VERTEBRACIÓN TERRITORIAL

The literature review shows that Lean, as a socio-technical system (Shah and Ward, 2007), is typified by basic themes. These include characteristics from various definitions from the literature review, as well as characteristics considered to be critical for successful Lean

implementation. The literature from the review was coded manually, using keywords that link to Lean, were repetitive, or appeared significant, to create a table of Lean characteristics. Table 2-12 captures, and broadly groups the identified Lean characteristics into themes, asking the question ‘what thematic construct captures the differences between Lean and not- Lean for the identified characteristic?’ The themes range from what Hines determines to be below the waterline and ‘enabling’ such as leadership, strategy, alignment and engagement (Hines, 2011a)—similar to the philosophy ‘P’ in Liker’s model—to the more practical system and process group, including processes, technology, tools and techniques.

Page 107 of 372

TABLE 2-12: CHARACTERISTICS OF LEAN, GRO UPED IN THEMES AND REFERENCED BY AU THOR Themes Characteristic Reference:

Envi ronment

Cha nging environment Ha mmer (1990); Hormozi (2001); Ma son-Jones et a l (2000); Hines et al (2004)

Di fferent environments Ra dnor et al (2012); Skorstad (1994); Hines a nd Rich (1997); Powell and Chi l derhouse (2010); Seddon (2010)

Customers Identify customer value Woma ck et al (1990); Radnor et al (2012); Sohal & Eggl estone (1994); ; Seddon (2007)

Peopl e i nvol vement

Peopl e i nvol vement

Acti ve i nvolvement Ja mes-Moore & Gi bbons (1997); Ohno (2013) Beha viour Hi nes et al (2011a ); Emiliani (1998)

Cha nge Ra dnor et al (2006); Pedersen a nd Huniche (2009) ; Ka l lage (2006) Communication Pedersen and Huniche (2009); Scherrer-Rathje et al, 2009)

Cul ture Li ker (2004); Kra fcik (1988) ; Pedersen a nd Huniche (2009); Acha nga et al (2006)

Defect prevention Ja mes-Moore & Gi bbons (1997) Enga gement Hi nes et al (2011a ); Ohno (2013)

Fl exibility Ja mes-Moore & Gi bbons (1997); Sohal & Eggl estone (1994); Seddon (2007)

Improve continuously Woma ck et al (1990); Radnor et al (2012); Hi nes et al (2011a); Sohal & Eggl estone (1994); Ohno (2013); Imai (1986); Ohno (1988)

Lea dership; ma nagement commi tment/support

Hi nes et al (2011a ); Li ker (2004); Emi liani (2012); Pedersen a nd Huniche (2009); Scherrer-Rathje et al, 2009); Ra dnor et al (2006); Achanga et al (2006); Ka l lage (2006)

Mul ti -skilling Ja mes-Moore & Gi bbons (1997); Sohal & Eggl estone (1994); Kra fcik (1988); Acha nga et al (2006)

Reduce poor work

condi tions Ra dnor et al (2012)

Res pect for people Li ker (2004); Sohal & Eggl estone (1994); Ohno (2013) ; Bha sin & Burger (2006); Emi liani (2012); Achanga et al (2006)

Root ca use problem s ol ving

Ja mes-Moore & Gi bbons (1997); Li ker (2004); Emiliani (2012); ; Seddo n (2007)

Sha red destiny Soha l & Egglestone (1994) Shop-floor problem

s ol ving Li ker (2004); Sohal & Eggl estone (1994) Soci o-technical Sha h & Wa rd (2007)

Tea m-based Ja mes-Moore & Gi bbons (1997); Sohal & Eggl estone (1994); Li ker (2004)

Systems and processes

Autonomation Soha l & Egglestone (1994); Li ker (2004); Ohno (1988)

Crea te flow Woma ck et al (1990); Ja mes-Moore & Gi bbons (1997); Li ker (2004) El i minate waste Sha h & Wa rd (2007); Ja mes-Moore & Gi bbons (1997); Ra dnor et al

(2012); Li ker (2004); ; Seddon (2007); Ohno (1988) Identify Va lue stream Woma ck et al (1990)

Integrated Sha h & Wa rd (2007); Ja mes-Moore & Gi bbons (1997); ; Seddon (2007) Jus t-In-Time (JIT) Ja mes-Moore & Gi bbons (1997); Sohal & Eggl estone (1994); Li ker (2004); _{Ohno (1988)} Proces s control Ja mes-Moore & Gi bbons (1997); Ra dnor et al (2012); Li ker (2004); Kra fcik

(1988); ; Seddon (2007)

Pul l Woma ck et al (1990); Ja mes-Moore & Gi bbons (1997) Reducing va riability Sha h & Wa rd (2007); Ra dnor et al (2012)

Supply/value chain Petters en (2009); Hi nes et al (2004); Holweg and Pil, (2001); Pi ercy a nd Ri ch (2004)

Sys tem Sha h & Wa rd (2007) Tool s & techniques Hi nes et al (2011a )

Suppliers Ja mes-Moore & Gi bbons (1997); Li ker (2004); Sohal & Eggl estone (1994) ; Bha sin & Burger (2006)

Page 108 of 372

Themes Characteristic Reference:

Vi s ual management Li ker (2004)

Bel ief System

Vi s ion Acha nga et a l (2006)

Stra tegy Hi nes et al (2011a ) ; Acha nga et a l (2006)

Qua l ity Li ker (2004)

Phi l osophy Ra dnor et al (2012); Hi nes et a l (2011a); Li ker (2004); Bhasin & Burger (2006)

Long term thi nking Emi l iani (2012) ; Scherrer-Rathje et al, 2009) Pri nci ples Woma ck et al (1990)

Al i gnment Hi nes et al (2011a ); ; Pedersen and Huniche (2009)

2.3.9.1.Defining a mature Lean organisation

The applications of Lean in multiple industries that produce a variety of products and product groups leads to the recognition that:

 The relevance of what is produced is relatively low; non-Lean organisations can produce exactly the same product as highly-Lean organisations; and conversely that

 The relevance of how a product (including service) is produced is relatively high where it concerns people and processes; organisations that produce identical products can be highly Lean or not at all.

 The relevance of how technologically advanced a product (including service) is produced is relatively low; organisations that have modern technology can be ‘un- Lean’ while organisations with low technology can be highly Lean (e.g. Schonberger, 1987).

Although customer themes and output product are important, the relevance of both lies in how the organisation views and uses customer value and how it delivers that value in output product (a service is considered to be a product). It is the functioning organisation that makes the difference. Lean is not a final state; it is an evolutionary concept that can never fully be achieved as there is always something to improve. Organisations can however achieve a level of Lean maturity, indicating that the attitude, knowledge, experience and responsibility of the organisation has developed from the initial stage to advanced or grown-up; the ideal state is illusive.

Page 109 of 372

This leads to the extraction of the following definition of a mature Lean organisation as:

 Having a holistic, integrated approach to production of goods and/or services,

 starting with vision and leadership, and pervading the organisation from top to bottom and into the supply chain/value stream to achieve common goals in a shared destiny,

 involving and empowering people to continuously improve the processes they are involved in to eliminate unevenness, overburdening and all other forms of waste to the customer, endorsing positive change,

 creating smooth production flow, substantially based on what needs to be produced and when, able to absorb variable customer demand,

 producing quality products (value) to customer demand,

 using the tools they have learned,

 and creating an adaptive sustainable culture to continue doing so in an ever-changing environment.

2.3.9.2.Lean as a viable organisational system

Organisations are conceptually ‘alive’, continuing their existence by interacting with the environment and continued adaption to their customer requirement e.g. through continuous improvement in producing customer value; this applies particularly to Lean organisations.

A broad comparison can be drawn with Beer’s Viable Systems Model (Beer, 1979). The viable systems model is based on three interacting constituents, the organisation’s environment, the organisation’s meta-level and the organisation’s operational level (figure 2-32). The system responds to the environment by having a thinking ‘meta- system’ (vision, philosophy, principles and strategy) and an operational system that

‘executes’ (people involved in systems and process execution). The meta-system includes three different thinking levels that steer the operational activities from hierarchical functions

Meta -Level Environment

Operational System

Page 110 of 372

of policy (vision and philosophy), below which there is strategy and adaptation/planning aimed at the outside world and an internal optimisation level (systems and process thinking). A fourth level communicates from and to the operational (fifth) level. The system is recursive, meaning that there can be systems within systems, following the same model. Importantly for the discussion of the model, Beer argues that the meta-system (vision, philosophy, principles and strategy) belongs inside the operational system, which is surrounded by the environment (Beer, 1979).