PurposeThis paper gives the background to the ISO 18404:2015 standard and explains its rationale. It aims to correct misconceptions and erroneous statements about the standard appearing in the paper by Antony et al. (2021) and to demonstrate the usefulness of the standard in a wide range of application sectors.Design/methodology/approachA review of recently reported misconceptions and erroneous statements is presented and clarifications are provided. A qualitative interview approach was utilised to obtain the views of leading academics and practitioners familiar with Six Sigma and Lean in a range of sectors and from different parts of the world. This includes the results of a survey for capturing expectations and requirements for the next ISO18404 version.FindingsClarifications were needed to correct some misconceptions and erroneous statements in recently published work. However, on review, the reports of the interviews in Antony et al. (2021) indicate that most Lean Six Sigma professionals have positive experiences with ISO 18404:2015 and see the advantages of a common standard in helping continuous improvement deployment. Possible causes of some reported negative results are already scheduled to be addressed in the forthcoming review of ISO 18404:2015.Research limitations/implicationsA very real constraint when conducting research into ISO 18404:2015 is to obtain a balanced view of the standard from those who have a vested interest in its continuation and evolution, or not. Whilst the authors cannot claim to be any more objective than Antony et al.’s (2021) authors and commentators, they are, in contrast to that group, highly knowledgeable about the reality of the standard, rather than speculating in ignorance.Practical implicationsA very real constraint when conducting research into ISO 18404:2015 is to obtain a balanced view of the standard which is balanced with respect from those who have a vested interest in its continuation and evolution, or not. Whilst the current authors cannot claim to be any more objective than previous authors, Antony et al.’s (2021) authors and commentators, they are, in contrast to that group, highly knowledgeable about the reality of the standard, rather than speculating in ignorance.Originality/valueThe paper gives a clear description of the ISO standard development process and provides a resource for people to obtain insight into the value or non-value add of a standard in Six Sigma and Lean, and the appropriate details of such a standard. These results can form the basis of a case for the implementation of the standard for those organisations currently trying to decide whether or not to implement it.