementation of Lean.
A framework for the integration of Green and Lean Six Sigma for superior sustain- Mathiyazhagan, K., Govindan, K., NoorulHaq, A., Geng, Y., 2013. An ISM approach for
ability performance. Int. J. Prod. Res. 55 (15), 4481–4515. the barrier analysis in implementing green supply chain management. J. Clean. Prod
Cherrafi, A., Elfezazi, S., Hurley, B., Garza-Reyes, J.A., Kumar, V., Anosike, A., Batista, L., 47, 283–297.
2019. Green and lean: A Gemba–Kaizen model for sustainability enhancement. Prod. Marco-Ferreira, A., Stefanelli, N.O., Seles, B.M.R.P., Fidelis, R., 2019. Lean and green:
Plan. Control 30 (5–6), 385–399. Practices, paradigms and future prospects. Benchmarking Int. J. https://doi.org/10.
Chiarini, A., 2014. Sustainable manufacturing-greening processes using specific lean 1108/BIJ-12-2018-0415.
production tools: An empirical observation from European motorcycle component Näslund, D., 2013. Lean and six sigma–critical success factors revisited. Int. J. Qual. and
manufacturers. J. Clean. Prod. 85, 226–233. Serv. Scien. 5 (1), 86–100.
Cluzel, F., Yannou, B., Afonso, D., Leroy, Y., Millet, D., Pareau, D., 2010. Managing the Nordin, N., Deros, B.M., Wahab, D.A., Rahman, M.N.A., 2012. A framework for organi-
complexity of environmental assessments of complex industrial systems with a Lean 6 zational change management in lean manufacturing implementation. Int. J. Serv.
Sigma approach. In Complex Systems Design & Management. Springer, Berlin, Operat. Manag. 12 (1), 101–117.
Heidelberg, pp. 279–294. Pandey, H., Garg, D., Luthra, S., 2018. Identification and ranking of enablers of Green
Coronado, R.B., Antony, J., 2002. Critical success factors for the successful im- Lean Six Sigma implementation using AHP. Int. J. Prod. Qual. Manag. 23 (2),
plementation of six sigma projects in organisations. The TQM magazine. 187–217.
Cudney, E., Elrod, C., 2010. Incorporating lean concepts into supply chain management. Panwar, A., Jain, R., Rathore, A.P.S., Nepal, B., Lyons, A.C., 2018. The impact of lean
Int. J. Six Sigma Competit. Adv. 6 (1–2), 12–30. practices on operational performance–an empirical investigation of Indian process
Deif, A.M., 2011. A system model for green manufacturing. J. Clean. Prod. 19 (14), industries. Prod. Plan. Control 29 (2), 158–169.
1553–1559. Ramanan, L., Kumar, M., Ramanakumar, K.P.V., 2014. Six Sigma–DMAIC framework for
Duarte, S., Cruz-Machado, V., 2019. Green and lean supply-chain transformation: A enhancing quality in engineering educational institutions. Int. J. Busin. Manag.
roadmap. Prod. Plan. Control 1–13. Invent. 3 (1), 36–40.
Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Childe, S.J., Fosso Wamba, S., Papadopoulos, T., 2016. Rathi, R., Khanduja, D., Sharma, S., 2016a. Capacity Waste Management at the
Enablers of Six Sigma: Contextual framework and its empirical validation. Total Qual. Automotive Industry in India: A Six Sigma Observation.
Manag. Bus. Excell. 27 (11−12), 1346–1372. Rathi, R., Khanduja, D., Sharma, S.K., 2016b. Efficacy of fuzzy MADM approach in Six
Dües, C.M., Tan, K.H., Lim, M., 2013. Green as the new lean: How to use lean practices as Sigma analysis phase in the automotive sector. J. Indust. Eng. Int. 12 (3), 377–387.
a catalyst to greening your supply chain. J. Clean. Prod. 40, 93–100. Rathi, R., Khanduja, D., Sharma, S.K., 2017. Six Sigma Perceptions for Capacity Waste
Farias, L.M.S., Santos, L.C., Gohr, C.F., de Oliveira, L.C., da Silva Amorim, M.H., 2019. Management in Indian Manufacturing Sector.
Criteria and practices for lean and green performance assessment: Systematic review Sagnak, M., Kazancoglu, Y., 2016. Integration of green lean approach with Six Sigma: An
and conceptual frame work. J. Clean. Prod 218, 746–762. application for flue gas emissions. J. Clean. Prod. 127, 112–118.
Freitas, J.G., Costa, H.G., Ferraz, F.T., 2017. Impacts of lean six sigma over organizational Sharma, V.K., Chandna, P., Bhardwaj, A., 2017. Green supply chain management related
sustainability: a survey study. J. Clean. Prod. 156, 262–275. performance indicators in agro-industry: A review. J. Clean. Prod. 141, 1194–1208.
Gamal Aboelmaged, M., 2011. Reconstructing Six Sigma barriers in manufacturing and Siegel, R., Antony, J., Garza-Reyes, J.A., Cherrafi, A., Lameijer, B., 2019. Integrated green
service organizations: The effects of organizational parameters. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. lean approach and sustainability for SMEs: From a literature review to a conceptual
Manag. 28 (5), 519–541. framework. J. Cleaner Prod. 118205.
Garza-Reyes, J.A., 2015a. Green lean and the need for Six Sigma. Int. J. Lean Six Sigma 6 Silich, S.J., Wetz, R.V., Riebling, N., Coleman, C., Khoueiry, G., Abi Rafeh, N., Szerszen,
(3), 226–248. A., 2012. Using Six Sigma methodology to reduce patient transfer times from floor to
Garza-Reyes, J.A., 2015b. Lean and green–a systematic review of the state of the art critical-care beds. J. Healthc. Qual. 34 (1), 44–54.
literature. J. Clean. Prod. 102, 18–29. Singh, A., Basak, P., 2018. Economic and environmental evaluation of municipal solid

8
M.S. Kaswan and R. Rathi Environmental Impact Assessment Review 83 (2020) 106396

waste management system using industrial ecology approach: Evidence from India. J. TOPSIS method. Ecol. Indic. 73, 554–558.
Clean. Prod. 195, 10–20. Sunder, M.V., 2013. Synergies of Lean Six Sigma. IUP J. Oper. Manag. 12 (1), 21.
Singh, B.J., Khanduja, D., 2014. Perspectives of the control phase to manage Six Sigma Sunder, M.V., 2016. Rejects reduction in a retail bank using Lean Six Sigma. Prod. Plan.
implements an empirical study. Int. J. Bus. Excell. 7 (1), 88–111. Control 27 (14), 1131–1142.
Smith, M., Paton, S., MacBryde, J., 2018. Lean implementation in a service factory: Views Sureeyatanapas, P., Poophiukhok, P., Pathumnakul, S., 2018. Green initiatives for logis-
from the front-line. Prod. Plan. Control 29 (4), 280–288. tics service providers: An investigation of antecedent factors and the contributions to
Sony, M., Naik, S., 2019. Green Lean Six Sigma implementation framework: A case of corporate goals. J. Clean. Prod. 191, 1–14.
reducing graphite and dust pollution. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 1–10. Verrier, B., Rose, B., Caillaud, E., Remita, H., 2014. Combining organizational perfor-
Sreedharan, V.R., Raju, R., 2016. A systematic literature review of Lean Six Sigma in mance with sustainable development issues: The lean and green project bench-
different industries. Int. J. Lean Six Sigma 7 (4), 430–466. marking repository. J. Clean. Prod. 85, 83–93.
Sreedharan, V.R., Sandhya, G., Raju, R., 2018. Development of a Green Lean Six Sigma Wong, W.P., Wong, K.Y., 2014. Synergizing an ecosphere of lean for sustainable opera-
model for public sectors. Int. J. Lean Six Sigma 9 (2), 238–255. tions. J. Clean. Prod. 85, 51–66.
Sun, L.Y., Miao, C.L., Yang, L., 2017. Ecological-economic efficiency evaluation of green Zhu, Q., Johnson, S., Sarkis, J., 2018. Lean Six Sigma and environmental sustainability: A
technology innovation in strategic emerging industries based on entropy weighted hospital perspective. Supply Chain Forum Int. J. 19 (1), 25–41.