Towards Greater Understanding of Success and Survival of Lean Systems 2013

This article was downloaded by: [Universitat Politcnica de Valncia]
On: 09 December 2014, At: 00:52

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of Production Research

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tprs20
Towards greater understanding of success and survival

of lean systems
a
Andrew Taylor , Margaret Taylor & Andrew McSweeney

a
Operations and Information Management, School of Management, University of Bradford,

West Yorkshire, UK.
Published online: 06 Aug 2013.
To cite this article: Andrew Taylor, Margaret Taylor & Andrew McSweeney (2013) Towards greater understanding
of success and survival of lean systems, International Journal of Production Research, 51:22, 6607-6630, DOI:
10.1080/00207543.2013.825382
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2013.825382
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
International Journal of Production Research, 2013

Vol. 51, No. 22, 66076630, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2013.825382
Towards greater understanding of success and survival of lean systems

Andrew Taylor*, Margaret Taylor and Andrew McSweeney
Operations and Information Management, School of Management, University of Bradford, West Yorkshire, UK
Downloaded by [Universitat Politcnica de Valncia] at 00:52 09 December 2014
(Received 3 January 2013; nal version received 26 June 2013)

The purposes of this research are to remove some of the confusion surrounding the characterisation of lean systems; to
delve deeper into the human issues associated with lean; and to explore the complexity of an established lean system to
identify issues which affect its success and ongoing continuance. Using the mixed methods of literature analysis, semistructured interviews and document analysis, we examine the lean implementation in one site of an international car
manufacturer. We claim several contributions for the work. First, we produce a literature-based taxonomy dening the
core dimensions of lean this gives managers a clear roadmap for lean implementation. A second contribution is a
detailed delineation of the human issues of lean, from which managers can follow our set of themes to guide their
managerial efforts. Finally, we provide insights into the inner workings of a lean system showing several examples of
the delicate balances and tensions which exist. Perhaps none is as signicant as the issue of its long term survival, which
our ndings suggest may be at risk. This serves as a warning signal to managers to be on constant lookout for signs of
faltering or failure.
Keywords: lean operations; human issues in lean; lean taxonomy; automotive manufacturing; case study research
1. Introduction
Lean production (LP) is regarded by many as the optimum route to competitive capability (Losonci, Demeter, and Jenei
2011) to the extent that lean is sometimes described as the dominant paradigm and the gold standard of modern operations (Farris et al. 2009). Despite these accolades, there are at least three aspects of lean where knowledge is lacking.
The rst of these concerns its denition and characterisation, where there remains confusion and imprecision: It is
extremely difcult to determine what LP stands for denitions are rather vague and confused, with various elements and sub-elements put forth in various papers (Demeter and Matyusz 2011, 155). This reects a widespread view
that the essence of Japanese management practices is difcult to circumscribe (Spear and Bowen 1999; Towill 2007;
Taylor and Taylor 2008).
The second aspect relates to the softer human issues associated with lean implementations (Losonci, Demeter, and
Jenei 2011). While this research need was originally highlighted some years ago, it is only recently that an associated
stream of investigation has emerged, albeit that many articles remain theoretical or anecdotal rather than empirical
(Farris et al. 2009). Knowledge of the relationships between LP implementation activities and employee outcomes are
not fully understood, and additional research is needed to determine which lean system designs produce the most positive outcomes (Ibid., 43). Even within published empirical studies, in most instances, the human focus has been limited
(Liker and Hoseus 2010). The nal knowledge gap concerns the ability of rms to harness their lean implementations
to achieve performance improvements and to sustain these gains over time, by keeping the system going forward and
evolving; in other words, by maintaining its momentum through the commitment of all employees (Glover et al. 2011).
Many rms which attempt to implement lean do not experience their anticipated performance results (Bhasin and Burcher 2006; Losonci, Demeter, and Jenei 2011). Moreover, even among rms that have reported signicant benets from
their implementation these gains have tended to dissipate over the years (Jayaram, Das, and Nicolae 2010).
This study aims to investigate these knowledge gaps using literature review and an empirical case study to address
the following research questions: (i) What are the dening characteristics of a lean system? (ii) What are the key human
issues that should be included in any study of lean? (iii) What are the challenges in sustaining a lean system over time?
The literature is currently unable to provide unequivocal responses to these questions, yet managers need the answers in
order to make sensible decisions about resource allocation for lean system development and survival.
*Corresponding author. Email: w.a.taylor@bradford.ac.uk
2013 Taylor & Francis
6608
A. Taylor et al.
Our research contributes to knowledge in three ways as follows. Firstly, by drawing on prior literature, the essential
features of lean systems are identied and a taxonomy of lean characteristics is produced, underpinned by indicative
statements for each construct. Empirical testing of this taxonomy, on the established LP system at a UK automotive
plant, identies areas of alignment and difference. Secondly, as access to shop-oor employees is difcult and uncommon, our case research at the focal plant, which investigated human issues associated with lean through interviews with
such employees, is unusual and important. It yielded a multifaceted set of human issues, thereby responding to the call
for work examining lean systems on the shop-oor that considers workers feelings and perceptions, particularly of success, which are considered crucial to effective implementation (Losonci, Demeter, and Jenei 2011). Finally, the data
from the eldwork were used to examine the challenges associated with maintaining performance levels and sustaining
lean initiatives. These contributions to knowledge are mirrored in three contributions to management practice. (i) The
lean taxonomy provides managers with a road map for lean implementation to avoid the limitations of partial implementation which abound. (ii) The mapping of employee perceptions of lean provides managers with a set of themes around
which to focus their managerial effort. (iii) Identication of the socio-technical aspects of sustaining lean shows managers several levers which form part of a continuing capability for change management and lean transformation.
The remainder of the paper is structured as follows. Initially, the literature is reviewed to contextualise and justify
the research questions. Thereafter, the research methodology is described and the results of the three stages of enquiry
are presented. The ensuing discussion includes suggestions for future research, before conclusions summarise the contributions of the work.
2. Literature review
The primary focus of the literature review, which is presented in three sections to reect the research questions, is based
around automotive production, since this forms the context for the eldwork.
2.1 What are the dening characteristics of a lean system?
It is approximately 35 years since the rst extensive description of the Toyota Production System (TPS) was published
in English (Sugimori et al. 1977). Subsequently, the need for deeper investigation of the TPS (and by implication, of
Japanese management practices more generally), was highlighted: it is now clear that over-simplied histories and categorizations do not do justice to the complexity and subtlety of the subject we dont really understand what the TPS
is, and it is possible we never will (New 2007, 35463547). Failure to increase understanding by getting beneath the
surface of the lean phenomenon will maintain the current situation where lean management is only skin-deep in most
companies and where companies continue to rely excessively on consultants, while themselves displaying an inadequate depth of knowledge, with inadequate employee involvement (Schonberger 2007, 417). The same author comments that, during study missions to Japan in the 1980s, many Western observers were blinded by their mindsets of
functional separation and silo mentality instead of being able to see Japanese Production Management (JPM) for what it
was. Reecting similar ideas, micro-level investigation of lean is advocated in order to avoid the tendency of scholars
to over-simplify resource-based view concepts, and thus squeeze away the quintessential intangibility of practice.
(Witcher, Chau, and Harding 2008, 544).
To a large degree, the difculties in studying lean are associated with its complexity and the inter-dependence of its
constituent elements (Saurin, Marodin, and Ribeiro 2011). Whilst, it can be envisaged as a philosophy, or a set of principles, or as a group of practices (Shah, Chandrasekaran, and Linderman 2008); the prevailing view is of a set of bundles of practices (Shah and Ward 2003; Narasimhan, Swink, and Kim 2006). That said, the number and constitution of
bundles remains problematic and the precise elements that constitute lean remain unresolved (Hines, Holweg, and Rich
2004; Shah and Ward 2007). In early work, four bundles comprising a total of 22 items were proposed, empirically veried and shown to contribute signicantly to improved operational performance (Shah and Ward 2003). These were
just-in-time (JIT), total quality management (TQM), total preventive maintenance and human resource management
(HRM). Subsequently, the measurement instruments used in 11 empirical studies of lean dating from 1993 to 2005 were
found to show considerable overlap but also signicant dispute with several of the 25 constituent measures being used
for different aspects of the lean system (Shah and Ward 2007). In response to this confusion, these authors used a substantive empirical data-set to develop a new 10-factor and 41-item set of measures of lean. However, they subsequently
reverted to the earlier ideas of Shah and Ward (2003), citing the general consensus that lean can be represented by four
bundles relating to quality management, pull production, preventive maintenance and HRM (Shah, Chandrasekaran, and
Linderman 2008). The discord that is evident in the literature suggests that further work is needed to get closer to the
dening characteristics of lean.
6609
2.2 What are the key human issues that should be included in any study of lean?
The notion of one best model of production is probably unrealistic such that debate over the merits of different production systems is important (Adler and Cole 1994, 45). As not all automotive production stems from Japanese manufacturing techniques (Tolliday et al. 1998), this argues for comparison with other systems. Such an evaluation of
Volvos human-oriented production system at Uddevalla against the functionalist Japanese lean model in the Toyota-GM
joint venture (NUMMI) drew attention to a number of human dimensions that differentiate alternative systems (Adler
and Cole 1993). Whilst, this work went on to stimulate debate about the relative merits of different systems, it also
served to focus attention on the human aspects of lean.
In this regard, lean manufacturing has been argued to harm workers through the stress it creates (Conti et al. 2006)
and due to the methods of implementation where bullying, harassment, humiliation and fear of punishment are commonplace (Mehri 2006). Mehris covert observation of the TPS system in an automobile company in the Toyota kereitsu in
Japan particularly highlights the fundamental distinction in Japanese culture between what one believes one is supposed
to feel or do (tatemae) and what one actually feels or does (honne). This difference between the public and private
views of individuals is, Mehri argues, an essential reason why Western researchers have not grasped the true nature of
TPS and lean implementations.
Returning to those studies which have attempted to dene and measure lean (Section 2.1), it is striking that there is
relatively insignicant representation of human issues in the measurement instruments that have been used. In Shah and
Ward (2003), only two of the 22 practices are HR-based, while in Shah and Ward (2007) only ve of the 25 measures
identied in previous studies relate to human issues. Shah and Wards own (2007) data yield a single human-related factor comprising four items, and Shah, Chandrasekaran, and Linderman (2008) operationalise their single HRM bundle
using only one of 15 constituent practices. Other work shows a similar pattern (Jayaram, Das, and Nicolae 2010; Thun,
Druke, and Grubner 2011), even to the point of asserting that HRM is not a dening characteristic of lean (Pettersen
2009).
More recently, there have been some survey-based and simulation studies which recognise the role of HRM in
enhancing the effectiveness of lean practices and their synergistic interactions (Liker and Hoseus 2010; Losonci, Demeter, and Jenei 2011). Furlan, Vinelli, and Dal Pont (2011) go further, delineating an HR bundle comprising seven items,
and providing evidence that HR enhances the complementary and synergistic effects of lean bundles such as TQM and
JIT, and also acts as an enabler of these interactions to the extent that without an effective bundle of human practices
lean will not work. However, they acknowledge the limitations of such quantitative approaches and recommend case
studies to shed light on the complexities of the mechanisms which lie beneath the surface.
Typical of this approach is Aokis (2008) investigation of the transfer of Japanese kaizen activities to plants in
China, which revealed difculties associated with giving workers a real say in improving their work processes in order
to develop innovative capabilities that are difcult to imitate. In Aokis view, such capabilities are those that encourage
worker self-initiative to participate in kaizen activities by voicing matters concerning their own work; those that instil
discipline in workers to conform to company rules, work standards and practices such as 5S, and cleaning of machines
and tools; and those that facilitate knowledge creation through reducing the social distance between different categories
of the workforce, wherein on-the-job training has a critical role. To be successful in this regard, management needs to
create a system of continuous organisational learning aiming towards innovation (Aoki 2008, 520). This theme is
developed elsewhere in an examination of the development of dynamic capabilities through the process of top executive
audits and policy deployment (hoshin kanri) at Nissan South Africa (Witcher, Chau, and Harding 2008). A central feature of hoshin kanri is that it combines the management of exploitation and exploration, effectively producing an integrative learning system, which gives to Nissans organisation a dynamic capability for managing change (Ibid., 555).
Both these case-based studies point towards learning and human development as key enablers of lean implementation.
Together with the relative lack of emphasis on human issues in lean measurement studies and the calls for investigation
of employee perceptions at the shop-oor level (Losonci, Demeter, and Jenei 2011), this suggests that deeper examination of the human issues associated with implementing and working in a lean environment is essential.
2.3 What are the challenges in sustaining a lean system over time?
Whilst the challenges of implementing a lean system are recognised (e.g. Aoki 2008; Panizzolo et al. 2012), sustaining
the momentum of a lean programme over time is also problematic (Hines, Holweg, and Rich 2004; Turesky and Connell 2010). Hines, Holweg, and Rich (2004) point to the human dimensions of motivation, empowerment and respect
for people as being key to long term continuance, along with strategic thinking and alignment through policy deployment. Similar issues are raised through Turesky and Connells (2010) study of why lean failed in a US manufacturing
6610
A. Taylor et al.
company, Batemans (2005) analysis of sustaining kaizen improvements and Schonbergers (2007) major international
longitudinal assessment of leanness. Schonbergers data highlight low levels of lean performance, most notably among
Japanese rms, and he concludes that this might indicate a difculty in sustaining JPM approaches despite their underlying simplicity. He further suggests that similar declines in leanness for the Western companies he studied could mean
that Western-enhanced JPM may also falter. Similar disquiet has been expressed elsewhere (Fine, Hansen, and
Roggenhofer 2009).
Despite the range of dimensions discussed in Adler and Coles (1993) comparison of the lean NUMMI plant with
Volvos Uddevalla plant and in subsequent published discourse, the crux of the debate was argued to be about which
form of work organisation better supports the kind of sustained rapid organisational learning for world-class competitive performance in auto assembly (Berggren 1994, 46). This raises twin concerns about the survival of lean and
related to this the central role of learning in the process of continuance. The focus on organisational learning resonates
with observations about the TPS, which stimulates workers and managers to engage in the kind of experimentation that
is widely recognised as the cornerstone of a learning organisation (Spear and Bowen 1999, 98); and it aligns with the
more recent views of Aoki (2008) and Witcher, Chau, and Harding (2008) discussed in the previous section.
It seems clear therefore that to adopt and maintain lean, an organisation must be able to learn quickly (Robinson
and Schroeder 2009) and must invest in employee training, organisational infrastructure and culture development to
support and sustain improvements (Achanga et al. 2005; Hoyte and Greenwood 2007). Learning also implies a need to
constantly question standard processes and procedures in the ceaseless search for improvement (Turesky and Connell
2010), while at the same time cultivating the discipline to capture and sustain improvements through further standardisation (Brown, Collins, and McCombs 2006). The tension created by the interplay between standardisation and improvement almost inevitably leads to resistance to change, since employees prefer the comfort zone of the status quo and will
enact signicant, often hidden, forces to thwart the pressure to alter it (Bamber and Dale 2000).
Studies of lean systems have mentioned a range of individual, group and organisational hurdles that threaten to
derail them or impair their sustainability (Turesky and Connell 2010, 111). Moreover, many of these studies show that
context matters when implementing lean and that its essential elements must adapt and evolve as markets change over
time. In summary it would seem that the continuance of lean depends on complex interaction between a number of variables. Micro-level investigation is therefore needed in order to reveal the ways in which leans inherent competitive
capabilities are instituted, developed and sustained. Knowledge of what organisations must do to maintain lean systems
once implemented depends on gaining detailed understanding of the challenges associated with sustaining lean over
time.
This review of the literature points to a need for empirical evidence about the constitution and sustainability of lean
systems especially with regard to the relationships between their human and organisational dimensions. It suggests that
such evidence should primarily derive from case-based research that examines the perceptions of direct employees
including shop-oor workers, and raises three research objectives which provide the focus for our eldwork, as follows:
To establish the dening dimensions of a successful lean system.

To derive a detailed picture of the human aspects of lean through examination of employee perceptions.
To identify the challenges inherent in maintaining performance levels and sustaining lean over time.
3. Research methodology
3.1 Research design
The literature has called for more in-depth, case-based study of lean (Witcher, Chau, and Harding 2008; Slomp,
Bokhorst, and Germs 2009; Furlan, Vinelli, and Dal Pont 2011), and a case study approach was chosen, primarily
because it allows detailed exploration of complex phenomena (Eisenhardt and Graebner 2007) using a variety of evidence including artefacts, documents, observations and interviews. The research questions argue for an organisation with
extensive experience in implementing lean and whose lean system is fully embedded in its operations. The selected case
is acknowledged by both academia and practice as a leading exponent of lean, and is regularly cited as the most productive automotive plant in Europe. This reputation for being highly productive piqued our curiosity and was the primary
reason for its selection, since it suggests it could represent a critical case which, according to Yin (2009), merits a single-case approach. Research access to such plants is often difcult especially when the research is exploratory and
where respondents time is scarce (Laurila 1997; Okumus, Altinay, and Roper 2007). These issues seem to align with
the features of a revelatory case which is also a rationale for a single-case design (Yin 2009). Finally, the choice was
6611
based on availability of access, as one of the researchers had been employed at the site prior to the study. Since the
study was exploratory, the stages were not planned in detail in advance. Rather, they emerged as the ndings unfolded,
to permit controlled opportunism i.e. the facility to make adjustments to the data collection process in the light of
emerging results (Eisenhardt 1989). With the benet of hindsight, and for convenience of reporting, the study proceeded
in the three sequential stages outlined in Table 1.
3.2 Research setting and data sources

The research was conducted between 2008 and 2010 in one UK assembly plant of a global car manufacturer. At that
time, the plant produced over 300,000 cars annually and was organised around two assembly lines. It employed a total
of approximately 5000 employees, of whom around 3300 worked in manufacturing. Lean had been introduced in 1994,
hence at the time of this study, it had been deployed for around 16 years. (The plant is not named due to the sensitivity
of some of the ndings).
In addressing our rst research question, during stage 1, the aim was to isolate the core dimensions of lean. From
an initial set of over 150 articles on lean systems identied through literature review, 16 were selected for in-depth analysis based on the criterion that they provided sufcient detail and coverage of the constituent dimensions of lean. A
table listing all dimensions was constructed in order to establish the degree of consensus which existed. For the sake of
size and readability, the full table is not reproduced here but Table 2 demonstrates its form and content, where Y indicates a match between a source and a dimension. (A Y was recorded if somewhere in the article the tool/concept was
mentioned in a positive way as being part of lean on at least three occasions. The criterion of at least three occasions
is arbitrary, to try to ensure that the tool/concept is not simply mentioned in passing, but is discussed as being a key part
of lean). In total 63 dimensions were culled, from which consensus analysis identied eight core factors that depict a
representative view of lean as articulated in the results section.
Stage 2 sought to compare the focal lean system with the version generated at stage 1, and thereby to determine the
degree of t and to identify differences. Internal documents concerning the design and implementation of the lean
system, including training materials, presentations and company reports were examined. Lengthy semi-structured interviews were conducted with three senior executives who were responsible for the development of the lean system and
who had in-depth knowledge of its operation both locally and in sister plants. The interviewees were able to speak
authoritatively about the origins, design and development of the system. The interview protocol was informed by the
ndings from stage 1 and was arranged into six distinct areas of enquiry with the plant as the unit of analysis:
The approach to waste reduction and the role of the lean system within that.
The organisation of the lean system including the approach to JIT supply.
The rationale for, and methods of, including suppliers in the lean system and for their subsequent development.
The methods for identication, rectication and prevention of defects, including standardisation, autonomation
and improvement strategies.
The approaches to managing and developing employees within the lean system and for stimulating their
involvement.
The features of the lean system which have been added since its inception and also features which are unique
to the specic plant.
Table 1. Stages in research design.

Stage
Purpose
Methods
1. Review of literature on empirical and conceptual

studies of lean
To delineate the core dimensions of lean production

which would subsequently be used to direct the
empirical eldwork
To understand the main dimensions of the lean
implementation in order to be able to compare it with
the core dimensions identied from the literature
Literature review
and consensus
analysis
Document analysis
and semi-structured
interviews
2. Document analysis and interviews with company

experts responsible for the development of the
lean system and for the implementation of new
components and modications
3. Interviews with shop-oor employees and support To explore what it feels like for people to work as part Semi-structured
interviews
workers
of the lean system in this specic organisation and to
investigate the human aspects of the lean system and its
inherent challenges
Kaizen
Kanban
TPM
Root cause
analysis
Value stream
mapping
SPC
Autonomation
Policy
Deployment
Supplier
involvement
Poka Yoke
Set up time
reduction
Lean
dimension
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Womack,
Jones, and
Roos
Liker Bicheno
(1990)
(2004) (2004)
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Dennis Feld Shingo

(2002) (2001) (1984)
Table 2. Example of consensus development process from literature review.
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Monden Ohno Schonberger Aoki Mehri Lewis

(1998) (1998)
(2007)
(2008) (2006) (2000)
Source
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Shah
and
Conti
Ward
Cusumano et al.
(1994)
(2006) (2007)
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
De
Treville
and
Antonakis
(2006)
6612
A. Taylor et al.
6613
To ensure consistency, one researcher carried out all interviews and used audio-recording, supplemented by note-taking, to record the responses. Written transcripts were produced and sent back to the respondents for verication. The
text was subsequently analysed in two steps. Firstly, a table was constructed for comparison of the focal system with
the dimensions in the literature-derived view of lean. The analysis involved manual coding of the transcripts using category headings from the literature-derived view, followed by the assignment of the text to sub-categories associated with
each heading. Secondly, the transcripts were re-examined to identify unassigned portions of text. These were scrutinised
and further manual coding facilitated the extraction of additional themes. All of these results are presented in the next
section.
Stage 3 sought insights into employee perceptions of the lean system as a working environment. Open questions
were used as the basis for semi-structured interviews, each lasting approximately an hour. The respondents were a mix
of direct and support staff from one nal assembly area of the factory. The choice was based on getting access to workers who had direct experience of working on the continuously moving assembly line in a lean environment. Other areas
of the factory would not have provided access to large numbers of such workers because of the levels of automation.
Specically the questions asked for employees views of working within the lean system, their opinions as to why the
plant was so successful and their perceptions of the challenges associated with maintaining performance levels and sustaining the lean system. Pilot-testing of the questions with other employees from the same factory area ensured that the
meaning was clear and the wording was unambiguous. The resulting transcripts were validated in the same way as those
for stage 2. Radnors six-stage technique was used for data coding, analysis and interpretation (Radnor 2002), which
comprises (i) topic ordering, (ii) constructing categories, (iii) reading for content, (iv) completing coded sheets, (v) generating coded transcripts and (vi) moving from analysis to interpretation. Two members of the research team scrutinised
each of the interview recordings independently. Thereafter, the third researcher examined both sets of results to check
for consistency and accuracy (Lockstrm et al. 2010). Where conicts arose, the audio-recordings were used for clarication. This approach produced a set of topics and sub-topics from the data which are depicted in Figures 13.
4. Results
4.1 Core dimensions of lean
With many different views on the constituent elements of a lean system, it will always be difcult to identify a consensus. However, from our literature review and analysis of the initial 63 dimensions, eight core dimensions emerged.
These were the topics most frequently appearing in the 16 papers; their names are representative of those used in the
source papers and the indicative statements for each derive directly from these sources. These form our proposed view
of the dimensions of lean, as shown in column 1 of Table 3.
Each of the core dimensions was associated with indicative statements (shown in column 2 of Table 3) to complete
the taxonomy, and to aid with their operationalisation in the eldwork. This exercise conrmed the paucity of emphasis
on human aspects of lean beyond common mention of employee training, multi-skilling and job rotation, and employee
involvement in problem-solving teams and improvement programmes. Whether or not this is sufcient to encapsulate
the human contribution to a lean system is a moot point, and one which the second stage of the investigation sought to
explore in more detail.
4.2 Comparison of focal lean system with core dimensions
These results compare the literature-derived view of lean with its manifestation in the focal organisation, in order to
establish to what extent it reects the theoretical prole. Table 3 summarises this analysis, with the rightmost column
providing evidence and examples from the interviews for each core dimension.
These results indicate that the practical system aligns fairly closely with the synthesised lean framework, with exceptions associated with three of the eight core dimensions, viz.
Customer focus and co-operation: this is a manufacturing plant where customer contact is indirect, through
marketing and sales, and dealerships. Nonetheless customer feedback on performance is fed into the plant, as
are sales forecasts and other demand data.
Statistical Process Control: this is not as much in evidence as might have been expected.
Kanban-based production control: these visual triggers which are typical of many lean systems are replaced by
a computer-based scheduling system which reects the same basic principle of aligning all activity with the
demands of the customer/order schedule (Liker 2004).
6614
A. Taylor et al.
Two-way
communication
Physically
challenging
Mental
challenges
Open
management
style
0.52
0.62
0.72
0.81
Giving
workers a
voice
0.57
Demanding
targets
Highly
responsive
0.72
0.67
The Working
Environment
Relentless
Line Speed
Sense of
achievement
Demanding
targets
Flat
management
structure
0.62
0.90
Union
representation
Listening to
concerns
0.57
0.76
Supervisorworker
relations
0.86
Effective
Labour
management
0.52
0.90
Team ethos
0.81
Continually
changing
0.76
Suggestion
scheme
Discipline
for
standards
Focused
on Health &
Safety
Repetitive
0.86
0.86
0.95
Job security
Personal
development
planning
Opportunities
for personal
development
0.95
Succession
planning
0.57
Promotion
prospects
Appropriate
training
methods
0.76
Private
health
scheme
0.62
0.62
0.57
Regular
appraisal
0.76
High potential
fast-track
Employee
involvement
0.52
Perceptions of
the Lean system
0.67
Relevant
training
0.81
Assessing
attitudes &
achievements
0.72
Monetary
incentives
0.81
Reward and
Recognition
system
Nonfinancial
recognition
Pension
scheme
0.67
Team-based
rewards
0.86
0.90
Figure 1. What is it like to work within the lean system?
The analysis also identied portions of commentary in the transcripts which did not map onto the eight dimensions
of the framework. These have been categorised under the following themes: (i) Work Standardisation; (ii) Capturing and
Sharing Improvements; (iii) Operator Responsibility and Autonomy; (iv) Performance objectives, performance measurement and KPIs. Table 4 presents evidence from the interviews for each one.
4.3 Employee perceptions of the lean system
Figures 13 and Tables 57 have been prepared as summaries of the ndings following analysis of the stage 3 interviews. The gures are freeform diagrams that capture the richness of the data following its iterative analysis process
(Radnor 2002) during which different themes emerged relating to the three primary areas of enquiry. The items which
surround the emerging themes in each gure were raised by respondents and ascribed to the relevant theme by the
research team using Radnors six-stage process. The numbers in these gures represent the percentage of respondents
who mentioned each issue. The details of the data analysis are provided in the corresponding tables where we discuss
the items that emerged from the interviews relating to each theme. Unattributed direct quotes from individual respondents are included in the tables to illustrate the discussion.
Thus, Figure 1 and Table 5 show how employees perceptions of working within the lean system fell into ve main
themes relating to the working environment, labour management, rewards and recognition, opportunities for personal
development and the means by which the workers have a voice.
Similarly, Figure 2 and Table 6 provide details of the factors which our respondents believe facilitate the plants success. Here, the ideas were categorised into the themes of corporate systems infrastructure, workforce attributes and attitudes, and top management leadership.
Finally, Figure 3 and its corresponding Table 7 present the interview ndings about employees views on the challenges of maintaining performance levels and sustaining the lean system. Five key themes emerged which were categorised as the quality of staff, attitudes to change, appetite for change, maintaining momentum and sustaining engagement.
6615
Clear
direction
0.57
Clear
performance
expectations
Fast
response
0.67
0.52
Leadership
from top
management
Credibility
Vision &
forward
looking
0.76
0.72
Personally
involved
0.81
Plant
success
Best-practice
sharing
Inter-plant
learning
0.90
0.57
Adapting Lean
to context
0.86
0.67
Industrial
Heritage
0.52
Pride,
Work ethic
Local oversight
& development
0.72
0.62
Corporate
Systems
Infrastructure
Workforce
Attributes
and Attitudes
Upbringing
0.57
Belief that
Lean works
Director-level
responsibility
Re-launch and
re-energise
0.52
Commitment,
loyalty
0.81
Flexibility
adaptability
0.86
0.90
Failure not
countenanced
Continual review
& improvement
0.86
0.95
Figure 2. Why is the plant so successful?
Attitudes to
Change
Appetite for
Change
0.95
0.81
Quality of
staff
Change
Management
proficiency
0.67
Maintaining
momentum
0.76
Sustaining
engagement
0.57
Figure 3. What are the challenges of maintaining performance levels and sustaining the lean system?
5. Discussion
What are the dening characteristics of a lean system? What are the human issues that should be included in any study
of lean? What are the challenges in sustaining a lean system over time? These were the questions that this research set
out to address through an exploratory study consisting of literature review and examination of the lean system in a
highly productive UK car manufacturing plant. The discussion deals initially with the rst question before jointly considering the other two.
Supplier Relationships
Set Up Time
improvement and
SMED
Layout for Continuous

Product and Process
ow
Developing and maintaining regular, close contact

with customers
Customer focus and

co-operation
Planning for long-term relationships with as many

suppliers as possible
Ensuring that suppliers receive regular and detailed

feedback on their performance
(Continued)
Within the rst tier supply chain there is a support function for suppliers called the Alliance
Supplier Improvement Programme. Onsite suppliers can utilise training programmes and gain
access to standard operations procedures and basic Lean tools
All suppliers receive regular feedback on performance based on quality, delivery and cost. It
is an essential part of the continuous improvement ethos to provide them with relevant data
which they are expected to use to drive improvement
A lot of suppliers have been engaged for a long time but new suppliers come along all the
time, particularly with new models which require new processes, and new design features.
The plant is continuously looking at ways to improve work ows and to reduce set-up times
Making set up time reduction a specic production

and performance objective
Developing and maintaining regular, close contact

with key suppliers
Employees are trained on set ups and supported through improved ergonomics, low cost
automation and lifting devices
Models determine the factory layout based on two ow lines. Each line is smoothed as much
as possible around the customer demand schedule. The lines are multi-model so smoothing
has to account for models as well as variants of each model
Equipment is grouped in shops for pressing, painting and bodywork production. It is not
quite a continuous ow but nevertheless the production is based on the pull philosophy
Process ow is mapped based on value stream mapping techniques to identify and eliminate
wastes in terms of inventory levels and lead times. Even within the standard lines the layout
is continually changing as further improvements are identied through process mapping
activities
Models are scheduled such that, where possible, everything is producing to a synchronised
scenario but within the batch shops this is not always possible and sometimes stock is built
up to have a variety of parts ready for assembly
Being a manufacturing plant the contact with customers is indirect, through the corporate
marketing and sales function and through dealerships. The TQM process places customer
satisfaction at the core of quality activities. It is critical to only manufacture for the customer
what he is willing to pay for, hence build-to-order
All customer concerns are logged by dealers on a database which is accessible in the plant.
This includes every concern at pre-delivery inspection and every warranty concern. This
provides trend information which is broken down by model, by market and by mileage
marketing and sales function and through dealerships
marketing and sales function and through dealerships. Sales predictions are fed into the plant
from marketing and this in turn determines manning levels
Evidence from plant interviews
Providing regular training and support to facilitate

sustained reductions in set up time
Classifying and ordering products according to their

routing requirements
Plant and equipment layout is done with the aim of

achieving continuous ow
Grouping products according to their processing
requirements
Plant layout is shaped and inuenced by the product

and model mix
Regularly involving customers in the product

development process
Encouraging customers to share demand forecasts and
sales data for improved planning and scheduling
Actively seeking customer feedback on product,

service and delivery performance
Sub-dimension/indicative statement
Dimension of lean
systems
Table 3. Comparison of focal lean system with core lean dimensions from literature.
6616
A. Taylor et al.
Using 7 quality tools to identify the root causes of

quality problems
Providing visual feedback on shop oor about defect
rates and production performance
Making considerable use of statistical techniques and

SPC to understand and reduce process variance
Maintaining and developing effective communication

with suppliers on strategic issues
Encouraging suppliers to re-locate to be closer to the

plant or on-site
Devolving the responsibility for managing inventory

to key suppliers
Supplier reduction programmes based on performance
and capability
Working with suppliers to achieve year-on-year cost

reductions
Evaluating supplier performance on the basis of total
cost
Objective deployment boards are used across the shop oor. Feedback on defect rates is part
of the information made available to shop-oor employees. They are not necessarily SPC
charts as such
SPC is used around the plant for various things, mainly control of machines and checking
that they are within specications and that everything is working. A new process has been
introduced called V-Up (value up) which is like six sigma
All 7 traditional quality tools are used extensively and regularly within the production areas
Suppliers have to commit to cost reduction but it is not just demanded from them; teams go
in to help them achieve it as well
Total Delivered Cost is a key measure and suppliers have a crucial inuence on it. Teams
help them to identify cost reduction opportunities whether it be regarding line balancing,
purchasing or how they build-to-order. For high cost items which are shipped from other
parts of the world efforts are made to source them locally
Inventory is owned by suppliers until it is booked in onsite. No more than 2 hours inventory
is held in-plant. They have a responsibility to meet the delivery schedules of the focal plant
The focus is less on reducing the number of suppliers and more on increasing the capabilities
of existing suppliers and working with them to reduce costs and to improve quality and
productivity
Suppliers are encouraged to move on site. As well as the satellite supplier park around the
site there are also 0.5 tier suppliers who are literally at line side. They manufacture
components in sequence just in time.
Purchasing teams visit suppliers to discuss what they need to produce and what must be done
to deliver it
An Alliance Supplier Improvement team goes into suppliers and helps them meet their
productivity targets, improve their processes and develop products. Within ASIP they map
their full process including value stream mapping and ow charting
Regularly involving key suppliers in the product
This is seen as crucial. All suppliers are involved in new model development from a very
development process
early stage. There is a design stage called S-Lot which involves suppliers
Operating systematic supplier certication programmes There is robust supplier selection and monitoring by way of supplier selection audits based
according to published criteria
on TS60949 and scorecards, plus rigorous capability audits
Making visits to supplier sites and inviting suppliers

to the plant.
(Continued)
Kanban-based production Various forms of Kanban are used for production

Kanbans are not used anywhere in the plant. The computer-based scheduling system within
control
control
the Douki Seisan system synchronises everything according to customer orders
Production at machines or work centres is triggered by Even in the press shop, body shop and paint shop, all are pulling in the same direction it is
demand at the next work station in the sequence
not a push system. Each knows what their customer requires in terms of delivery, quality
requirements etc
The delivery and order requirements of nished goods The philosophy of build-to-order means that all production is pulled by customer orders.
pulls production through the plant
There is a philosophy of a never-ending quest to synchronise with the customer
SPC
Supplier improvement
and development
Dimension of lean
systems
Table 3. (Continued).

6617
HRM Issues
Dimension of lean
systems
Stimulating or mandating employees to identify

suggestions for improvement
Devolving responsibility for improvement to shop

oor personnel
Encouraging employee involvement in problem

solving teams
Cross-skilling is key to improving the work ows. The policy is that each operator should be
able to work at a minimum of three work stations and every workstation should be able to be
operated by a minimum of three operators
Shop-oor employees work on the smaller improvements generally. If there is a bigger issue
then they would be involved in a QC Story along with team leaders and supervisors. Many
of the improvement ideas come from shop-oor employees but because of overtime etc most
of the improvement work comes from team leaders and supervisors
Shop-oor employees are involved in 2-hour and 2-day Kaizen activities and also working in
problem solving teams on QC Stories which are similar to quality circles using a PDCA
protocol. The main focus of employee involvement is on improving their work cells and
work zones. They are also involved in cross functional improvement teams which are given
responsibility to make improvements in certain areas
There is a formal suggestion scheme with clear objectives that every person has to make a
specic number of suggestions, but it has to be re-launched periodically
Key suppliers make frequent deliveries, just in time either as sequenced parts coming from
local satellite suppliers or else from various places around the world but only delivered in
from local warehouses. Most deliveries are on a JIT basis
Requiring suppliers to deliver only on the basis of JIT

wherever possible
Developing employees to have cross-functional

capability
6618
A. Taylor et al.
6619
Table 4. Additional dimensions of lean from interviews.

Dimension of lean system
Work standardisation
Jobs and tasks are specied in standard operating procedures and have standard working
methodologies
The 5S methodology is used for standardising workplace organisation
Non-production areas also have SOPs called Indirect Operations Sheets
Standard processes also exist for how to instruct operators and how to write training documentation
Job observation is used to conrm that the operator is doing what he is meant to be doing,
conrming that the operation is exactly the same as the standard operation, conrming that it is the
best method, and making sure there arent any risks or any safety concerns
Capturing and sharing

improvements
Results of all Kaizen activities within the plant are logged on to a database to log and share the
results internally
There is a separate system to share ideas and best practices throughout the global organisation
Visits are encouraged to sister plants to study each others Lean implementation and to compare
against each other
Global competitions are used for Kaizen events and other improvement activities to stimulate and
maintain interest and to reward success
Operator responsibility and
autonomy
Since components go directly onto the assembly line from suppliers, the operators are responsible
for noticing anything odd about the appearance or the functionality of the parts
There is a system of neighbourhood checks where the next operator checks to see that the part has
been tted correctly and/or is functioning properly
At the end of every zone is an operator who rotates with other team members and who checks all
the components tted by his team members
Shop-oor employees can pull Andon cords to signal a concern on the assembly line (but this does
not stop the line). They can only stop the line for a safety issue
Performance objectives,
measures and KPIs
Hoshin Kanri is used for the deployment of policy and strategies and the identication of key
business objectives
There is a daily measure of the delivery schedule time achievement ratio (DSTAR) with a target of
98% and a tolerance of plus or minus 2 hours
Productivity is measured using a design standard time ratio (DSTR) which compares the time it
should take to build a vehicle with the time which it actually took
There is a manufacturing diagnosis system which measures how capable you are at manufacturing
a product. This can be applied to suppliers too
Engineers are involved in an integrated factory automation system whereby they take an overview
of production shops to improve kitting or use of AGVs to reduce headcount and improve
productivity and DSTR
5.1 Dening characteristics of lean

Analysis of the literature identied eight core dening characteristics of lean which, together with 33 indicative statements, form a lean taxonomy (Table 3). This was used to analyse the focal plants lean implementation, wherein it was
possible to uncover empirical evidence which mapped onto most of the statements, suggesting that it could be regarded
as a reasonably representative site for the study of lean.
Whilst there was a good level of t between the plants lean system and the literature-based view of lean, three areas
of disparity were highlighted. Firstly, since intermediaries such as dealerships form the next downstream stage in the
supply chain, there is no direct customer interface between the plant and its customers. So, whilst the literature-based
view of lean incorporates customer focus and co-operation, the reality at this plant involves indirect linkages. Since this
could apply to many manufacturing contexts we argue that the taxonomy should be enriched to allow for this possibility. Of course the notion of customer focus within lean also extends to internal suppliercustomer relationships. Our
ndings suggest that the workers in the factory recognise the value of getting to know their internal customers.
6620
A. Taylor et al.
Table 5. Employees perceptions of what it is like to work within the lean system.
Theme
Issues raised at the interviews (with illustrative quotes)
The working environment
Effective labour management
Reward and recognition system
Relentless line speed and demanding targets that push staff to their physical and
mental limits: we wont turn down the line speed just because its the night
shift or its early morning to allow people to wake up its relentless but thats
what this place is built upon
Specied operating procedures and dened standards for everything mean that the
environment is regimental and disciplined, with no place for individuals to deviate
Some acceptance of the above challenges because they help the plant to respond
with agility to market changes and provide a sense of achievement at performing
successfully in a tough setting
Tensions evident between the need to adhere to set methods and the temptation to
cut corners when changes in customer demand required agility and responsiveness
you might say were not going to apply Gemba Kanri to this line balance because
the market is screaming for more cars, so there is always the temptation to take
short cuts but you cant do that
Environment of continual change due to the underlying ethos of continuous
improvement resulting in revised working standards. Need for employees to learn
new methods which pertain until they change again
Everyone is pushed to their limits in the pressure cooker of the production line
Demanding targets not welcomed but accepted for the sake of maintaining competitiveness and jobs
Flat management structure with few formal protocols and easy access to top management if required Good supervisorworker relationships crucial for effective
operation and development of teams
Employee involvement enacted primarily through teams e.g. for group based problem solving via kaizen or quality circle activities; inter-team competitions recognising the best ideas and improvement projects
Teams primarily dened through natural boundaries associated with sections of the
assembly lines, and the focus of such teams lies principally on improving their
local situation Even if you save one step or two steps, when you make 300 cars
it saves a lot of walking in a day. They try to involve you in your job, how to
make it easier, rather than in something thats got nothing to do with you
Employee involvement in weekly behavioural audits to ensure localised adherence
to procedures, premised on the basis that staff are most likely to notice any problems in their own work areas
Use of visual performance feedback to ensure effective communication that
includes employees
Management concern for Health and Safety (H & S) demonstrated through the
adoption of a H & S approach developed at Dupont that had yielded a signicant
fall in reported incidents
Reward and recognition for attitudes as well as achievements with considerable
emphasis on the adoption of appropriate mindsets e.g. frugality and cross-functional orientation
Less need for reward and recognition in earlier times of higher job security and
better benets, e.g. private health care/pensions: In those days morale and reward
didnt come from pay rises but from the long-term job security. When I joined
here 20 years ago I felt I had a job for life and thats what all my family thought
too. Now the healthcare is being taken away and the pension scheme has been
changed but its about staying in business
Clear understanding that the external environment had become tougher,a and of
extensive internal inter-plant competition for building new models both of which
had eroded job security
Rewards are primarily team-based e.g. for good performance in quality circle
activities. Rewards such as a fridge or microwave for rest areas, or cinema/sporting
event tickets: Its not like Japan where you might get 10% of the savings from an
(Continued)
6621
Theme
Opportunities for personal development
improvement project and youd be rich. Were here to do a job; improvement is

part of the deal and youll get recognition in other ways for good ideas
Non-nancial recognition of teams and individuals through publicity in the company magazine/intranet, issue of certicates/team photograph
Some recognition of individual performance via a merit award system within the
formal appraisal process linked to promotion and nancial incentive within a salary band: but once youre up at the top of your band, thats it youre stuck
Organisation-wide annual appraisal that records positive and negative aspects of
performance (positive appraisal may result in merit awards) and identies personal
development opportunities
Fast-tracking through inter-department movement for high-potential employees to
develop business acumen, lean prociency and product knowledge
Company preference for internal appointments/promotion (respondents citing the
European Vice President who started out as an assembly line team leader)
Extensive succession planning incorporating potential candidates lling temporary
or permanent vacancies as an opportunity to stand up for a period of time for
trial and assessment
Training is integral to the system:
21-day training programme for new recruits followed by expectation of job competence after 1015 shifts for assembly line employees
Extensive training for all employees following appraisal and in association with
the launch of new plant initiatives
training of supervisors to write standard operations documents with subsequent
issue of a standard operations licence lasting 3 years before requiring re-accreditation
Giving workers a voice (e.g. on

improvements /concerns & grievances)
Ofine, classroom training is common when the plant is not busy, i.e. when
demand is low. This was often regarded negatively, e.g. respondents do not see
themselves as classroom-orientated and often get no chance to apply such learning.
Some training was described as just reading and copying off the screen; others
questioned its relevance and one described how employees stuff the training folders into our lockers and never open them again. There was a view that training
should be delivered by people with direct assembly line experience and that it
should focus on how to make employees jobs easier by relating to practical issues
that concern them
Open management style that creates a culture to encourage and welcome the
worker voice
Facilitation of two-way communication through e.g. half-yearly canteen-based
communication sessions with bite-sized groups of the workforce
Effective top-down communication of plans (long and medium term) and company
goals; with prociency in translating these into clear objectives for, and expectations of, individuals
Effective use of visual communication regarded as crucial for employee ownership
and buy-in e.g. objective deployment boards in work areas: the question is always
asked about the messages in the deployment boards what does that mean to the
guy sitting round the bench having his lunch, what does that actually tell him? If
it is in a language he doesnt understand or theres a high level concept thats over
his head then we will change it
Active encouragement of improvement suggestions from employees both formally and informally. Despite the acknowledged communications success and high
quality of ideas emanating from the assembly line concerns about suggestions that
are not implemented: A lot of suggestions get turned down for ridiculous reasons
in my opinion a stubborn designer or politics theyll give us some pathetic
reason why the idea was never implemented
(Continued)
6622
A. Taylor et al.
Theme
A system that encourages supervisors and team leaders to listen to the concerns of
employees is only partially effective: We had a bit of bad news from a survey of
employees conducted by Hays International, the personnel people. Their survey told
us that the guys dont feel we listen to them. Weve clearly got a big job to do there
Direct interaction between employees and management seems more prevalent than
that through union representatives. The union is not involved in wage negotiations,
and employees question the point of paying membership subscriptions. A Company Council, with elected shop-oor members, has replaced much of the Unions
traditional role
a
At the time of these interviews two of the plants main rivals had shut down for a number of weeks because of a downturn in demand caused by
economic recession.
Secondly, our plant did not make extensive use of SPC, relying instead on more advanced and more stringent statistical
approaches such as Six Sigma. Thus, the taxonomy fails to capture some of the reality at this plant and we argue that
more widespread testing may nd this to be the case elsewhere and could suggest the need to change the taxonomy. We
acknowledge that the emphasis on SPC (as opposed to more recent statistical approaches) may be a reection of the
inherent time lag in published work (MingNan and Jung 2009; Vinodh, Gautham, and Ramiya 2011). Finally, kanban
usage emerged as the archetypal production control method in lean whereas, in the plant, a sophisticated information
system is used to match production with customer orders in a six-day scheduling window (so called D-6 scheduling).
This is an interesting nding since the kanban is widely regarded as a fundamental component of lean implementations (Hopp and Spearman 2004; Schonberger 2007), given its role in operationalising JIT supply (Lewandrowski and
Mertins 1999; Adamides et al. 2008). It is the case, however, that the scheduling system in the plant reects the same
underlying principle of pull production, being driven only by downstream customer requirements. More widespread testing of the taxonomy may reveal interesting derivations of similar principles but operationalised either as kanbans or
using bespoke systems. Apart from the areas of difference, four categories emerged from the eldwork that did not feature prominently in the literature review. All have been mentioned by some writers in the past, so there is no claim for
their novelty per se, but it is noteworthy that they were not discussed in the majority of articles reviewed.
Of these, work standardisation is perhaps the most quintessentially lean dimension. The associated practices that we
found concerning the standardisation of operations in non-production areas, the standardisation of instructional methods
and processes for producing training material, and observational audit to ensure adherence to procedures, have less
prominence in extant literature and represent useful insights. The second category, capturing and sharing improvements,
also provides insight into the methods associated with nurturing and capitalising upon improvement ideas both within
the plant and globally across the rest of the organisation. It supports the literature advocating more focus on organisational learning (Robinson and Schroeder 2009) within lean systems and the development of communities of practice
(Aoki 2008). The discussion of this theme will be developed in Section 5.2.
The third category concerns the responsibility and autonomy given to operators within the lean system. It has often
been argued that lean systems reduce operator autonomy compared to other work settings, since they have little choice
about when or how to carry out their work (Jackson and Mullarkey 2000). Employee autonomy is a big topic in its own
right. We base our interpretation and use of the term on the work of De Treville and Antonakis (2006) who quote traditional denitions of autonomy as freedom concerning work procedures and timing, in which case they point out that
workers in lean systems have almost no freedom about scheduling their work (due to short cycle times and ow-based
layout) or the procedures to be used (due to process standardisation). However, De Treville and Antonakis argue in detail
that autonomy consists of two components choice autonomy (freedom concerning work procedures and timing) and
responsible autonomy (which is about increased accountability, arising from decentralisation of authority, e.g. for inspection and equipment maintenance and participation in decision making). They argue that in lean environments choice
autonomy is reduced but responsible autonomy is increased. Our evidence supports this viewpoint. First, if we consider
some of the comments in Table 5, it is clear that choice autonomy is low. Second, in terms of the third area of disparity
between the literature-based view of lean and our interviews about the focal plants lean system, responsible autonomy
appears to be high. We called this area of disparity responsibility and autonomy in Table 4. It is depicted using four
examples from our eldwork, concerning (i) operators being responsible for checking parts coming straight to the line,
(ii) operators having responsibility for checking team members work as the next step in the process, (iii) operators
carrying out end of zone checks, (iv) operators having the responsibility for pulling Andon cords and stopping the line.
6623
Table 6. Employees views of the reasons for the plants success.

Theme
Corporate system
infrastructure
The system infrastructure is designed to ensure that the lean system functions effectively and continues to
evolve/improve:
Corporate lean system is regarded as a framework with boundaries within which every plant
must operate
The scope that allows for adaptation of the system to suit local contexts, e.g.
This plants development of its own unique 8-step Quality Circle problem solving approach
as a variant of the standard 11-step version
This plants unique use of a computerised Improvement Diagnosis System (IDS), which logs
the use of problem solving tools and associated results, so that these can be shared across the
plant
Workforce attributes and

attitudes
A strong belief in the strengths of the workforce:
Leadership from top

management
Global use of an e-room which shares ideas and best practice across the entire organisation
through the capture of improvement projects company-wide. Despite inter-plant competition e.g.
for new models, the e-room system is used extensively in a spirit of openness and willingness to
learn from other departments and plants
Management infrastructure which involves local oversight, and with responsibility cascading
downwards from director level through steering committees, steering groups and working level
groups which meet regularly to share best practices and to review performance
Systematic process to audit all installed improvements to check that they are still in place and
to assess any scope for further development
Periodic re-launch of aspects of the system, e.g. the formal suggestion scheme and the TQM
process, whenever they are felt not to be being used correctly: Weve had Gemba Kanri diagnosis for 15 years but it has evolved over the 15 years and we have re-launched and repackaged
it only 6 months ago. The same has happened with 5S we have operated a 3S system for
many years and we have recently introduced 5S and then had to re-introduce it and reinforce it
to ensure that it becomes habitual and engrained in everyones mindset
Pride in the determination, commitment and loyalty of workers which was sometimes linked to
the regions strong industrial heritage and work ethic: This area has always been like this with
shipbuilding and the pits; their families have always worked very hard and its bred into you,
all the way down the line
Perceptions of workforce exibility/adaptability to achieve what often seem like unrealistic targets e.g. signicant increases in production volumes at short notice. The concept of non-delivery/failure is not countenanced
A belief that this plant is better than sister plants and external competitors: The Rovers and the
Fords are a million miles away from us, even now. They cant adapt like we do; they work at a
different pace
Proud talk of the tangible evidence of success e.g. high productivity, sustained customer orders
despite a sharp economic downturn, and examples of direct competitors having extended shutdowns whilst this plant was not
Strong belief in the role of the lean system in achieving success and faith in its principles: You
need to believe in it and know that it will work; you need to be passionate about it to be honest
and thats the single most important thing of all
Top management leadership is crucial in setting performance expectations/clear direction, and for making
decisions quickly:
Effective leadership with the credibility to make difcult decisions, particularly that of the
Chairman and CEO whose name was raised, unprompted, by several respondents: When the
CEO took over we were facing a near death experience as we now affectionately call it but he
took the tough decisions and took out costs, cut out the deadwood and set a new direction,
giving design more prominence and more focus on the customer
(Continued)
6624
A. Taylor et al.
Theme
Personal involvement of top management in all aspects of the business at all levels
Top managements vision and forward-looking approach which has encouraged a culture of customer focus in employees: Now since the new CEO came in its all much more customer
focused on what the customer wants. We dont make anything now that the customer wont pay
for and we dont make cars for stock to sit out in a eld and rust anymore
Finally, we have found evidence to suggest that performance objectives, measures and KPIs should be added as an
explicit component of the taxonomy. Whilst many articles about lean have treated performance as a dependent variable
(Fullerton and Wempe 2009; Meade, Kumar, and White 2010), it has generally not featured as a core element, aside
from measuring and providing feedback on shop-oor performance (Niepce and Molleman 1998; Mehta and Shah
2005). Conversely, in this case it appears that performance measurement and objective deployment is an intrinsic part of
the lean system demonstrating a deep-rooted embedding of measurement and feedback in the culture and practices to
drive continuous improvement. Adding these categories from Table 4 to the taxonomy of Table 3 results in a synthesised view of lean that is based on the literature and an exemplar lean implementation. It comprises 12 core dimensions
and 51 indicative statements. The successful use of the taxonomy at this plant suggests that it has wider utility in the
analysis of practical lean implementations. We acknowledge that further testing elsewhere will assess its value more
generally.
This approach to identifying the dening characteristics of lean adopted a tools approach as a consequence of the
predominant method in the existing literature. This was purely a pragmatic rst step in our overall research plan to see
what the existing literature could tell us. We would not argue that a tools approach is the right way or the best way to
do it. Indeed, opposing viewpoints to what some would call a supercial tool orientation must be recognised, e.g. I do
not believe lean tools or Six Sigma tools or a marriage of the two will get a company to a lean learning enterprise
(Liker 2004, 296).
5.2 Human issues in lean and continuance of the lean system
Whilst the ndings from the rst two work stages allowed us to answer our rst research question, they also hinted at
issues that would help us to address the remaining questions. For instance, the literature review revealed that whilst
recent articles have demonstrated a growing recognition of the importance of human issues, there has been relatively
little attention paid to these apart from token mention of practices such as job rotation and multi-skilling. The third
stage, which investigated employees perceptions, provided a much more detailed view of human issues within lean. It
allowed us to develop a richer picture than is typically found in the literature, aside from debate about the stressful
effects of lean (Conti et al. 2006), and the insider account by Mehri (2006).
The employee interviews yielded detailed insights into perceptions of working life on the assembly line, revealing
complex and multi-faceted images of what it feels like to be a part of the system. They also provide further evidence in
support of the new dimensions proposed for the lean taxonomy. Given the relentless line speed and the highly competitive external environment there were indicators of tensions and contradictions between the need for consistency and
standardisation on the one hand, and the ongoing drive for improvement and change on the other. There were similar
tensions between the need for standardisation of methods and procedures and the need to be exible and responsive,
while not cutting corners. We believe that the overall picture of the lean system is one which is demanding, with targets
which are not welcomed by employees, but are nevertheless accepted for the sake of keeping their jobs and for the
long-term job security that this has provided. Moreover, while the employees mentioned the relentless line speed and
demanding targets with everyone being pushed to their limits, they did not talk about this in terms of unwelcome or
unhealthy levels of stress. Conversely, the demanding environment was talked about with pride in achieving unrealistic
targets which none of the competitors could do. For examples, see the section in Table 6 on workforce attributes and
attitudes. Thus, while there might be apparent contradictions in some of the detailed evidence we have presented, it
needs to be read as a whole.
Knowledge creation and innovation was facilitated by the culture which was open and encouraging with a very
strong focus on employee involvement methods. It is also noteworthy that there is widespread willingness to share and
to learn from each other and from other plants, despite the high level of internal competition for new business.
6625
Table 7. Employee perceptions of the challenges of maintaining performance levels and sustaining the lean system.
Theme
Quality of staff
The need to recruit and retain the correct calibre of staff:
Attitudes to change
As the plants pay and conditions have become less competitive relative to other local employers in
recent years new employees are less willing to take on extra tasks The culture now in this company
is that if Im not getting paid for it Im not doing it. Its not just this company. The mentality of people has changed. Its a different class of person. Its hard to get them to do it
Need for recruits who can meet the physical demands of the job; and the psychological consequences
The rst 2 or 3 weeks I worked here, when I went home to sleep I was hearing the buzzers in my
sleep; I was waking up in the night thinking I was moving with the assembly track
Despite the rigour of the recruitment process there is still a percentage fall-out of those who cannot
cope with the demands
The attitudes that derive from the strong tension which exists between the needs for continuous improvement
and for standardisation and operating procedures:
A natural desire for stability in the face of demands associated with continually changing working
procedures in response to improvement ideas
As new working procedures are internalised and rhythm develops the status quo can run like clockwork to achieve maximum output levels. Hence questions about the need for change, The lines run
very smoothly, in a robotic way, so if you try to change something after six months people say hold
on, not more change, cant we just leave things as they are?As new ways of doing things become
custom and practice, negativity and resistance often follows requests for change
Appetite for change A sense of change fatigue:
Maintaining
momentum
Sustaining
engagement
Reluctance to do tasks that used to be done willingly and voluntarily, indicating reduced motivation
Considerable mention of weariness and reluctance to change as a consequence of the continual process of change over time
Lack of buy-in to change even by team leaders/supervisors There are a lot of things I disagree with
now, but I have to just try to persuade people that its right, even if I dont believe its right myself
Reduced levels of job satisfaction reported by experienced employees For many years I enjoyed
working here, but now Im just ticking over Ive lost some of the enjoyment
The need to maintain momentum during change implementation:
The constant need to convince people that change is for the better results in challenges associated with
keeping change initiatives going
Despite the clear economic imperatives, it is progressively more difcult to persuade staff of the benets of change: Its a really difcult balancing act to keep it all moving forward, the continuous
improvement, kaizen and all of that. On the one hand the employees have a bit of resentment that the
company pushes them so hard, but on the other hand they know that the rewards are there weve a
good chance of keeping a job for life
The need to keep the workforce engaged in the principles of the lean system and with improvement initiatives
to ensure their continued collaboration and cooperation
Difculties in engaging staff: Employee relations has become increasingly more important and
increasingly challenging trying to nd ways to engage the staff and to avoid a them and us situation where were not working together effectively
Evidence of lack of engagement such as employees regarding the 5S methodology to be a chore that
is not part of their jobs and not being willing to stay behind after their shifts to clean their workspaces
Many employees seem happy to do their jobs but not to be developed further
6626
A. Taylor et al.
Operators are given considerable amounts of devolved responsibility not simply for suggestions and team-based
improvement activity, but also for involvement in things like weekly behavioural audits. Similarly, it was interesting to
learn that the plant is able to modify global practices such as the 11-step problem-solving methodology and even to
introduce its own system (IDS) for capturing and sharing improvements which is not done in any other plant. As
regards employee training and development, the systematic appraisal system seemed powerful and effective with an
additional fast-track to recognise and nurture high-potential employees within a succession planning framework. However, there is evidence of concerns about the relevance of some training and about the methods of delivery.
When asking employees why the plant is so successful we did not expect a single silver bullet answer. However,
the pride and commitment of the workforce certainly shines through all of the interview transcripts, as does the emphasis
on innovation. It is interesting that, of the themes which emerged from the responses, aside from the corporate systems
infrastructure, the other two were about human issues. The employees perceptions of the challenges of maintaining performance levels and of sustaining the lean system also strongly linked to human issues. With increased competition for
good quality staff in a tough labour market, it will be interesting to see what can be done to make the work more attractive to potential recruits so that the plant can enlist the quality of worker that it needs. This seems resonant with the experience of Volvo in the 1980s when they introduced the human-centred production system at Uddevalla.
One could also recognise the negative reactions brought about by the drive for continuous improvement when set
against the employees expressed need for standardised operating procedures, so that they could work at full speed. Frequent changes to work procedures are inevitably going to be unwelcome at times, despite being for the common good.
Respondents also expressed this resistance to change in a more extreme manner when they talked about being weary of
change and unwilling to give their full commitment any more. The existence of such change fatigue is not uncommon
(Hoyte and Greenwood 2007; Fine, Hansen, and Roggenhofer 2009), but is perhaps an indicator which needs to be considered carefully in relation to the demands of the workplace and the rewards which are provided. Without an effective
change management capability the plant is unlikely to be able to adapt its production model to changing labour markets,
business cycles, macroeconomic conditions and the development of new technologies (Boyer et al. 1998).
The ongoing survival of lean systems has been a recurring theme in the literature with the following comment being
particularly apposite: Lean should be regarded as more than a set of mechanistic hard tools and techniques and the
human dimensions of motivation, empowerment and respect for people are key to the long-term sustainability of any
lean programme (Hines, Holweg, and Rich 2004, 9991000). Yet, curiously, in almost all of this eldwork, motivation
did not feature prominently; the rewards which were mentioned were about extrinsic issues such as job security, a merit
award or a new fridge or microwave for the team. Respondents were silent about any intrinsic motivation pertaining to
the work itself. Indeed, the literature on the intrinsic motivational potential of lean systems is fragmented and conicting
(Niepce and Molleman 1998). There remains a need to understand the kinds of motivational effects which are engendered by lean systems and to what extent these effects and their outcomes vary, depending on the methods and effectiveness of implementation. In other words, in lean environments, does worker behaviour result only from increased
management control or do the workers increase their effort because of the characteristics of the task itself (De Treville
and Antonakis 2006)? Respondents reported that many of the systems within the lean implementation needed to be
re-launched at regular intervals in order to keep them effective. Moreover, they pointed to the growing opinion that the
disciplines of 5S were an unwelcome chore, and that new recruits were reluctant to stay behind to sweep and tidy their
work areas. When taken together with comments about employee suggestions not being implemented, and examples of
change weariness, the nature of the challenge that exists behind the scenes to ensure that momentum and employee
engagement are preserved becomes evident.
5.3 Methodological reections
This work was based upon a three-stage methodology utilising a range of methods including literature analysis, document evaluation and two phases of semi-structured interviews. As a research design, it follows best-practice advice to
employ multiple methods for triangulation. The driving force for the research design was repeated calls for micro-level
investigation to get under the surface of this complex phenomenon; thus, a single case study was chosen using an emergent approach where each stage of investigation informed the next one. Although case studies are relatively common in
operations research generally, they have not been used extensively in the study of lean systems. The investigation began
with a predominantly tools focus to the topic, subsequently evolving to adopt a greater emphasis on human and
organisational issues in a socio-technical sense. This was intended to overcome the limited perspectives of extant
methodologies which have relied heavily on survey methods. Our methodology included access to shop-oor employees
which is unusual and important; in the OM tradition it is usually managers who are surveyed or interviewed, since
access to shop-oor workers is difcult and uncommon.
6627
It is also important to recognise the limitations of this work. The rst relates to the limitations of any single case
study, including the inability to generalise the ndings and conclusions, and the lack of opportunity to compare events
and data across cases. Generalisability is further constrained by having access to only one area of the factory, albeit one
which we believe is typical of its lean implementation. It would also have been desirable to collect a larger data-set by
conducting more interviews. Nonetheless, the degree of consensus reected in the ndings is encouraging and provides
ne-grained insights into the operational deployment of lean. Finally, the literature review and eldwork could have
been strengthened through an increased focus on the cultural aspects of lean, since the cultural dimension of change is a
central element in the implementation of lean (Meier 2006; Barabel, Le Boulch, and Meier 2008). The empirical ndings pointed to a few aspects of culture in the focal organisation such as the focus on measurement and feedback, and
its open and encouraging character. However, there were also some negative indications of tensions between workers
and management and resistance to change such that there is even more scope for investigation through a cultural lens.
6. Conclusions
This exploratory study has investigated the lean phenomenon through literature review and an in-depth case study comprising semi-structured interviews with senior executives and shop-oor employees in one automotive company. It
makes a number of contributions to theory and practice, as follows:
6.1 Implications for research
Firstly, the taxonomy of lean that has been developed, which incorporates core dimensions and indicative statements for
each, is an addition to knowledge in its own right. Its process of development was unusual in that the ndings derived
directly from consensus in the literature rather than through the more common route of surveys which tend to have a
narrower focus. The value of the taxonomy comes in part from its broader perspective. Its use as a means for analysing
lean implementations in practice has been demonstrated through a case study and we propose that future research should
test and rene it in a variety of settings.
Secondly, the paper delineates the human issues associated with lean systems in a ne-grained way that conveys the
rich and multifaceted landscape that exists. Few, if any, studies of lean have been able to produce this level of detail;
this demonstrates one of the advantages of the single-case research design. Thirdly, the case study has revealed a set of
insights into the dynamics of an established lean system. The interactions between the operational deployment of lean
and the associated human issues are often hidden facets of such socio-technical systems. The case analysis has uncovered subtle tensions, interplays and reactions which ebb and ow as the system continues to evolve. These, in turn,
point to the issue of the systems long term survival for which we identify a number of levers which may be central for
the companys ongoing prociency in change management and lean transformation.
These ndings suggest several additional avenues for further research:
(1) To explore how the voice of the customer may be brought into settings such as this one where there is no direct
customer interface.
(2) To study the effectiveness of the learning and knowledge creation mechanisms such as the Improvement Diagnosis System and the Global e-room, and to see how they support and stimulate Communities of Practice.
(3) To undertake a longitudinal study of this lean implementation to observe the effectiveness of the change management capability and the continuance of the system.
(4) To investigate the motivational potential of the lean system in more depth to see whether or not there is an
intrinsic motivational element, and if so, how it works.
(5) To extend the literature review and eldwork to take a more direct focus on the cultural dimension of lean.
(6) To test the developed lean taxonomy in a range of other settings.
(7) To undertake a comparative study of the issues raised through this study, in organisations representing different
stages in their adoption and experiences of lean from beginners, through intermediate to experienced.
6.2 Implications for practice
The research also has implications for management practice. Firstly, the taxonomy demonstrates the multi-faceted nature
of lean and it highlights the need for managers to focus attention on lean implementations in order to nurture and
encourage the many interactions and relationships which make it work effectively. The taxonomy underpins
Schonbergers (2007) warning that managers understanding of lean is too supercial in most organisations and that
6628
A. Taylor et al.
implementation is much more than a set of mechanistic activities. The taxonomy can be used by managers as a checklist or aide-memoire to ensure that they are attending to all the necessary facets of their lean system. In the same regard,
the taxonomy could form a framework for organisational self-assessment of lean implementation to avoid the limitations
of partial implementation which are prevalent (Done, Voss, and Rytter 2011).
Secondly, the ndings from the employee interviews demonstrate the reality of working within a lean system. This
signals to managers that it is vital to seek out the views and feelings of employees in order to bring their concerns to
the surface where they can be addressed. While many managers would acknowledge that a focus on human aspects of
lean is de rigueur, the richness of such a focus has rarely been spelled out in any detail. Our ndings emphasise the
need for managers to concentrate on the perceptions of employees around the themes and sub-themes we have
identied.
Finally, just as Schonberger (2007) found wavering signs for many lean implementations, our research suggests that
it seems difcult to sustain. This nding is an alert to managers to guard against complacency. Even when a lean system
appears to be functioning well and delivering expected levels of performance, there are factors which can cause it to falter and even fail. These include existing performance-management systems, employee mindsets and an underestimation
of the level of senior management involvement (Fine, Hansen, and Roggenhofer 2009). Suitable managerial attention to
all of these factors is essential to keep the lean process moving forward and thriving.
References
Achanga, P., E. Shehab, R. Roy, and G. Nelder. 2005. Critical Success Factors for Lean Implementation within SMEs. Journal of
Manufacturing Technology 17 (4): 460471.
Adamides, E. D., N. Karacapilidis, H. Pylarinou, and D. Koumanakos. 2008. Supporting Collaboration in the Development and
Management of Lean Supply Networks. Production Planning and Control 19 (1): 3552.
Adler, P. S., and R. E. Cole. 1993. Designed for Learning: A Tale of Two Auto Plants. Sloan Management Review 34 (3): 8594.
Adler, P. S., and R. E. Cole. 1994. Rejoinder. Sloan Management Review 35 (2): 4549.
Aoki, K. 2008. Management Practices and Kaizen Culture: An Interpretive Study through the Perspective of Communities of
Practice. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 28 (6): 518539.
Bamber, L. L., and B. G. Dale. 2000. Lean Production: A Study of Application in a Traditional Manufacturing Environment.
Production Planning and Control 11 (3): 291298.
Barabel, M., G. Le Boulch, and O. Meier. 2008. Perceived Corporate Culture by EADS Top Management: European or American
Inuence? Journal of American Academy of Business 13 (2): 110117.
Bateman, N. 2005. Sustainability: The Elusive Element of Process Improvement. International Journal of Operations and
Production Management 25 (3): 261276.
Berggren, C. 1994. NUMMI vs. Uddevalla. Sloan Management Review 35 (2): 3745.
Bhasin, S., and P. Burcher. 2006. Lean Viewed as a Philosophy. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 17 (1): 5672.
Bicheno, J. 2004. The New Lean Toolbox: Towards Fast, Flexible Flow. 3rd ed. Bucks: PICSIE Books.
Boyer, R., E. Charron, U. Jurgens, and S. Tolliday. 1998. Conclusion: Transplants, Hybridization and Globalization: What lessons for
the future? In Between Imitation and Innovation: The Transfer and Hybridization of Productive Models in the International
Automotive Industry, edited by R. Boyer, E. Charron, U. Jurgens, and S. Tolliday, Chap. 16, 374379. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brown, B. C., T. R. Collins, and E. L. McCombs. 2006. Transformation from Batch to Lean Manufacturing: The Performance
Issues. Engineering Management Journal 18: 313.
Conti, R., J. Angelis, C. Cooper, B. Faragher, and C. Gill. 2006. The Effects of Lean Production on Worker Job Stress. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 26 (9): 10131038.
Cusumano, M. A. 1994. The Limits of Lean. Sloan Management Review 35 (4): 2732.
De Treville, S., and J. Antonakis. 2006. Could Lean Production Job Design Be Intrinsically Motivating? Contextual, Congurational,
and Levels-of-analysis Issues. Journal of Operations Management 24 (2): 99123.
Demeter, K., and Z. Matyusz. 2011. The Impact of Lean Practices on Inventory Turnover. International Journal of Production
Economics 133 (1): 154163.
Dennis, P. 2002. Lean Production Simplied: A Plain Language Guide to the Worlds Most Powerful Production System. New York:
Productivity Press.
Done, A., C. A. Voss, and N. G. Rytter. 2011. Best Practice Interventions: Short-term Impact and Long-term Outcomes. Journal of
Operations Management 29 (5): 500513.
Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review 14 (4): 532550.
Eisenhardt, K. M., and M. E. Graebner. 2007. Theory Building from Cases: Opportunities and Challenges. Academy of Management Journal 50 (1): 2532.
6629
Farris, J. A., E. M. Van Aken, T. L. Doolen, and J. Worley. 2009. Critical Success Factors for Human Resource Outcomes in Kaizen
Events: An Empirical Study. International Journal of Production Economics 117 (1): 4265.
Feld, W. M. 2001. Lean Manufacturing: Tools, Techniques, and How to Use Them. Boca Raton, FL: St Lucie Press.
Fine, D., M. A. Hansen, and S. Roggenhofer. 2009. From Lean to Lasting: Making Operational Improvements Stick. The McKinsey
Quarterly (1): 109117.
Fullerton, R. R., and W. F. Wempe. 2009. Lean Manufacturing, Non-nancial Performance Measures and Financial Performance.
International Journal of Operations and Production Management 29 (3): 214240.
Furlan, A., A. Vinelli, and G. Dal Pont. 2011. Complementarity and Lean Manufacturing Bundles: An Empirical Analysis.
International Journal of Operations and Production Management 31 (8): 835850.
Glover, W. J., J. A. Farris, E. M. Van Aken, and T. L. Doolen. 2011. Critical Success Factors for the Sustainability of Kaizen Event
Human Resource Outcomes: An Empirical Study. International Journal of Production Economics 132 (2): 197213.
Hines, P., M. Holweg, and N. Rich. 2004. Learning to Evolve: A Review of Contemporary Lean Thinking. International Journal
of Operations and Production Management 24 (10): 9941011.
Hopp, W. J., and M. L. Spearman. 2004. To Pull or Not to Pull: What is the Question? Manufacturing and Service Operations
Management 6 (2): 131148.
Hoyte, D., and R. Greenwood. 2007. Journey to the North Face: A Guide to Business Transformation. Academy of Strategic
Management Journal 6: 91104.
Jackson, P. R., and S. Mullarkey. 2000. Lean Production Teams and Health in Garment Manufacture. Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology 5 (2): 231245.
Jayaram, J., A. Das, and M. Nicolae. 2010. Looking beyond the Obvious: Unravelling the Toyota Production System. International
Journal of Production Economics 128 (1): 280291.
Laurila, J. 1997. Promoting Research Access and Informant Rapport in Corporate Settings: Notes from Research on a Crisis
Company. Scandinavian Journal of Management 13 (4): 407418.
Lewandrowski, K., and U. Mertins. 1999. Inventory Safety Stocks of Kanban Control Systems. Production Planning and Control
10 (6): 520529.
Lewis, M. A. 2000. Lean Production and Sustainable Competitive Advantage. International Journal of Operations and Production
Management 20 (8): 959978.
Liker, J. K. 2004. The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the Worlds Greatest Manufacturer. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Liker, J. K., and M. Hoseus. 2010. Human Resources Development in Toyota Culture. International Journal of Human Resources
Development and Management 10 (1): 3450.
Lockstrm, M., J. Schadel, N. Harrison, R. Moser, and M. K. Malhotra. 2010. Antecedents to Supplier Integration in the Automotive
Industry: A Multiple-case Study of Foreign Subsidiaries in China. Journal of Operations Management 28 (3): 240256.
Losonci, D., K. Demeter, and I. Jenei. 2011. Factors Inuencing Employee Perceptions in Lean Transformations. International
Journal of Production Economics 131 (1): 3043.
Meade, D. J., S. Kumar, and B. White. 2010. Analysing the Impact of the Implementation of Lean Manufacturing Strategies on Profitability. The Journal of the Operational Research Society 61 (5): 858871.
Mehri, D. 2006. The Darker Side of Lean: An insiders Perspective on the Realities of the Toyota Production System. The Academy
of Management Perspectives 20 (2): 2142.
Mehta, V., and H. Shah. 2005. Characteristics of a Work Organization from a Lean Perspective. Engineering Management Journal
17 (2): 1421.
Meier, O. 2006. Management Interculturel: Stratgie, Organisation, Performance. 2nd ed. Paris: Dunod.
MingNan, C., and L. Jung. 2009. A Lean Six-sigma Approach to Touch Panel Quality Improvement. Production Planning and
Control 20 (5): 445454.
Monden, Y. 1998. Toyota Production System: An Integrated Approach to Just-in-time. 2nd ed. London: Chapman & Hall.
Narasimhan, R., M. Swink, and S. W. Kim. 2006. Disentangling Leanness and Agility: An Empirical Investigation. Journal of
Operations Management 24 (5): 440457.
New, S. J. 2007. Celebrating the Enigma: The Continuing Puzzle of the Toyota Production System. International Journal of
Production Research 45 (16): 35453554.
Niepce, W., and E. Molleman. 1998. Work Design Issues in Lean Production from a Sociotechnical Systems Perspective: NeoTaylorism or the Next Step in Sociotechnical Design? Human Relations 51 (3): 259287.
Ohno, T. 1988. Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-scale Production. Portland, ME: Productivity Press.
Okumus, F., L. Altinay, and A. Roper. 2007. Gaining Access for Research: Reections from Experience. Annals of Tourism
Research 34 (1): 726.
Panizzolo, R., P. Garengo, M. Sharma, and A. Gore. 2012. Lean Manufacturing in Developing Countries: Evidence from Indian
SMEs. Production Planning and Control 23 (10/11): 769788.
Pettersen, J. 2009. Dening Lean Production: Some Conceptual and Practical Issues. The TQM Journal 21 (2): 127142.
Radnor, H. A. 2002. Researching Your Own Professional Practice: Doing Interpretive Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Robinson, A. G., and G. M. Schroeder. 2009. The Role of Front-line Ideas in Lean Performance Improvement. Quality
Management Journal 16 (4): 2740.
6630
A. Taylor et al.
Saurin, T. A., G. A. Marodin, and J. L. D. Ribeiro. 2011. A Framework for Assessing the Use of Lean Production Practices in
Manufacturing Cells. International Journal of Production Research 49 (11): 32113230.
Schonberger, R. J. 2007. Japanese Production Management: An Evolution with Mixed Success. Journal of Operations Management 25 (2): 403419.
Shah, R., A. Chandrasekaran, and K. Linderman. 2008. In Pursuit of Implementation Patterns: The Context of Lean and Six Sigma.
International Journal of Production Research 46 (23): 66796699.
Shah, R., and P. T. Ward. 2003. Lean Manufacturing: Context, Practice Bundles, and Performance. Journal of Operations
Management 21 (2): 129150.
Shah, R., and P. T. Ward. 2007. Dening and Developing Measures of Lean Production. Journal of Operations Management 25
(4): 785805.
Shingo, S. 1984. A Study of the Toyota Production System from an Industrial Engineering Viewpoint. Tokyo: Japan Management
Association.
Slomp, J., J. C. Bokhorst, and R. Germs. 2009. A Lean Production Control System for High-variety/Low-volume Environments: A
Case Study Implementation. Production Planning and Control 20 (7): 586595.
Spear, S., and H. K. Bowen. 1999. Decoding the DNA of the Toyota Production System. Harvard Business Review 77 (5): 97106.
Sugimori, Y., K. Kusunoki, F. Cho, and S. Uchikawa. 1977. Toyota Production System and Kanban System: Materialisation of Justin-time and Respect-for-human System. International Journal of Production Research 15 (6): 553564.
Taylor, M., and W. A. Taylor. 2008. Operations Management Research in the Automotive Sector: Some Contemporary Issues and
Future Directions. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 28 (6): 480489.
Thun, J. H., M. Druke, and A. Grubner. 2011. Empowering Kanban through TPS-principles An Empirical Analysis of the Toyota
Production System. International Journal of Production Research 48 (23): 70897106.
Tolliday, S., R. Boyer, E. Charron, and U. Jurgens. 1998. Introduction to Chapter 1. In Between Imitation and Innovation: The
Transfer and Hybridization of Productive Models in the International Automotive Industry, edited by R. Boyer, E. Charron, U.
Jurgens, and S. Tolliday, 119. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Towill, D. R. 2007. Exploiting the DNA of the Toyota Production System. International Journal of Production Research 45 (16):
36193637.
Turesky, E. F., and P. Connell. 2010. Off the Rails: Understanding the Derailment of a Lean Manufacturing Initiative. Organization
Management Journal 7: 110132.
Vinodh, S. S., S. G. Gautham, and R. A. Ramiya. 2011. Implementing Lean Sigma Framework in an Indian Automotive Valves
Manufacturing Organisation: A Case Study. Production Planning and Control 22 (7): 708722.
Witcher, B. J., V. S. Chau, and P. Harding. 2008. Dynamic Capabilities: Top Executive Audits and Hoshin Kanri at Nissan South
Africa. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 28 (6): 540561.
Womack, J. P., D. T. Jones, and D. Roos. 1990. The Machine That Changed the World. New York: Macmillan.
Yin, R. K. 2009. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. (Applied Social Sciences Research Methods Series). 4th ed. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage. ISBN 9781412960991.

Towards Greater Understanding of Success and Survival of Lean Systems 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Towards Greater Understanding of Success and Survival of Lean Systems 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [Universitat Politcnica de Valncia]

On: 09 December 2014, At: 00:52

International Journal of Production Research