Critique of Six-Sigma Research by Henderson and Evans
This paper offers a structured critique of Henderson and Evans' (2000) article, "Successful Implementation of Six-Sigma: Benchmarking General Electric Company," published in Benchmarking: An International Journal. The critique evaluates the article against standard research criteria, including the formulation of a research question, clarity of methodology, appropriateness of data-gathering techniques, acknowledgment of limitations, and the validity of conclusions. The paper finds that while Henderson and Evans provide a detailed description of the Six-Sigma statistical process as used at General Electric, their work does not meet the rigors of formal research. Key deficiencies include the absence of a defined research question, lack of stated methodology, omission of limitations, and evidence of author bias toward the Six-Sigma program.
- Introduction: Defines standards for sound research reporting
- Article Summary: Describes Six-Sigma article content and limitations
- Research Questions, Objectives, and Methodology: Critiques absence of research question and purpose
- Research Design and Data Gathering Techniques: Examines undeclared design and data collection methods
- Limitations of the Article: Identifies bias and missing comparative analysis
- Conclusion and Practical Significance: Summarizes deficiencies and assesses practical value
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper applies a consistent evaluative framework throughout, measuring the Henderson and Evans article against established research standards such as Kerlinger's (1964) criteria for research questions and Polit and Beck's (2004) model for research reporting.
- The conclusion section uses a clearly itemized list of specific deficiencies, which makes the critique's findings easy to follow and reference.
- The author maintains a professional, measured tone even when delivering sharp criticism, modeling the objectivity that the paper itself argues is essential to sound research.
Key academic technique demonstrated
This paper demonstrates applied research evaluation — the systematic assessment of a published article against explicit methodological criteria. Rather than summarizing the article's content, the author interrogates its structure: Does it state a research question? Does it declare a methodology? Does it acknowledge limitations? This technique, sometimes called a methodological critique, is a core graduate-level skill in applied research courses.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a framing introduction that defines what a sound research report requires. It then moves through an article summary, a focused critique of the research question and methodology, an analysis of design and data-gathering choices, and a dedicated limitations section. The conclusion synthesizes all critiques into a bulleted list of specific failures, closing with a brief note on the article's practical value despite its research shortcomings.
Introduction
The rules for evaluating a researcher's investigative endeavor are closely guided by a code of research ethics to which the writing and investigation must adhere — namely objectivity, subject knowledge, and professionalism. The article authored by Henderson and Evans and subjected to review here concerns the Six-Sigma statistical process employed to evaluate manufacturing quality improvement.
The article was carefully scrutinized with respect to proper research formatting. A definitive evaluation was conducted in terms of identifying a proper research question, need and problem statement, appropriate data analysis, and the effectiveness of the summary conclusions drawn. Unfortunately, the article critiqued is not a true research endeavor, as the authors failed to adhere to the stringent rules governing research investigations. The totality of the information presented is simply a reporting of what is currently taking place in a large corporation with respect to quality improvement.
The structure of a research report is straightforward. It mirrors the structure of the research itself: the problem, the methodology, the results, the conclusions, and the interpretations. The purpose of the research report is to inform readers about the problem investigated, the methods used to address that problem, the results of the investigation, and the conclusions inferred from those results (Polit & Beck, 2004). The function of the research report is not, however, to convince the reader of the virtue of the research previously conducted. At all times the report must be written so that readers can reach their own conclusions as to the adequacy of the research, the validity of the reported results, and the soundness of the conclusions. Research reports must strive to be succinct, objective, and clear. The ultimate test of an excellent research report is its ability to be replicated by those who read it. If this criterion cannot be met, the report is inadequate in terms of knowledge transfer.
The paper presented here is a thorough analysis and critique of research information reported in an article entitled "Successful Implementation of Six-Sigma: Benchmarking General Electric Company" (Henderson and Evans, 2000). The critique covers areas important to research facilitation, including — but not limited to — the methodology used, formulation of an appropriate research question, significance of the reported substantive literature, research design selection, appropriateness of sample data-gathering techniques, data analysis, and the importance of conclusions drawn.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.