Análisis de necesidades educativas de superación

This chapter will be build-up by means of answering the following three questions; firstly, How do good and bad lean practices differently related to Employee Well-being?;

secondly, we look at our conceptual model and its hypotheses and answer; What are the relationships between the constructs: Perceived Lean Adoption, Relational Coordination, Leadership Behaviour, Employee Well-being and Job Performance? andthirdly, Which team leaders display effective lean leadership behaviour?”

7.1 Lean Practices; Good and Bad

How do good and bad lean practices differ in Employee Well-being? We see across the entire sample a wide variety of approaches to adopt the lean principles and implement it to their practices. Our observations, self-rated questionnaires and interviews show a divide in two general factions of lean practices, defined by their adoption.

7.1.1 Perceived Lean Adoption: bad. Firstly, the cause and countermeasures of all problems are not accurately identified through evidence-based methods of problem-solving, therefor reoccurring problems might not be entirely eradicated. Secondly, not all organisations use visual screens for process monitoring and poka-yoka systems to stop or interrupt the work processes. This may result in the primary work processes being found to be more important, or in other words, more “top of mind” and the lack of responsibility towards continuous improvement.“ But this is what I am hired to do here, improving our work processes is something extra that I am not getting paid extra for”. Thirdly, the lack of new innovative products being brought on the market through collaborating with a strategic partner. Almost no participating organisations report contemplated or being engaged with strategic partners working on the innovation of their products — finally, the lack of making thorough use of technology to collaborate with suppliers. There is a large gap in technological systems with these organisations that allow them to collaborate with suppliers. The two main underlying themes we see here are the lean systems; lack of evidence-based measures and solutions, inadequate system monitoring and visual management and the use of lean partnerships: too little synergetic relationships with partners making use of the available technological innovations available.

From the study 3, we found that the variety upon which employees were learning about innovations on the work floor highly differ between organisations. At the organisations that had adequate recording systems in place team members reported to “know where to look, but not really check the system regularly, or at all”, as many improvements would become

apparent if a colleague or team leader would point them out upon arrival. Furthermore, in the companies where we saw the lack of physical visual management (e.g. kaizen overview, improvement or A3 sheets displayed for the rest of the department to see), the team members reported to “feel less valued” or “no appropriately seen and rewarded by top management for their efforts”. This suggests a direct tie to the Employee Well-being, in which an employee that feels valued for its input reflects that back upon its overall perception of the workplace and its leadership. This ultimately results in decreasing interest or participation in continuous improvement initiatives or endorse other team members endeavours.

7.1.2 Perceived Lean Adoption: good In organisations further advanced in their Lean Practices, clear systems are in place that gives structure to the workplace and the work processes. This can be seen in the use of visual screens for process monitoring and poka-yoka systems. The workers have integrated continuous improvement in their daily routines and all individually lean minded ambassadors of their work strategies and with that the lean paradigm. This show by their responsible attitude towards continuous improvement and their work processes. An aforementioned step can be to elevate and seek out lean partnerships that will provide prosperous synergetic relationships. Furthermore, the third study suggests that employees that work at organisations with more systems in place rate their approval of lean high, and report to be “happy with the change”, implying a positive indirect effect on their well-being.

7.2 Relationships Between Constructs

“In our conceptual model; What are the relationships between the constructs: Perceived Lean Adoption, Relational Coordination, Leadership Behaviour, Employee Well- being and Job Performance?” We will dissect the hypotheses by their support from the data. 7.2.1 Hypotheses Supported

For hypotheses category 1; direct relations regarding and independent and dependent variables, in our general model, we found support for Hypothesis 1c. The Perceived Adoption Lean Practices positively relates to a score of Relational Coordination (Both the Relation and Communication dimension). In our specific model, we also found the same outcome with greater detail om the correlations per the shared communication, (t=2.94, p=.003) and the share relationships dimension, (t=1.99, p=.047).

For hypotheses category 2; mediating relations, in our general model, we found support for

hypothesis 2a. Relational Coordination relates positively to employee well-being. However, our specific model does not support this evidence.

For hypotheses category 3; direct and moderating relationships of Leadership Behaviours, in our general model, we found support for hypothesis 3a. Perceived Adoption Lean Practices has a positive relationship with the Leadership Behaviours (Task-, Relations-, Change- oriented). Moreover, the specific model gave us that Perceived Adoption Lean Practices specifically had significant correlations with both Task-Oriented Leadership Behaviour and

Relation-Oriented Leadership Behaviour.

7.2.2 Hypotheses Not Supported

For hypotheses category 1; direct relations regarding and independent and dependent variables, in both models, we could not find support for Hypothesis 1a. The Perceived Adoption of Lean Practices relates positively to Employee Well-being and Hypothesis 1b. The Perceived Adoption of Lean Practices relates positively to Job Performance. This means that we did not find any evidence in favour of supporting a direct relationship between the independent and dependent variables.

For hypotheses category 2; mediating relations, although we found support for the general hypothesis in our general model, in the specific model, we could not find support for either Hypothesis 2a; Relational Coordination relates positively to Employee Well-being or

Hypothesis 2b; Relational Coordination relates positively to Job Performance.

For hypotheses category 3; direct and moderating relationships of Leadership Behaviours, although Hypothesis 3a; Perceived Adoption Lean Practices has a positive relationship with the Leadership Behaviours, has been met in the general model. Only the relation between Perceived Adoption Lean Practices and Task-oriented Leadership and Relations-oriented Leadership Behaviours have been positively supported. Hypothesis 3b;

Leadership Behaviours (Task-, Relations-, Change-oriented) have positive relations with the Relational Coordination among team members and Hypothesis 3c; Leadership Behaviour(s) (Task-, Relations-, Change-oriented) will have a positive moderating effect on the Relationship between Lean practices and Relational Coordination, have not been supported.

7.3 Leadership Behaviour

“Which team leaders display effective lean leadership behaviour?” Study 2 showed that the perceived Lean Adoption correlates significantly positive with the leadership behaviour of the team leaders being Task-oriented and Change-orientated. This can be found interesting as the theoretical background of the profile of a lean leader, does not directly support these findings. Study 3 showed in organisations with Lean Adopted practices; practically everyone questioned reported their team leader to be a “positive influence” or “an agent supportive of

continuous improvement within the organisation”. This is congruent with the finding of the specific teams’ leader’s behaviour observed in study 1. As the leader plays a more facilitating role, they empower the employee to solve problems. This contributes to their sense of worth within the organisation, thus improving the employees' Job Satisfaction and in turn, its Well- being.