Editorial

Citation

Heap, T.B.a.J. (2014), "Editorial", International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 63 No. 5. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-04-2014-0061

Editorial

Article Type: Editorial From: International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Volume 63, Issue 5

It is now 40 years since the Toyota Production System (TPS) caught the attention of western management. The ubiquitous Peter Drucker is said to have drawn western management's attention to the system in his comments on Japanese management thinking in the early 1970s (Drucker, 1971), while early accounts of TPS were published a little later in western journals (e.g. Sugimori et al., 1977). The term “lean” was later attached to the ideas stemming from TPS and the use of “lean production” is first credited to Krafcik (1988). In TPS's now more general forms, such as lean manufacturing, lean production and lean thinking, lean has become the new orthodoxy. In this special issue we present a snap shot of where we are with respect to the practice of lean. We present seven papers, i.e. five standard and two reflective practice papers, which cover a diverse terrain. The issue covers traditional topics such as lean manufacturing and shows, that in some parts of the globe – for example, the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China), lean is still making new converts in manufacturing. But we also show that lean is colonising other territories, such as the service sector and the public sector, in both developed and emerging economies. As befits the mission of our journal some of the papers focus on the ongoing dilemma of how to measure the performance of lean. We also cover more recent developments where lean's longevity is enhanced by combination with other process improvement initiatives, such as six sigma. Finally we cover what might have been – and may still be – by reflecting on one of the so-far missed opportunities of lean.

In the first paper, Lucato, Calarge, Loureiro Júnior and Calado present the results of a survey of 51 manufacturing firms in the Sao Paulo area, a heavily industrialised part of Brazil. The survey was primarily to measure the extent of adoption of lean practice within the relevant firms in the area. Within their survey they find a wide variation between different firms, that multinational firms are more likely to be further down the lean road than national firms and some evidence that the automotive field still leads other sectors. One of the key aspects of the measurement approach they use is its anchoring back to standards and thus their method is one that is transferable to other regions and sectors and suitable for comparisons to be made.

Bateman, Hines and Davidson in the second paper show how lean principles developed in, and for, the manufacturing environment can be applied successfully to other types of environment – albeit with some “modest modifications” to the core principles of lean. They examine a public sector context, but a particularly intriguing one, in that their paper covers the application of lean to the logistics support of a fleet of front-line strike aircraft within the British Royal Air Force. In essence the contrast between their practical context and that of Toyota is quite striking. Public sector vs private; military vs civilian operations, and maintenance and service vs manufacturing are some of the distinctions that can be identified. What seems to come through is the robustness of the lean principles in the face of quite different environments from their origins in automotive production.

Once the management of a company has decided to implement lean then a key question they have to face is how to implement the philosophy. In the next paper the authors (Sangwan, Bhamu and Mehta) attempt to construct a rigorous causal model of the key “drivers” that can deliver success in implementation. Such a model, if constructed successfully, offers company management the knowledge that will support some effective decision-making. It gives them the ability to implement successfully while minimising the application of resources, i.e. the managers can make lean decisions to implement lean on their shop floor. The authors of our third paper build a model for an industry sector, in particular the Indian ceramics industry, by applying structural equation modelling (SEM) to data obtained from 67 companies. Their theoretical framework and analysis divides the drivers into three different groups: internal, external and (managerial) policy. The latter is significantly linked to the two other categories; external drivers are concluded to influence policy drivers which in turn influence the internal drivers. They put forward an implementation path that reflects the priorities that flow from the model. The authors indicate that the small sample of companies means that further validation with a larger sample would be useful; but notwithstanding this point they offer some beneficial advice to managers.

In the fourth paper Arif-Uz-Zaman and Ahsan focus on evaluating the performance of the supply side of a lean manufacturing supply chain using fuzzy numbers. A substantial review of the available metrics leads to the selection of a set of appropriate measures which are set within an evaluation method. They provide a case study drawn from the clothing industry to illustrate their approach which is based on the SCOR model; and which compares a lean supply chain situation with a non-lean situation.

This next paper covers a modern feature of lean; namely, its integration with other production improvement philosophies – in this case lean's integration with six sigma to form lean six sigma (LSS). In addition the paper covers another modern aspect of lean; namely, lean thinking's expansion in to fields other than manufacturing. Bhat, Gijo and Jnanesh present a case study where they describe the improvement of an Indian Hospital's registration process by the first-time use of LSS. Further aspects of this case study include its comprehensive coverage of the practical steps, which should inform the interested reader, plus the use of simulation to model the process that is the target of the improvement initiative. Finally, one of the key points to take away from the study is that it illustrates the key benefit of lean thinking; namely, the substantial improvement in performance of the lean process that accompanies a substantial reduction in waste.

The first of two reflective practice papers is a case study of Mujal Showal, an Indian manufacturer of shock absorbers. Amin, Atre, Vardia, and Sebastian show in the case study how the company, when awarded the contract for the manufacture of a key component previously manufactured in Japan, modified these previous manufacturing arrangements by using lean total productive maintenance (TPM) principles. This process entailed redesigning two operations that required separate machine tools such that the operations could be carried out on a single machine tool. However, the two previous machine tools were of standard designs that could be obtained on the open market at significant cost, while the replacement machine was designed and manufactured by the company at a low cost. The adherents of lean thinking will recognise this idea of making your own special-purpose machine tools as an important part of the Japanese attitude to lean. This case study shows why this idea is important.

In this final paper of the issue, Chaplin and O’Rourke reflect on a LSS improvement programme in a large UK manufacturing plant and focus in particular on critically evaluating the involvement, both actual and potential, of the marketing function. The starting point of their analysis is the recognition that current literature tends not to have a great deal to say about the involvement of marketing in lean practice. Despite the principle that the starting point of lean initiatives should be with the customer, lean programmes tend to be internally focussed on reducing manufacturing costs. More worrying still, the improvements that lean can bring to customer service and to aspects of the triple-bottom-line are rarely recognised outside of the operations area. In particular the authors identify a significant disconnect between the marketing function and the fruits of LSS; a gap that needs to be closed to ensure the wider gains of LSS and of lean thinking in general. The existence of such a gap relating to matters that clearly lie in the economic area does not bode well for the engagement of lean thinking with the more enlightened topic of sustainability. Surely this is a major challenge for the future of lean.

Tom Burgess and John Heap

References

Drucker, P.F. (1971), What we Can Learn from Japanese Management, Graduate school of business administration, Harvard University, Boston, MA

Krafcik, J.F. (1988), “Triumph of the lean production system”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 41-51

Sugimori, Y., Kusunoki, K., Cho, F. and Uchikawa, S. (1977), “Toyota production system and Kanban system materialization of just-in-time and respect-for-human system”, The International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 553-564