Abstract—The six sigma method is a project-driven management approach to improve the organization’s products, services, and processes by continually reducing defects in the organization. Understanding the key features, obstacles, and shortcomings of the six sigma method allows organizations to better support their strategic directions, and increasing needs for coaching, mentoring, and training. It also provides opportunities to better implement six sigma projects. The purpose of this paper is the survey of six sigma process and its impact on the organizational productivity. So I have studied key concepts , problem solving process of six sigmaas well as the survey of important fields such as: DMAIC, six sigma and productivity applied programme, and other advantages of six sigma. In the end of this paper, present research conclusions. (direct and positive relation between six sigma and productivity) Keywords—Six sigma; Project management, Quality, Theory; productivity I. INTRODUCTION IX Sigma has been characterized as the latest management fad to repackage old quality management principles, practices, and tools/techniques [7]. At first glance Six Sigma looks strikingly similar to prior quality management approaches. However, leading organizations with a track record in quality have adopted Six Sigma and claimed that it has transformed their organization. For example, 3M’s Dental Division won the Baldrige Award and then later adopted Six Sigma to improve performance even further [16]. The financial performance of 3M since Six Sigma adoption has been very impressive [8]. Other organizations with a quality track record, such as Ford, Honeywell, and American Express, have adopted Six Sigma as a way to further enhance business performance [9]. Masoud Hekmatpanah, Faculty of Management and academic member of Azad University,Ardestan Branch, Iran Email: m1595h@yahoo.com Mohammad Sadroddin, Member of Consulting Engineeris Pooya Sabz-e- Sepahan, Esfahan, Iran Email: ps_sepahan@yahoo.com Saeid Shahbaz, Member of Consulting Engineeris Pooya Sabz-e-Sepahan, Esfahan, Iran Email: ps_sepahan@yahoo.com Farhad Mokhtari, Member of Consulting Engineeris Pooya Sabz-e- Sepahan, Esfahan, Iran E-Mail: unicorn2002_m@yahoo.com Farahnaz Fadavinia, Member of Consulting Engineeris Pooya Sabz-e- Sepahan, Esfahan, Iran E-Mail: fr. Fadavinia @gmail.com This creates a dilemma: on the one hand, skeptics argue that Six Sigma lacks discriminate validity over prior approaches to quality management; on the other hand, quality-mature organizations adopt Six Sigma to enhance performance. Scholarly inquiry into this management approach has been limited. While many books and papers on Six Sigma have emerged in the practitioner literature, academic research on Six Sigma is just beginning to come forward. Scholarly research is needed to develop an in-depth, scientific understanding of Six Sigma and separate fact from fiction. Motorola originally developed Six Sigma in 1987 and targeted an aggressive goal of 3.4 ppm defects. In 1994 Larry Bossidy, CEO of AlliedSignal, introduced Six Sigma as a business initiative to ‘‘produce high-level results, improve work processes, expand all employees’ skills and change the culture’’ [5]. This was followed by the well-publicized implementation of Six Sigma at General Electric beginning in 1995 [18]. Currently, there are many books and articles on Six Sigma written by practitioners and consultants and only a few academic articles published in scholarly journals [13]. Reviewing the practitioner literature and these academic articles provides a starting point for defining Six Sigma. Six Sigma has been defined in the practitioner literature in a variety of ways. This disparity leads to some uncertainty and confusion. Consider some of the following definitions from the practitioner articles. Quality Progress called Six Sigma a ‘‘high-performance, data-driven approach to analyzing the root causes of business problems and solving them’’ [6]. Harry and Schroeder (2000), in their popular book on Six Sigma, described it as a ‘‘business process that allows companies to drastically improve their bottom line by designing andmonitoring everyday business activities in ways that minimize waste and resources while increasing customer satisfaction’’. Hahn et al. (2000) described Six Sigma as a disciplined and statistically based approach for improving product and process quality. On the other hand, Sanders and Hild (2000) called it a management strategy that requires a culture change in the organization. Recognizing the divergence in definitions, Hahn et al. noted that Six Sigma has not been carefully defined in either the practitioner or academic literature. Many of the definitions of Six Sigma found in the literature are very general and do not provide elements—or factors (variables, constructs, concepts), as described them—to define the ‘‘what’’ of the theory, nor do they describe relationships among the elements to define the ‘‘how.’’ Therefore, our data collection focused on obtaining a scientific definition of Six Six Sigma Process and its Impact on the Organizational Productivity Masoud Hekmatpanah, Mohammad Sadroddin, Saeid Shahbaz, Farhad Mokhtari, Farahnaz Fadavinia S World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Economics and Management Engineering Vol:2, No:7, 2008 731 International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 2(7) 2008 scholar.waset.org/1307-6892/8018 International Science Index, Economics and Management Engineering Vol:2, No:7, 2008 waset.org/Publication/8018