Author’s Accepted Manuscript

Applying the green Embedded lean production

model in developing countries: A case study of
china

Xiaoxi Fu, Mengzhen Guo, Niu Zhanwen

www.elsevier.com/locate/envdev

PII: S2211-4645(16)30222-6
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2017.02.004
Reference: ENVDEV332
To appear in: Environmental Development
Received date: 18 August 2016
Revised date: 10 February 2017
Accepted date: 10 February 2017
Cite this article as: Xiaoxi Fu, Mengzhen Guo and Niu Zhanwen, Applying the
green Embedded lean production model in developing countries: A case study of
c h i n a , Environmental Development,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2017.02.004
This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for
publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of
the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and
review of the resulting galley proof before it is published in its final citable form.
Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which
could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
Applying the Green Embedded Lean Production Model in Developing Countries: A

Case Study of China

Xiaoxi Fu1, 2, Mengzhen Guo2, Niu Zhanwen2*

1 Economics and Business Management School, Tianjin Sino-German University of

Applied Sciences, No.2 Yashen Road, Haihe Education Park, Tianjin, 300350, China

2 College of Management and Economics, Tianjin University, No. 92 Weijin Road, Nankai

District, Tianjin, 300072, China

*Corresponding author

E-mail: niuzhanwen@tju.edu.cn

Abstract
Academia and industry have become increasingly interested in how to employ environmental
management (EM) to build a green competitive advantage. This study systematically
investigates the logic, process, and mechanism of a “lean and green” deployment by firms in
developing countries. To do so, we use a scenario-activated analysis and examine existing
lean and green practices. Furthermore, we use a case study to examine the improvement of
firms in China. Our findings show that the Green Embedded Lean Production Model
(GELPM) illustrates the main advantages of “lean and green”-enabled profitability and green
competitiveness for firms in developing countries, which enhance the competitiveness of
such firms. The proposed GELPM comprises an operational strategy with which to
implement a lean and green approach, as well as novel concepts, thoughts, and tools, and is
structured according to theoretical and practical perspectives. Thus, firms in developing
countries can use this model to enjoy long-term benefits by building a durable competitive
advantage based on a lean and green deployment.

Key words Lean production, Environmental management, Operating strategy, Case study,
Developing country
Introduction
With the increasing importance of environmental issues, most firms realize the strategic
significance of environmental management (EM) to sustaining a competitive advantage [1],
particularly in developing countries such as China. In recent decades, China has witnessed
considerable development in its industry, economy, and people’s living standards. However,
this development has, to a degree, occurred at the expense of the country’s environment [2].
Thus, it is important to understand how enterprises can be environmentally friendly, but
without damaging their profitability.

Among the various operations of enterprises, an increasing number of scholars are studying
the significance of “lean and green” manufacturing to achieving both profitability and
greenness. Traditionally, lean production (LP) has been regarded as a powerful tool in
improving economic and operational performance [3], but it has mixed effects on the
environment [4,5]. Extant studies have also investigated how lean and green practices, and
possible synergies between the two, could lead to positive operational performance by
establishing management systems and tools [6,7], but indicate that “harvesting” these is not
simple [8,9]. Nevertheless, deploying lean and green practices at the enterprise level,
particularly in firms in developing countries, remains unresolved.

Despite a growing body of research on lean and green practices, several gaps still exist in the
literature. First, there is a scarcity of empirical research on lean and green deployments. Most
studies are conceptual and theoretical [10,11]. Second, to the best of our knowledge, few
studies consider the attributes of firms in developing countries, or propose strategies and
tactics to help enterprises become both lean and green [12,13]. Third, researchers have yet to
clearly define the processes, procedures, mechanisms, and tools of lean and green practices
[9,14-16]. Furthermore, it is debatable whether the relationship between lean and green
practices are as vague as a mysterious “black box,” as numerous studies suggest. The Green
Embedded Lean Production Model (GELPM) proposed in this study illustrates how lean and
green deployments improve the economic and environmental performance (EP) of enterprises.

Here, we examine a case study of Company J (henceforth, referred to as J), a large dairy
enterprise in the Hebei province. The purpose of this study is to bridge existing knowledge
gaps and by examining how the systematic framework of lean and green deployments
improves enterprise performance. This study investigates how firms conduct lean and green
deployments in developing countries, unlocks the “black box,” and determines the connection
between enterprise deployments of LP and EM. As a result, we highlight the necessity of
adapting current practices, particularly in the developmental stage in developing countries.

Theoretical information

To clarify the aforementioned gaps, we review relevant existing literature on lean and green
implementations, particularly with regard to developing countries, such as China. First, we
provide an inclusive definition for both LP and EM, neither of which have consistent
definitions in extant literature. Then, we provide a comprehensive overview of lean and green
deployment in order to understand the process and mechanism through which it can enhance
enterprise performance.

Environmental management (EM)

The World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) defines EM as a

comprehensive activity to achieve environmental objectives through planning, organizing,
coordinating, controlling, supervision, and so on. According to the ISO14000 standard, EP
can be defined as “measurable organizational management results in the environment.”
Obviously, the definitions of EM and EP differ according to the industry, product, and
internal and external environment of a company. Nevertheless, based on the definitions of
sustainable development (SD) and eco-efficiency, we can summarize the content and
objective of EM as providing goods and services to satisfy human needs and improve
people’s quality of life, while progressively reducing the environmental impact and resource
consumption intensity to meet the environmental carrying capacity.

EM and EP have been common research topics since the 1990s. Many scholars have
summarized EP in empirical studies and literature reviews. Lober suggested that EP could be
evaluated according to four dimensions [17]. Jeurissen and Ronald summarized 14 benefits of
EM to enterprises by investigating Switzerland-based manufacturing enterprises [18]. These
benefits are divided into two main categories: increasing customer satisfaction and reducing
environmental risk. Then, Ilinitch and Soderstrom suggested that EP should be divided into
four dimensions: an internal methodology system, external relationships, external influences,
and internal policies [19].
However, few studies focus on how to implement EM or improve EP. At the same time, there
is no standard approach to EM, although a relative scientific classification was proposed by
King and Lenox [8]. They divide environmental protection activities into three types:
pollution prevention; pollution treatment; and pollution transfer. Then they prove that only
pollution prevention can be profitable for enterprises. Cagno et al. found that technology
evolution is the most common mode of pollution prevention [20]. From the perspective of the
government, Moss stated that if government agencies intend to reduce costs by preventing
pollution, they need to develop regional partnerships, involve all members in environmental
training and build a performance appraisal index system [21]. Pollution prevention is a joint
aspect of EM and LP. To prevent pollution, enterprises need to prevent wastage and pollution
during the entire process, from the source to the final products. Sánchez-Medina et al.
analyzed the relationship between EM and business operations in small and medium-sized
companies [22]. They found that insufficient resources meant that environmental training of
managers was the most effective way to improve a company’s EP.

We define EM based on two dimensions, namely target and technique. The target includes
resource utilization, energy consumption and pollutants. There are many techniques and will
be described in detail in GELPM in figure 12.

Lean production (LP)

In the past, scholars have defined LP in various ways. After comparing existing articles on
LP, Mi Dahlgaard-Park and Pettersen concluded that there was no consolidated definition of
LP [23]. In general, scholars define LP from the perspective of its objectives. Comm and
Mathaisel describe it as a tool to reduce costs and lead-times, and to improve product
performance along the entire value chain [24]. Liker and Wu indicated that the core concept
of LP was just-in-time (JIT) delivery [25]. According to Shah and Ward, the most appropriate
definition of LP is that it is a method of providing customers with the greatest value via waste
elimination [26]. They state that all LP tools are interrelated and all create value for
customers.

Other scholars define LP from a technology perspective. MacBryde et al. describe LP as a

manufacturing process with zero waste, which means its main function is to eliminate all
waste from the value stream [27]. Shah and Ward believe that the key to LP is to identify and
remove all waste from the production flow [28]. Moreover, waste elimination is not limited to
a particular company, but should include the entire supply network.

Overall, scholars define LP as a method for waste elimination that uses lean tools to reduce
costs, improve quality, and ensure timely delivery. Furthermore, an authoritative website in
the United States (www.leanproduction.com) comprehensively summarizes 25 types of lean
tools. However, as indicated by Pavnaskar and Gershenson, there are many overlapping parts
among lean tools, making it difficult to define a scope for each [29]. However, these tools
achieve the objectives of LP. Therefore, the combination of LP objectives and tools could
help define LP more comprehensively and precisely. The LP objectives was described as
quality, cost and delivery (QCD), while the tools will also be described in detail in GELPM
in figure 12.

For the purposes of this study, we analyze the status of LP in China. Chinese enterprises have
been implementing LP for about 30 years. However, the status of LP within enterprises is not
ideal [30]. There still exists great potential for LP practice among Chinese companies. Taj
and Morosan indicated that Chinese enterprises focus more on product quality, overlooking
other areas of LP [31]. Other developing countries face similar challenges. For example,
Bhamu et al. point out that a poor basis, despite having expert guidance, means the
development of LP in India still has a long way to go [32].

The unsatisfactory application of LP in China is a consequence of numerous factors [33],

including a poor basis for industrialization, backward consultation service, and low employee
quality. Here, two aspects should not be ignored. First, enterprises lack a comprehensive
analysis of LP implementation, especially the interaction and synergistic effects among
manufacturing cells and processes. The result is a partial focus on LP performance. Second,
enterprises lack an effective scientific evaluation methodology for LP implementations,
making it difficult to ensure good results and to identify a correct development direction.

Some LP tools and methods can progress quickly, but a separate application cannot create a
systematic impetus in an enterprise. Even if it achieves results in some manufacturing sectors,
there is no culture of total involvement, in which case an enterprise cannot be considered as
lean. In conclusion, partial LP cannot combine perfectly with EM. Consequently, as a
preventive measure, we do not partially assess the outcomes of LP, and instead, determine an
approach to comprehensively analyze the results of LP and EM.
Lean and green

The term lean and green was first proposed by Larson and Greenwood [34]. They described
lean and green as a “parallel world,” and suggested that the relationship between the two was
more than a simple synergy. In lean and green research, LP has a relatively long history of
development and a comparatively mature system. Especially in developed countries, LP is
applied extensively and achieves good results. Therefore, scholars first found previously
undiscovered environmental impacts of LP. For example, Maxwell and Schenck found that
LP had both positive and negative effects on the environment. Such an impact had always
existed, but remained undiscovered [35]. Scholars believed that because LP can eliminate
waste using preventive measures, it would both reduce environmental pollution and reduce
costs [36-38].

Lean and green is an emerging field, many scholars had lucubrated on the relationship
between lean and green in empirical studies and literature reviews. Through a comprehensive
literature analysis, Dues and Tan proved that the overlap between LP and EM was waste
reduction, while some parts could not be combined, such as energy consumption and
management scope [39]. King and Lenox selected 17,499 enterprises from the EPA toxic
substances list in the United States and their data analysis indicated that the better an
enterprise conducts LP, the easier they find it to build a formal EM system [40]. Yang and
Hong proved that LP was positively related to EM practices in a data analysis of 309
manufacturing enterprises [41].

There are fewer cases of lean and green applications. Scholars widely acknowledge that LP
can boost the establishment and processing of an EM system, but there is no conclusive
method to help an enterprise be both lean and green. Simons and Mason improved the classic
LP tool value stream mapping (VSM), which added CO2 emissions as a sustainable VSM in
order to analyze the energy consumption status [42]. Diaz-Elsayed and Jondral established a
compromised lean and green model to estimate the synergistic effects of LP and EM in
enterprises [43]. Pampanelli et al. established an EM model based on the basic LP process
[44]. They merged the lean concept with environment sustainability to increase the utilization
of natural resources and reduce the environment load.

In conclusion, existing research on developed countries focuses mainly on EM system

construction under a perfect LP system. Their main objective is to increase EP using LP tools.
However, this objective can only be achieved under certain circumstances, such as production
stability, a leanness degree exceeding 80%, and an enterprise that can already use LP tools
[44,45]. However, the degree of LP in developing countries is not high, and many enterprises
face challenges such as significant factory waste. At the same time, these enterprises face the
same (or sometimes worse) environmental pressure [46]. Therefore, reducing the
environmental load while saving costs is an urgent goal for firms in developing countries [47].
However, existing theories and methods do not resolve the problem of how to be lean and
green in low LP (or no LP) enterprises. Few scholars focus on the LP implementation process.
Therefore, this paper tried to answer the following questions. First, how to implement lean
and green in the enterprises with low lean degree? Second, does this approach contribute to
the existing research in developed countries? Third, is there a significant amount of resources
required to implement lean and green in enterprises in developing countries?

Using a comprehensive analysis of enterprises in developing countries (especially in China),

we believe that a complete implementation of LP is a matter of urgency. EM is certainly
important, but is more suitable as an influential factor in the LP processes of Chinese
enterprises. Consequently, enterprise benefits can be maximized and environmental damage
can be minimized.

Research methodology
In order to respond to the aforementioned academic questions, the case study methodology is
especially suitable for three reasons. First, this method is suitable to explore how firms can
enhance their performance through lean and green deployments in developing countries [48].
Second, our work is an exploratory study. The lean and green process is connected to the
internal and external environment of a firm. Accordingly, the qualitative approach is
appropriate [49]. Third, we use the case study to construct a theoretical model and a
systematic framework in an inductive manner using both qualitative and quantitative data.
Furthermore, it can help us develop practical and theoretical insights in our research [50,51].

According to Voss et al., focusing on fewer cases means a deeper observation can be
obtained [52]. Furthermore, we searched for companies with the following criteria: a
relatively complete production process; usage of poisonous chemicals in the production
process; a certain amount of waste generated in the production process; a strong willingness
to improve the entire production process by the company leadership; and a certain level of
capital reserves to fund the improvement.

We finally selected J as the pilot plant. It is a large dairy enterprise with a long history.
Owing to fierce industrial competition, the company needed additional investment in
equipment and resources, not only to improve the quality of their product, but also to meet
the requirements of environmental laws. In addition, in order to wash the pipeline,
fermentation tanks, reactors, and other equipment, the production process requires large
amounts of chemicals, such as acids and alkalis, most of which are toxic. Corporates spend a
significant amount of money on storing and managing these chemicals, especially during this
important period of environmental protection. At the same time, the scope for growth in the
price of dairy products is very small, which means the corporate sector faces significant
challenges in terms of profit. Therefore, there is a strong willingness to improve and to invest
in improvements.

Since direct data are most reliable, we conducted a two-year in-depth business improvement
project in J. First, we discussed determining a general policy with the top-level management,
including a fair reward and penalty system, initial investment, and prospective earnings.
Because we are a lean production consulting team, we introduced lean improvement at the
beginning of the project. In particular, we used lean tools that could provide quick results for
the company, such as 5S, morning conferences, training, and publicity, in order to gain their
trust. In addition, these measures ensure communication with staff and increase their
enthusiasm for being involved in the project, which is a foundation for the success of any
project. An important aspect was to ensure that all employees understood the concept of LP
and the system of rewards and penalties. Then, we encouraged them to identify problems and
report these to us timeously through a proposal awards program, which provides material and
spiritual rewards to employees who raise problems. Consequently, all levels of management
and junior staff had confidence in what we were doing, and became comfortable in sharing
their experiences with us and making reasonable suggestions. Then, we interviewed almost
the entire staff during the project, which provided us with a clear understanding of the
company status and production process. Thus, we could verify, and even enrich the
information obtained through internal files and the company intranet.

A structured–pragmatic–situational (SPS) approach [53] was used to collect data from four
sources. First, we interviewed the managers of J, including five department managers, and
two general managers. Second, we read the company documents (both paper and electronic)
on operations management, financial statements, environment files, and so on. Third, we
carried out a field survey of the entire production region to observe the production process
and identify concerns, if any. Lastly, we interacted with the workers on the production line
and helped them complete the forms for the rationalization proposal and one-point lesson.
Eventually, all forms were submitted to us as direct information.

Theoretic framework

To answer the research questions of this paper, we proposed the analytical framework shown
in Fig.1. The lean and green model was targeted at companies with lower lean levels and tried
to make it effective without increasing the input. Moreover, the model for a company must be
consistent with its surroundings (both internal and external).

Therefore, our objective is to propose a new model, the GELPM, that matches the current
economic and environmental situation in developing countries. Based on the LP
implementation, in which environmental factors are embedded, the GELPM attempts to
balance the economy and the environment. In order to support the operation of the GELPM,
we focus on three aspects in the case study: establishing an integral process, integrated tools,
and evaluation metrics. At the same time, we identify operational thinking that can promote
both LP and environmental consciousness, as well as resolve any conflicts between the two.

Fig.1 Analysis Framework

Case Study
The case study commenced with the following research hypotheses, based on the literature
review:

(1) Does lean improvement have a positive effect on the environmental load reduction?

(2) Does environmental improvement have a positive effect on cost reduction and time
compression?

(3) Is there a conflict between LP and environment management?

(4) Can our GELPM make an enterprise both lean and green?

We need to implement this project carefully in order to cover all four hypotheses.
Note that the case study does not involve animal or human trials, and we have obtained the
agreement of the ethics committee to proceed with the study.

Data collection and current situation investigation

First, we need to determine the overall production process from a field investigation and with
the help of engineers (see Fig.2). It is evident from Fig.2 that most processes have physical
inputs and outputs, such as raw materials, additives, and cleaning agents. In order to
comprehensively analyze the process waste, a VSM was drawn to determine the processes
that generate the maximum waste (Fig.3).

Fig.2 Production Process in J

Fig.3 Existing Value Stream Mapping of J

We considered the smallest unit in the final product warehouse (a bale of yogurt; 24 bottles)
as the processing time standard (unless otherwise specified, the remainder of this paper uses
this as a criterion in the calculations). As shown in Table 1 and Fig.5, the proportion of the
value-added process is nearly 60%, and the most time-consuming non-value-added process is
equipment cleaning.

At the same time, in order to evaluate the environmental cost and performance more precisely,
we employ material flow cost accounting (MFCA). MFCA is a method of revenue and
expenditure accounting for EM, and was proposed by Katsuhiko [54]. It is an accounting
approach for estimating the output-input ratio and material flow using physical and monetary
units, and is the main method of internal environmental accounting. The principle of MFCA
is to divide a product into a positive product (PP) and a negative product (NP), and then to
calculate their relative proportions based on their quality. Then, the cost is distributed
proportionately to identify the waste value in the processes.

In MFCA, costs include the following:

MC (Material Cost): Includes not only the main material input at the beginning of the process,
but also auxiliary material, such as cleaning agents, solvents, and the catalytic agent input
during the process.

EC (Energy Cost): Includes electricity, fuel, etc.

SC (System Cost): Processing fees such as depreciation of machinery and maintenance costs.

HC (Human Cost): Includes wages of workers on the production line and administration cost
apportionment.
These costs are distributed according to the mass proportion of raw materials, final product,
and waste. Thus, the waste value in the production process can be shown directly. Based on
this theory, we improved the original VSM to create a material-value stream mapping
(MVSM), which reflects time and material waste (measured by weight) (see Fig.4). In
addition, the improvement results are evident visually by comparing the waste weight
reduction before and after the improvement.

Fig.4 Material-Value Stream Mapping (MVSM) of J

Table 2 illustrates the following cost distribution of each bale of yogurt:

( )

( )

( ) ( )
( ) ( )
where WP, WN, and WT represent the weights of the positive product, negative product,
and total input, respectively. Then, PP% and NP% are the proportions of positive products
and negative products, respectively, and CPP, CNP are the costs of the positive product and
negative product, respectively. Lastly, CR, CA, CE, CS, and CH denote raw material costs,
accessory costs, energy costs, system costs, and human costs, respectively.

Based on equations (1)-(4) and the costs shown in Table 2, we calculate that WT = 40 kg, WP
= 25.3 kg, PP% = 63.3%, and CNP = 76 yuan. Other costs are shown in Table 2. The daily
production was 30 t. Therefore, we deduce that the negative product cost was 95,000 yuan
per day.

Improvement plan
First, our site observation revealed some obvious waste, such as yogurt spilt during the filling
procedure, discarded plastic film used to bundle bottles, and defective products. At the same
time, according to the information reflected in MVSM, the largest non-value-added step was
the initial preparation time, namely equipment cleaning. In order to analyze the equipment
cleaning process, we develop a separate MVSM for cleaning (see Fig.5).

Fig.5 Material-Value Stream Mapping (MVSM) of Equipment Cleaning

Because each batch of taste needs different additives and food safety provisions, each tank
requires four hours of cleaning after a batch of yogurt production. In this step, a large amount
of water, alkalis, and acids are consumed. Moreover, the cleaning agents are all discharged
last. This increases costs, but also pollutes the environment.

After an in-depth interview with an experienced engineer and with line workers, we analyzed
the problems in the production process, as well as their causes (see Table 3).

The causes of these problems are analyzed using a fishbone diagram [55], showing the
following five aspects: people, machines, materials, methods, and the environment (see
Figs.6–9).

Fig.6 Spilt yogurt Cause Analysis

Fig.7 Cleaning Problem Cause Analysis

Fig.8 Defective Products Cause Analysis

Fig.9 Waste of Plastic Film Cause Analysis

In the filling procedure, a mass of bubbles is generated because of the long distance between
the filling mouth and the base. At the same time, the entire filling process needs air isolation,
which means the bubbles cannot be removed by shaking the container. In order to ensure the
same net weight of every bottle, it is necessary to maintain a slow filling speed and fill more
yogurt to exhaust the bubbles. This method wastes yogurt (production), but also pollutes the
equipment, increasing the cleaning frequency, and eventually increasing the consumption of
water, acids, and alkalis.

Cleaning is a necessary process before production, the steps of which are shown in Fig.8. All
sewage is discharged, while the acids and alkalis are discharged into special recovery tanks.
Owing to a design problem in the equipment and pipeline, staff are required to enter the milk
containers for cleaning, which could jeopardize their safety. In addition, continuous flushing
results in unrecyclable sewage and waste chemical reagents, eventually increasing the
environmental burden. An even more serious challenge is that constant cleaning could lead to
increased microorganisms, resulting in defective products and waste.

There were two main reasons for defective products: unqualified microbiological detection
and the incorrect addition of accessories. From our field observations, in addition to the
constant cleaning, bottles exposed to air were another cause of pollution. Different packing,
no obvious identification, and a lack of staff training were the main reasons for the latter
reason. Thus, all defective products with the incorrect accessory would not be detected until
an on-site inspection after filling. In this phase, recycling is no longer feasible.
Non-degradable and unrecyclable materials should not be used because of their harm to the
environment. To facilitate hauling, a plastic film is used to pack bottles and to quadruplicate
the bale packaging, which is non-degradable, and can be discarded by the distributors.
However, because of the low cost of the plastic film, enterprises had never attached
importance to this waste. Moreover, most plastic film was disposed of in the landfill, which
incurs an extra expense and causes irreparable damage to the environment.

Based on these analyses, we prepared the following preliminary improvement plan (see Table
4).

Process improvement
To obtain the support and initial investment from the top-level management, we arranged
improvement steps according to the amount of the investment. Furthermore, we collected
several rationalization proposals from the staff, obtaining valuable suggestions. Therefore, we
conducted the improvement in a holistic way.

Water recycling
The company produces about 300 t of heavy water per day because equipment cleaning needs
pure water, which makes up 70% of tap water. This heavy water is useless and is discharged
directly. Other cleaning processes do not require high quality water, such as car washing and
watering the plant to eliminate dust. Therefore, by installing pipes for recycling, we made full
use of this heavy water. We even recycled the sewage after car washing to flush the toilets.
Thus, we saved on water costs for J and reduced their consumption of water.

Electrical energy saving

We posted starting rules for air conditioners (only start when the temperature is higher than
27 °C in summer and lower than 20 °C in winter) and signs asking that lights be switched off
when leaving the plant. Then, we found that the ventilator in the storeroom did not need to
remain on for the entire day. However, there was no explicit instruction or automatic switch.
After repeated experiments, we set the downtime to one hour per two hours during the day,
and two hours per hour at night. Furthermore, we suggested J replace their lighting equipment
with LED lighting to increase the service life and to save electrical energy.

Accessory adding standardization

We first implemented 5S and visual management in the accessory area. Accessories are
classified according to the final product and are labeled with unified serial numbers. All
logistics personnel related to receiving and delivering accessories undergo centralized
training. Several operators were selected to classify and label accessories when delivered by
suppliers. They also helped other operators to select the correct accessories after verifying the
material requisition. In addition, the group leader must confirm that accessories have been
before implementation. Eventually, errors when adding accessories were eliminated, which
saved the company more than 1.3 million RMB yuan per year.

On this basis, the new operation standard was enacted. All operators must wear gloves when
unpacking bottles. Disinfection procedures were added after unpacking. The parts of the
transport channel exposed to air were sealed with a transparent PVC box. These initiatives
reduced microorganisms and increased the product yield. No costs were incurred
implementing these improvements.

Cleaning procedure redesign

First, we held discussions with experienced engineers and operators, and then decided on a
standard procedure and dosage for cleaning. According to these standards, work instructions
were created and posted at every process node. After a period of training and practice, we
collected suggestions, via brainstorming sessions, on how to increase the cleaning efficiency
of staff. Through repeated experimental investigation, four steps for improvement were
identified: 1) before flushing with water, push residual yogurt out with compressed air, which
can be done repeatedly and does not cause pollution; 2) one minute of flushing can push the
acid and alkali remaining in the pipeline back to the storage tanks, without affecting the
solution concentration; 3) automatic cleaning equipment was designed and produced to
automatically spray water from top to bottom, which avoided manual cleaning and reduced
operational risk; and 4) the cleaning method changed so that flushing occurs intermittently
rather than continuously. Then, the automatic sprinkling intensity was increased to raise the
cleaning efficiency. After the practical inspection and data collection, the new cleaning
method proved to be efficient, in terms of reducing both the cleaning agent (water, acid, and
alkali) and the microbial pollution resulting from bad cleaning. For clarity, the MVSM of the
cleaning procedure is shown in Fig.10.
Fig.10 Improved VSM of Equipment Cleaning

Solution to spilt yogurt

For spilt yogurt, we first changed the fixture size to eliminate the waggle in transit. Next, we
found that bubbles did not appear until the filling volume exceeded 70%. Therefore, another
line of filling mouths was added to divide the filling procedure into two parts. The filling
volume of each step was set to 50%, with a three second standing time between the steps.
After practicing for two months, almost no bubbles were generated. Moreover, the net
content of each bottle of yogurt had been controlled effectively.
Elimination of the plastic film

The plastic film helps to facilitate handling and is relatively inexpensive. Therefore,
eliminating it required an investment and the cooperation of suppliers and distributors.
Fortunately, owing to the previous improvements, the cost savings secured the trust of the top
management. A recyclable plastic box replaced the plastic film for packing bottles. On
delivery, the suppliers would return the plastic boxes used previously to achieve cyclic
utilization. In the packing step, quadruplicate and bale packaging were removed and plastic
trays were used to place the product. The product amount did not change (24 bottles) and
were placed on trays manually (four bottles at a time). Once again, distributers returned the
trays used during the previous delivery.

Evaluation and continuous improvement

The improved MVSMs of J after completing all the improvements is shown in Fig.11. Owing
to the reduction in the cleaning agent used and the elimination of the plastic film, accessory
costs were reduced. Process standardization reduced the level of equipment wear, the cost of
which was too small to be reflected in the system cost. The LED lighting and downtime
setting for the ventilator in the storeroom saved energy costs, part of which were offset by
jidoka. Finally, two staff members were removed because of the automatic cleaning, reducing
the human cost as well.

Fig.11 Improved Material-Value Stream Mapping (MVSM) of J

The cost calculations are the same as those in equations (1)-(4). The improved cost
distributions per bale of yogurt are shown in Table 5. Here, WT1 = 38.8 kg, WP1 = 30.4 kg, PP%
= 78.4%, and CNP = 45 yuan. Therefore, the negative product cost was reduced to 56,250
yuan per day.

Then, the time taken up by non-value-added procedures was also reduced (see Table 6). The
total operation time was reduced by 105.8 minutes, and the proportion of value-added
procedures increased to 68.1%.

The investment in this two-year project was about 6.8 million RMB yuan, comprising mainly
equipment and consulting fees. The total cost saving was 14.1 million RMB yuan per year, or
about twice the investment. Moreover, this cost saving could be maintained going forward. In
addition, the yogurt quality improved significantly and employee satisfaction increased.
Finally, the environmental burden of J decreased significantly (detailed benefits are shown in
Table 7).
Before the end of the project, we helped business managers develop the company’s medium-
term and long-term plans. We also developed a series of institutions to discover and solve
problems, and to collect proposals each month. Finally, the system of regular visits and
information exchange between suppliers and distributors was enacted to encourage mutual
cooperation throughout the supply chain. Thus, continual improvement was ensured.

Discussion
The inductive model is shown in Fig. 12, which encapsulates the entire process of J
promoting its lean and green transformation. The structured GELPM shows that the firm
executed the change according to the Deming Circle to achieve the lean and green
transformation and to enhance its level of competitiveness.

Fig.12 GELPM and Framework in Developing Countries

All four hypotheses mentioned earlier were well represented in the case study. At the same
time, they revealed new operational perspectives and tools that are worth considering.

Hypothesis 1: All four improvement steps demonstrated the positive link between LP and EM.
Although it has been neglected, LP can significantly reduce a company’s environmental
impact, mainly in terms of energy and resource savings. Therefore, emphasizing LP can
reduce the environmental burden.

Hypothesis 2: The green improvement in water reuse and electricity conservation can reduce
costs. However, in eliminating the plastic film, the non-recurring investment in plastic trays
and can be recovered within 1.5 years. This also reduced the consumption of materials and
non-biodegradable emissions. Therefore, environmental improvement has a positive effect on
business cost reduction in the long run. Furthermore, steps for improvements should be
arranged according to the investment required to facilitate the initial investment by the top
management.

Hypothesis 3: In the cleaning procedure redesign, the automatic cleaning equipment needed
investment and the more complex time setting increased the task difficulty. In the short term,
there is a conflict between LP and EM. However, considering environmental pollution,
personal risk, and product quality, green thinking could be equal to lean thinking, and both
could serve enterprise competitiveness. Therefore, treating the production process holistically
and evaluating the overall results as a criterion is vital to lean and green improvements. The
evaluation criterion should include both environmental and lean objectives.
Hypothesis 4: The lean and green improvements reduced the cost, time consumption, and
environmental load. In conclusion, our GELPM is capable of making an enterprise both lean
and green.

Conclusion
We devised a lean and green deployment system, considering companies’ needs for survival
and short-term profitability in developing countries. Ultimately, this study provides several
significant theoretical contributions. First, we developed a case study undertaking empirical
research on lean and green practices, as well as on the structure of the lean and green
implementation process. Second, we propose a well-configured systematic framework, the
GELPM, which is adapted to manufacturing firms in developing countries. By contemplating
and appraising the composition of firms’ interests in developing countries, we accommodate
the existing relationships between lean and green to redesign their connection according to
the new setting. Hence, our study unlocks the “black box” of how lean and green should be
deployed in developing countries. Third, our scenario-driven lean and green model derived
and refined from a real-world case not only testifies to the substantial difference of promoting
lean and green between developed and developing countries, but also validates the positive
effect of green on lean. Additionally, we contribute to theoretical knowledge in other aspects.
For instance, we develop novel operational principles such as the holistic perspective, tools
such as MVSM, and performance appraisal metrics to facilitate the lean and green
implementation.

In terms of practical implications, the efficacy of our study for green-concerned

manufacturing firms in developing countries has been confirmed. A few ways in which J
implements lean and green are radically innovative. To an extent, this highlights one of the
principle presuppositions of the current study that the success of lean and green is not reliant
on technical superiority and maturity, but rather on the combination of the two. Therefore, we
anticipate that the efforts and resources on lean and green implementations presented here
can be utilized as a roadmap to assist other enterprises in similar scenarios.

Although this study attempted to conduct an exhaustive examination of lean and green for
firms in developing countries, there is still some scope for research. For instance, we did not
consider the impact of enterprise and country cultures on the configuration of the theoretical
framework and process. We will investigate the influence of these similar factors in future.
Furthermore, one may extend the firm-level scope of the proposed GELDS to supply chain
scenarios to consider the effects of system agents’ collaboration and cooperation on lean and
green activities.

References
1. Pagell M, Gobeli D (2009) How Plant Managers' Experiences and Attitudes Toward Sustainability
Relate to Operational Performance. Production & Operations Management 18: 278–299.
2. Liu X, Liu B, Shishime T, Yu Q, Bi J, et al. (2010) An empirical study on the driving mechanism
of proactive corporate environmental management in China. Journal of Environmental
Management 91: 1707-1717.
3. De Treville S, Antonakis J (2006) Could lean production job design be intrinsically motivating?
Contextual, configurational, and levels-of-analysis issues. Journal of Operations Management 24:
99-123.
4. Bergmiller GG, McCright PR (2009) Are Lean and Green Programs Synergistic? The 2009
industrial engineering research conference. pp. 1-6.
5. Miller G, Pawloski J, Standridge CR (2010) A case study of lean, sustainable manufacturing.
Journal of industrial engineering and management 3: 11-32.
6. Bowen FE, Cousins PD, Lamming RC, Farukt AC (2001) The role of supply management
capabilities in green supply. Production and operations management 10: 174-189.
7. Delmas M (2004) Erratum to “Stakeholders and competitive Advantage: The case of ISO 14001”.
Production and operations management 13: 398-398.
8. King AA, Lenox MJ (2001) Lean and green? An empirical examination of the relationship between
lean production and environmental performance. Production and operations management 10:
244-256.
9. Kleindorfer PR, Singhal K, Wassenhove LN (2005) Sustainable operations management.
Production and operations management 14: 482-492.
10. Gary G. Bergmiller PRM. Are Lean and Green Programs Synergistic?; 2009.
11. Longoni A (2014) Sustainable Operations Strategies. Springer International Publishing.
12. Tilman D, Cassman KG, Matson PA, Naylor R, Polasky S (2002) Agricultural sustainability and
intensive production practices. Nature 418: 671-677.
13. Kemmler A, Spreng D (2007) Energy indicators for tracking sustainability in developing countries.
Energy Policy 35: 2466-2480.
14. Hutchins MJ, Sutherland JW (2008) An exploration of measures of social sustainability and their
application to supply chain decisions. Journal of Cleaner Production 16: 1688–1698.
15. Docherty P, Kira M, Shani ABR (2009) Sustainable work systems: past, present and future of
social sustainability. In: Docherty P, Kira M, Shani ABR, editors. Creating sustainable work
systems developing social sustainability. Second ed. London and New York: Routledge Taylor &
Francis Group. pp. 268-289.
16. Lacy P, Cooper T, Hayward R, Neuberger L (2010) A new era of sustainability: UN Global
Compact-Accenture CEO Study 2010.
17. Lober D (1996) Evaluating the environmental performance of corporations. The Journal of
Managerial Issues 8: 184-205.
18. Jeurissen, Ronald (2000) Cannibals With Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business.
Journal of Business Ethics 23: 229-231.
19. Ilinitch AY, Soderstrom NS (1998) Measuring corporate environmental performance. Journal of
Accounting and Public Policy 17: 383-408.
20. Cagno E, Trucco P, Tardini L (2005) Cleaner production and profitability: analysis of 134
industrial pollution prevention (P2) project reports. Journal of Cleaner Production 13: 593-605.
21. Moss LR (2008) Local governments reduce costs through pollution prevention. Journal of Cleaner
Production 16: 704-708.
22. Sanchez-Medina AJ, Romero-Quintero L, Sosa-Cabrera S (2014) Environmental Management in
Small and Medium-Sized Companies: An Analysis from the Perspective of the Theory of
Planned Behavior. Plos One 9.
23. Mi Dahlgaard-Park S, Pettersen J (2009) Defining lean production: some conceptual and practical
issues. The TQM Journal 21: 127-142.
24. Comm CL, Mathaisel DF (2000) A paradigm for benchmarking lean initiatives for quality
improvement. Benchmarking: An International Journal 7: 118-128.
25. Liker JK, Wu Y-C (2006) Japanese automakers, US suppliers and supply chain superiority.
Supply Chains and Total Product Systems: A Reader: 177-196.
26. Shah R, Ward PT (2003) Lean manufacturing: context, practice bundles, and performance. Journal
of operations management 21: 129-149.
27. MacBryde J, Radnor Z, Taj S, Berro L (2006) Application of constrained management and lean
manufacturing in developing best practices for productivity improvement in an auto-assembly
plant. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 55: 332-345.
28. Shah R, Ward PT (2007) Defining and developing measures of lean production. Journal of
Operations Management 25: 785-805.
29. Pavnaskar S, Gershenson J, Jambekar A (2003) Classification scheme for lean manufacturing
tools. International Journal of Production Research 41: 3075-3090.
30. Zhang H, Niu Z (2013) A Systematic Appraisal of Lean Management Implementation Based on
ANP and SPA. Industrial Engineering Journal 16: 97-103.
31. Taj S, Morosan C (2011) The impact of lean operations on the Chinese manufacturing
performance. Journal of manufacturing technology management 22: 223-240.
32. Bhamu J, Shailendra Kumar J, Sangwan KS (2012) Productivity and quality improvement through
value stream mapping: a case study of Indian automotive industry. International Journal of
Productivity and Quality Management 10: 288-306.
33. Qi E, Zhang H (2008) Enterprise's Lean Culture Construction. Science of Science and
Management of S& T 12: 133-136.
34. Larson T, Greenwood R (2004) Perfect complements: Synergies between lean production and
eco‐sustainability initiatives. Environmental Quality Management 13: 27-36.
35. Maxwell J RS, Schenck B (1993) Does lean mean green: the implications of lean production for
environmental management. International Motor Vehicle Program MIT.
36. Klassen RD (2000) Just-in-Time Manufacturing and Pollution Prevention Generate Mutual
Benefits in the Furniture Industry. Interfaces 30: 95-106.
37. Pojasek RB (1999) Quality Toolbox Poka-Yoke and Zero Waste. Environmental Quality
Management 9: 91-98.
38. Rothenberg S, Pil FK, Maxwell J (2001) Lean, green, and the quest for superior environmental
performance. Production and operations management 10: 228-243.
39. Dues CM, Tan KH, Lim M (2013) Green as the new Lean: how to use Lean practices as a catalyst
to greening your supply chain. Journal of Cleaner Production 40: 93-100.
40. King AA, Lenox, M.J. (2001) Lean and green? An empirical examination of the relationship
between lean production and environmental performance. Production and Operations
Management 10: 244-256.
41. Yang MG, Hong P, Modi SB (2011) Impact of lean manufacturing and environmental
management on business performance: An empirical study of manufacturing firms. International
Journal of Production Economics 129: 251-261.
42. Mason Sa (2003) lean and green: doing more with less. ECR Journal 3: 84-91.
43. Diaz-Elsayed N, Jondral A, Greinacher S, Dornfeld D, Lanza G (2013) Assessment of lean and
green strategies by simulation of manufacturing systems in discrete production environments.
Cirp Annals-Manufacturing Technology 62: 475-478.
44. Pampanelli AB, Found P, Bernardes AM (2014) A Lean & Green Model for a production cell.
Journal of Cleaner Production 85: 19-30.
45. Galeazzo A, Furlan A (2013) Lean and green in action: interdependencies and performance of
pollution prevention projects. Journal of Cleaner Production: 1-10.
46. Nghiem LTP, Soliman T, Yeo DCJ, Tan HTW, Evans TA, et al. (2013) Economic and
Environmental Impacts of Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in Southeast Asia. Plos One 8.
47. Ojaveer H, Eero M (2011) Methodological Challenges in Assessing the Environmental Status of a
Marine Ecosystem: Case Study of the Baltic Sea. Plos One 6.
48. Yin RK (2013) Case study research: Design and methods: Sage publications.
49. Klein HK, Myers MD (1999) A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field
studies in information systems. MIS quarterly: 67-93.
50. Eisenhardt KM, Graebner ME (2007) Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges.
Academy of management journal 50: 25-32.
51. Yin RK (1994) Case study research: Design and methods (Applied Social Research Methods).
Sage publications.
52. Voss C, Tsikriktsis N, Frohlich M (2002) Case research in operations management. International
journal of operations & production management 22: 195-219.
53. Pan SL, Tan B (2011) Demystifying case research: A structured–pragmatic–situational (SPS)
approach to conducting case studies. Information and Organization 21: 161-176.
54. Katsuhiko K (2000) The Concept of Effects in Environmental Accounting. Journal of economics
and business administration 182: 63-80.
55. Haga H, Fukushima N (2011) Historical consideration of the widespread infection of the hepatitis
C virus in Japan and use of a fishbone diagram to investigate the cause. Yakushigaku Zasshi the
Journal of Japanese History of Pharmacy 46: 21-28.
 Table 1 Time consumption for the overall process
Value-added Non-value-added Proportion of value-
Total time Transport process
process process added process
891.5 min 533.5 min 273.5 min 84.5 min 59.8%
 Table 2 Cost distribution of each bale of yogurt
Raw material cost Accessory
Energy System Human
(Milk powder & cost Total
cost cost cost
bottles) (Others)
Total 151.2 37.1 6.4 1.5 12.4 208.6
Positive
95.7 23.5 4.2 1 8.2 132.6
Products
Negative
55.5 13.6 2.2 0.5 4.2 76
Products
Note: Each cost was calculated by the proportion of each bale of yogurt to the daily output, and used
RMB yuan as the unit.
 Table 3 Problems in the processes
Problems Position Waste and negative effects
Waste of raw material and accessories; Reduction in
Spilt yogurt Filling procedure
PP%; Equipment pollution; Greater cleaning burden
Waste of water, acid, and alkali; Increase in cost of
Equipment in production professional recycling; Safety of staff in cleaning
Cleaning
process procedure; Environmental pollution; Increase in time
consumption in non-value-added step
Every process node, such as Waste of raw material, accessories, and packing
Defective
accessory mixing, code- material; Reduction in PP%; Reduction in customer
products
spurting, etc. satisfaction
Bottle unpacking,
Discarded Waste of plastic film; Increase in non-biodegradable
quadruplicate packaging, and
plastic film waste; Greater environmental burden
bale packing
 Table 4 Preliminary plan for improvement
Processes Improvement plan Method
Fixture modification; Filling speed reduction; Adding Mold replacement; Procedure
Spilt yogurt
standing time for bubble elimination redesign; Design of experiment
Automation element design for self-cleaning;
Cleaning method change for recycling acid and
Standardization; Automation; 5S;
Cleaning alkalis; Pipeline change for circular cleaning; 5S
Procedure redesign
standardization strengthening; Work environment
improvement
Standardized nameplate in accessory storage area;
Defective Checking routine setting; Pre-job training for all Visual management;
products staffs; Disinfection after bottles unpacking; Closed Standardization; Process design
system of pipes design; Unified inspection standard
Contact with suppliers to change to recyclable
Discarded Supply chain management;
packages and realize cycle use; Design recyclable
plastic film Procedure redesign; Greenization
baskets for quadruplicate and bale packaging
 Table 5 Improved cost distribution of each bale of yogurt
Raw material cost Accessory
Energy System Human
(Milk powder & cost Total
cost cost cost
bottles) (Others)
Total 151.2 36.9 6.3 1.4 11.9 207.7
Positive
118.5 28.9 4.9 1.1 9.3 162.7
Products
Negative
32.7 8 1.4 0.3 2.6 45
Products
Note: Each cost was calculated by the proportion of each bale of yogurt to the daily output, and used
RMB yuan as the unit.
 Table 6 Improved time consumption for the overall process
Value-added Non-value-added Proportion of value-
Total time Transport process
process process added process
785.7 min 534.7 min 166.5 min 84.5 min 68.1%
 Table 7 Improvement benefits
Benefits
Process Material Energy Pollution Quality Cost Delivery
saving saving reduction improvement reduction (time)
Water recycling + + +
Electricity saving + + +
Accessory adding
+ + + + + +
standardization
Cleaning procedure
+ - + + + +
redesign
Solution to spilt
+ + - -
yogurt
Elimination of
+ + - +
plastic film
Note: “+” represents a positive effect; “-” represents a negative effect.