the link between lean and human resource management or … · 2019. 9. 3. · human resource...

XXIV Summer School “Francesco Turco” – Industrial Systems Engineering

The link between lean and human resource management or organizational behaviour: a bibliometric review

Ciano M. P.*, Strozzi F.*, Minelli E.*, Pozzi R.*, Rossi T.*

* Dipartimento in gestione integrata di impresa- Scuola di Ingegneria Industriale - LIUC-Università Cattaneo, Corso G. Matteotti, 22, 21053 -Castellanza VA – Italy ([email protected])

Abstract: Nowadays many companies deal with lean: some of them have a consolidated lean adoption, others are facing the lean transformation and many others are combining lean with the newest strategies. In all these contexts, the key resource is the human factor and utmost attention should be put to its interface with the organization. This study aims to clarify the link between lean and human resource management (HRM) or organizational behaviour (OB) depicting an overview of the body of literature devoted to their intersection. Two bibliometric tools allowed to examine literature in a dynamic and quantitative way. In particular, the citation network analysis, through the main path analysis, identified the development trajectory of the topic, while the analysis of author keywords co-occurrence network distinguished the different research areas within it. As first result, two main development trajectories were identified: one devoted to the central role of the HR practices included in the “High involvement work systems” to obtain a successful lean implementation; the other one to the clarification of the core nature and patterns of lean when combined to HRM or OB. The second result is the distinction of five different research areas: Lean and BIM – collaboration centrality, Teamwork and lean practices, Training in lean six sigma, Lean leadership and kaizen benefits. Finally, the literature analysis highlighted the need of more cross-fertilization between the fields.

Keywords: lean, human resource management, organizational behaviour, bibliometric review, literature review

1.Introduction In the last forty years, scholars and practitioners have recognized the benefits of lean in both production and human resource matters (Ciano et al. 2019). In reference to the latter aspect, lean is able to drastically reduce human effort (Womack et al. 1990), to improve skills development and to increase the employees’ involvement in the decision-making process (Bamber et al. 2014). Moreover, lean combined with human resource management (HRM) is proven to positively affect job satisfaction and perceived job autonomy (Rodríguez et al. 2016). However, in literature, there are contradictory positions and a dearth of publication about some important issues (Niepce and Molleman 1998, Bamber et al. 2014, Rodríguez et al. 2016). Some scholars, especially in the early periods of the discipline, linked lean to traditional production theories due to its application of Scientific Management principles, while others looked at lean as a completely different paradigm regarding the attention to the human factor (Niepce and Molleman 1998). Some studies supported the above mentioned positive effects, while few others indicated lean as a negative driver of work characteristics and job attitudes that can even lead to a decrease in the perceived job autonomy of workshop workers (Rodríguez et al. 2016). Furthermore, nowadays, lean is facing new challenges, such as the link with other strategies. For instance, literature looks upon lean as a prerequisite and enabler to industry 4.0 application (Tortorella and Fettermann 2017). The technological content of this paradigm can require much effort from the workers in dealing with the increasing complexity of their tasks (Longo et al. 2017)

and, perhaps, lean systematic human-centred approach can intervene (Tortorella and Fetterman 2017). This plethora of positions and contexts in which lean and HRM or the wider field of organizational behaviour (OB) are involved, calls for an investigation of the literature. Therefore, this work aims to depict an overview of the scientific production that has linked lean with HRM or OB, revealing the predominant positions and the issues that have already been considered and developed. This aim is explicated in the following research questions: RQ1: What is/are the main development path/s that characterise/s the topic? RQ2: Which are all the research areas within the topic? Towards this end, this research is characterised by a literature review using bibliometric tools, namely the analysis of the citation network and the analysis of the authors keywords co-occurrence network. These tools are quantitative based methods that have been used to analyse literature in several contexts, such as supply chain, smart factory, project management, lean itself and many others (Strozzi et al. 2017, Ciano et al. 2018). This widespread use demonstrates their value in identifying the evolutionary trajectory and key streams of a topic in a more objective way compared to traditional descriptive reviews (Strozzi et al. 2017, Ciano et al. 2018). The following section explains how the papers’ collection was performed. Then, section 3 is devoted to the method. Section 4 and section 5 contain the bibliometric review. Section 6 concludes the paper and suggests future scope for further developing the topic.

2.Materials

321


Papers collection was performed on Scopus, the largest database of scientific peer-reviewed literature (Pozzi and Strozzi 2018) using TITLE and KEY (keywords) fields. The KEY field is a combined field that searches the AUTHKEY (author keywords) and different kinds of indexed keywords. Author keywords are keywords chosen by the authors themselves, reflecting the specific scope of their work, hence providing a clear direction about the topic. Indexed keywords, instead, are controlled thesaurus and vocabulary terms chosen by content supplier, so that they can be referred to the topic, the subject and peculiar characteristics of the paper but in a broader and more precise way (Pozzi and Strozzi 2018; Ciano et al. 2019). The use of KEY field, instead of just AUTHKEY, can include more works, perhaps not classified by the authors themselves in the macro subjects of lean, HRM and OB, but recognized as part of them by the content supplier. Lean and HRM or OB can have several practices, subtopic, and synonyms, but, in order to not exclude specific terms, the collection was conducted searching the most general keywords referred to them. This search should encompass the body of literature devoted to the intersection of the two subjects, relying on the fact that the interdisciplinary nature of the topic dictates the clear declaration of the main, thus general, subjects at least in the indexed keywords. “Lean” is a word Krafcik (1988) used referring to the “Toyota Production System” (TPS), thus this expression should be introduced in the search. The following string is the search performed on Scopus: (KEY("lean" OR "Toyota production system" OR "TPS") OR TITLE("lean" OR "Toyota production system" OR "TPS")) AND ( TITLE ("human resource*" OR "organizational behaviour" OR “organizational behavior" OR "HRM" OR "OBHR") OR KEY("human resource*" OR "organizational behaviour" OR “organizational behavior" OR "OBHR" OR "HRM")). Using “lean”, Scopus captures all the compound words such as “lean management”, “lean thinking”, “lean manufacturing”, etc. Of course “human resource” encompasses “human resources” and different locutions such as “human resource development”, “human resource strategy”, “human resource planning” and so on as well. Acronyms are introduced since their widespread use. However, the “OB” and “HR” keywords were excluded because they are connected to medicine where “OB” can stand for “obese” or “obstetrics” and “HR” for a gene or for “heart rate” and the corrective action to exclude all the medicine-related subjects led to exclude studies about lean and HRM or OB in the healthcare context. On February 2019, the output of this search was a set of 324 papers. The papers are distributed over time as shown by figure 1, revealing an increasing interest on the topic in the last decade, especially in the last five years. Moreover, Scopus results showed that the journal with more publications about the link between lean and HRM or OB is the “International Journal of Production Research”. This fact can be interpreted as a stronger interest in HR or OB by the production research world, than vice versa. This is confirmed by the subject area coverage, indeed Scopus refers the majority of the papers, 37,6 % out of them, to the Engineering field.

Figure 1. Number of papers about the topic published over

time

3.Method The method used in this work is a bibliometric analysis. In particular, two different parts of the SLNA, Systematic Literature Network Analysis, introduced by Colicchia and Strozzi (2012) and further developed by Strozzi et al. (2017), were used: the citation network analysis and author keywords co-occurrence network analysis (table 1). RQ1 is tackled through the citation network analysis. In the citation network, the connected publications rely on prior works that have influenced their study. Connected components, namely nodes representing publications connected by citations, are linked by arrows that represent the flow of knowledge. Considering only the connected components, it is possible to detect the main development trajectory of the field extracting the main path component (Lucio-Arias and Leydesdorff 2008). The main path represents the “backbone of the research tradition” (Lucio-Arias and Leydesdorff 2008, Colicchia and Strozzi 2012). As stated by Strozzi et al. (2017), “the Main Path highlights the articles that build on prior articles but continue to act as hubs in reference to later works”. Precisely, in this research, the focus was on the key-route main path, where key-route is the link that has the highest transversal count (Liu and Lu 2012). Its extraction was performed using Pajek, a software for analysis and visualization of large networks (http://mrvar.fdv.uni-lj.si/pajek/), and following the procedure suggested by Colicchia and Strozzi (2012). RQ2 is addressed through the author keywords co-occurrence network analysis. The analysis is based on the combined approach to clustering and mapping bibliometric networks, developed by Waltman et al. (2010). The network map (figure 4) and the clusters items (Appendix B) are the output of the software that implements this approach, i.e. VoSviewer (http://www.vosviewer.com/). The clusters of keywords are sets of keywords that are used most frequently together in the papers and then reveal research areas. The map represents the clusters with different colours and the occurrence of the nodes, namely keywords, with different dimensions.

Table 1. Methodological table

RQ Type of analysis Data Represent

ation Tool

for the analysis

Software

RQ1 Bibliometric Citations Citation network

Main path Pajek

RQ2 Bibliometric Author Keywords

Co-occurrence network of keywords

Clusterisation of nodes

VoSviewer

4.Citation network analysis

322


In the citation network of the set of 324 papers, many nodes are isolated, but there are four main connected components: the biggest connect component includes 73 papers, the other three include 2 papers each one (figure 2). Considering only the biggest connected component, it was extracted the key-route main path in order to visualize the knowledge diffusion path, the answer to RQ1. The extraction was performed setting the rank numbers of key routes from 1 to 5. The output is a key-route main path consisting itself of two components (figure 3).

Figure 2. Main connected components

4.1.Main path analysis Figure 3 depicts the main path of the biggest connected component, which includes 15 nodes. The nodes belong to two main components: 8 nodes belong to the first component and the other 7 to the second component.

4.1.1.First main path component In the first component (figure 3.a), the eight papers range from 2000 to 2017. The eldest paper in this main path component, the theoretical work by Biazzo and Panizzolo (2000) introduced and focused on the “high involvement work system”, the theme that clearly became the leitmotif of the entire component. The authors identified in the following points the main characteristics of a “high involvement work system”: (i) workforce flexibility; (ii) decentralization and autonomy of decision making; (iv) teamworking crucial importance; (v) central role of employment structures (e.g. continuous training, performance-based remuneration systems, security guarantees, etc.) in order to keep workforce highly motivated, creative, autonomous, satisfied and committed. The other papers included in this component are empirical works that examined and tasted the relevance of these features in lean systems. The following studies by Farris et al. (2008, 2009) continued the involvement theme focusing on the participation in Kaizen events, that Biazzo and Panizzolo (2000) identified as useful activities in the development of problem-solving capabilities. During a kaizen event, i.e. a focused continuous improvement project developed in a restricted timeframe, workers address a work area through a dedicated cross-functional team (Farris et al. 2009), creating the teamwork culture also for future purposes and for daily issues. Furthermore, Farris et al. (2009) described Kaizen events as ‘‘just-in-time’’ training opportunity for the workers. Moreover, besides the development of new problem-solving capabilities, it can increase motivation and willingness (Farris et al. 2009), consistently with the “high involvement work system”. The path then forks: one side includes two papers focusing on models for a successful lean implementation (Rane et al. 2016, Berlec et al. 2017) that recall and structure all the characteristics Biazzo and Panizzolo (2000) attributed to a “high involvement work system”; the other side, instead, includes three papers that deepen a specific characteristic each one. Precisely De Haan et al.

(2012) and Rodríguez et al. (2016) demonstrated that the combination of lean and HRM lead to job satisfaction due to the job autonomy that lean implies. The former identified in the “creative tension” of lean (Womack et al. 1990) the engine to the positive link between lean autonomy and job satisfaction. Wickramasinghe and Wickramasinghe (2016) empirically found that a performance-based remuneration in lean context positively affects job performance.

4.1.2. Second main path component In the second component (figure 3.b), the seven papers range from 1997 to 2018. The main theme of this knowledge trajectory is the investigation of the nature and the patterns of lean when combined with HRM or OB. The eldest paper, the one by Lowe et al. (1997) attempted to recognize patterns in the combination of lean and HRM in high-performance plants and also to mark the differences of lean features in HR matters between Western countries and Japan, the country where TPS took roots. Their data provided little support for the relation between lean and the expansion of employee involvement, enhanced skill and heightened commitment outside the Japanese plants. In the path there is another paper published in those years, the study by Niepce and Molleman (1998). This paper is fundamental in defining the nature of lean in HR matters. The authors recognized a stream of literature that regarded lean as High-Fordism” or “Neo-Taylorism” due to the use of Scientific Management principles. Moreover, this stream considered lean in opposition to the “human-centred” Sociotechnical System (STS). This study concludes that both lean and STS differ from Taylorism in important aspects such as teamwork relevance, feedback, control, multifunctionality, bottom-up continuous improvement, and many others. Lean and STS differed in the work control and coordination, dictated by standardization in the former and by decentralization and mutual adjustment in the latter, but both way different from traditional bureaucratic and hierarchical control. Another difference is the commitment concept, strived by lean through good social relations, satisfying social needs, and by STS through job enrichment, meeting growth needs. The definition of the nature and the extent of lean regarding the human factor was a crucial issue between scholars in those years and the difference between lean and traditional production models was a pivotal topic (Forza 1996). In this scenario, also the comparison between Western and Japanese lean adoption and interaction with HRM can see as an investigation of the lean essence, recognizing in the Japanese form the pure one. Moreover, at the end of the 90’ Niepce and Molleman (1998), stated that in literature it was not clear how the lean and HR practices could be integrated and which results could be achieved. Years later, the “clarification“ current was followed by Bonavia and Marin-Garcia (2011) who went ahead from the results of Lowe et al. (1997) and the conclusion of Niepce and Molleman (1998). Their study clarified some aspects, indeed they demonstrated the influence of a higher degree of lean implementation in a high level of training and job security, but they could not assert the same with other

323


HRM practices. Bamber et al. (2014) tried to capture the feature of the literature about the topic concluding that some points are still not clear because there is not yet a substantial body of empirical studies about how lean techniques fit with strategic HRM practices. Moreover, lean is being applied in several sectors, different from manufacturing, where it was born, such as banking, healthcare, institutions, service, etc. How lean matches HRM in these contexts is still underexplored and the role of HRM specialists in these change processes is not clearly defined. The remaining three papers of this path are less focused on the debated, but they try to clarify the link between lean and HRM or OB as well. Sangwa and Sangwan (2018) recognized HRM as one out of seven fundamental categories for lean organizations and adopted a conceptual literature review to identify its performance dimensions and then its KPIs. The other two studies focused on specific shades of lean, such as lean combined with IT and lean six sigma. Pinho and Mendes (2017) identified HRM as a research stream in the literature about IT in lean-based manufacturing industries analysing its specific cluster obtained with a VosViewer co-occurrence network. Shokri et al. (2016) adopted a survey study to disclose the HR elements essential to the support of lean six sigma implementation.

4.2.Discussion of the main path The main path analysis revealed two main knowledge trajectories: one component is devoted to the development of a consolidated theme in literature, i.e. the need of the HR practices included in the “High involvement work systems” to obtain a successful lean implementation; the other component is composed of studies that attempt to clarify the core nature and patterns of lean when combined to HRM or OB, mainly distinguishing lean from other theories and tracing literature. There is not a remarkable difference in the subject areas of the Journals in which the papers of the two components are published, they are quite heterogeneous; there is not a predominant geographic area of the affiliations or the studies characterising the two components either. Therefore, it seems that the two components are separated only because of the above-mentioned different scopes and themes of the studies. Both trajectories have a tree structure, where the roots determine the main theme of the entire path. It is important to note that the applied algorithm to detect the main path is based on the citation traversal weights, i.e. the extent to which a particular citation is necessary to link articles (Strozzi et al. 2017), so it does not necessarily take into account the very most cited papers. Indeed, three out of the five most cited papers about lean and HRM or OB (Appendix A) are not present in either the two main path components. The most cited paper, the one by Jabbour et al. (2013) is included in the set of analysed paper because it contains bot lean manufacturing and HRM as author keywords, but actually, it does not study their link. This paper aims to verify the influence of environmental management on operational performance and to analyse if lean manufacturing and HRM play a significant role in greening companies, treating them as

two distinct variables. This can be the reason why it is not in the main path representing the development trajectory of the field that links the two subjects. The study by Furlan et al. (2011), instead highlighted the crucial role of human resource management (HRM) as enhancer of the complementarity and synergy between TQM and JIT, two topics not deepened by the other studies in the main path. Another highly cited paper not included in the main path is the one by Emiliani (1998), entitled “lean behaviours”, in which lean production model is used to set the correct mindset and paths to minimize behavioural wastes. Hence, in this study lean is seen as the reference model for the human behaviour. This paper is quite peculiar and perhaps the not direct relation with the two main themes of the trajectories is the reasons for its exclusion. Similar inferences can be drawn referring to other highly cited papers excluded from the main path, while other excluded papers can perfectly fit the two trajectories themes and can have even more citations than the ones present in the path. In this regard, it is important to understand that, as above-mentioned, the method is not based on mere citations count, but on the citation traversal weights aiming to identify the flow of knowledge.

Figure 3.Biggest connected component main path.

5.Author keywords’ co-occurrence network analysis The software created five clusters grouping a set of 46 keywords, the result of the initial 839 keywords after setting a threshold of the minimum number of occurrence of a keyword at 4. The clusters, with keywords respecting a descending order of occurrence, are set out in Appendix B. Following, five subparagraphs are devoted each one to the analysis of a specific cluster. In the clusters the keywords insert in the Scopus search and their synonyms are expected to be recurring and with high occurrence weight; therefore, the other keywords lead the characterisation of the research areas enclosed in the clusters.

5.1 Lean and BIM – collaboration centrality The biggest cluster is devoted to the interaction between lean and building information modeling (BIM). Their integration invests mainly the construction industry (Dave et al. 2016, Mahalingam et al. 2015, Sacks et al. 2010). Lean applied to this sector is commonly denominated “lean construction” (Dave et al. 2016). The attention to lean construction seems to be vivid among scholars, indeed it is the third keyword with more occurrence after the general lean production and lean manufacturing. This cluster demonstrates the purpose to follow the technological development in order to meet production and human requirements in the sector.

324


Production control methods are essential in lean because they foster smooth production flow, a lean dogma; in lean construction an important method for this aim is the Last Planner System, a collaborative planning and scheduling system that involves site teams into the decision making. A drawback of Last planner system is the long “lookahead” planning cycle. (Dave et al. 2016). BIM software tools minimize this drawback providing virtual models of buildings and an information share platform to reduce the time resolution of planning coordination (Clemente and Cachadinha 2013). As stated by Clemente and Cachadinha (2013), BIM functionality materializes lean principles: (i) the work teams can analyse and manage BIM making the whole process collaborative and transparent, encouraging the teams self-coordination, and increasing flexibility; (ii) daily meetings to manage BIM involve the teams in the process, promoting continuous improvement; (iii) the info sharing increases synergies between teams reducing non-value added activities. The link between lean and BIM is also expressed by the BIM-based lean system called KanBIM (Kanban using BIM); KanBIM combines 3D and 4D BIM visualizations with the last planner system (Dave et al. 2016). BIM platform allowed the shareholders to visually manage the work of teams and to promote collaboration with them (Dave et al. 2016, Clemente and Cachadinha 2013). BIM can also share datasets with partners within the supply chain and promote also collaboration outside the site, but this possibility should be improved, perhaps through IoT that leverage system–system, system–human and human–system communication (Dave et al. 2016).

5.2 Teamwork and lean practices The other biggest cluster of the author keywords network deals with the concept of teamwork. Teamwork is a key theme in organizational science literature; since the 90s scholars have given considerable attention to the adoption of teamwork (Jones and George 1998) recognizing it as the preferable strategy when organizations deal with complex tasks, when errors lead to consequences, when multiple and quick decisions are needed and when different competences are required (Salas et al. 2008). The lean and teamwork binomial association is well known in literature (De Vries and Van der Poll 2018). Lean invested in the human collaboration since its dawn, indeed the father of TPS, Ōhno, (1988) stated that teamwork is important to involve employees in reaching an agreed-upon objective. Furthermore, it is important to note that teamwork has well-established links with TQM, a holistic quality program strongly associated with lean (Dahlgaard and Park 2006). The key role of the human factor is an intrinsic characteristic of lean systems, but lean implementation process can take root in a hostile environment dictated by negativity, resistance and misunderstanding of lean concepts (Mostafa et al., 2013). Teamwork can be the remedy to overcome the fear of change when a company undertakes the lean transformation journey (De Vries and Van der Poll 2018). Besides its recognized importance, there is a lack of literature regarding the team formation and patterns in the lean implementation process (De Vries and Van der Poll 2018), thus this topic can be a future research avenue.

5.3 Training in lean six sigma Six Sigma is a strategy linked to lean for both its focus to quality and to continuous improvement (Gamal Aboelmaged 2010). The two paradigms can be integrated into what is known as lean six sigma (Shokri et al. 2016). It considers both human resource aspects and process improvement aspects of continuous improvement such as culture change, training and customer focus for the former and process stability, variation reduction, capability for the latter (Arnheiter and Maleyeff 2005). A large body of literature about six sigma is devoted to the critical success factors to its implementation. Precisely, among the most cited CSFs, at the top there are human resource management related factors: Strong top management involvement and commitment, changing organizational culture, cross-functional team working, effective communication, Infrastructure (both organizational and IT infrastructure) and training (Gamal Aboelmaged 2010). In particular, training is one of the most peculiar and important CSF for lean six sigma (Shokri et al. 2016). Typically there is hierarchical and powerful infrastructure for training based on belts system, where the belts’ colour identifies the level of expertise and knowledge. In addition, the training of employees is formalized and supported to ensure its effectiveness: all employees would be trained in basic problem-solving skills, while some employees are provided advanced training and required to act as mentors to others in support of quality improvement projects (Arnheiter and Maleyeff 2005). This last training system has the “train-the-trainer” form. (Assarlind et al. 2013).

5.4 Lean leadership Lean leadership is a systematic leadership method necessary for lean sustainable implementation and continuous improvement. In this leadership style, employees and leaders cooperate, both striving for perfection, focusing on customer in all the processes and with a long-term perspective development (Dombrowski and Mielke 2013). According to Dombrowski and Mielke (2013), lean leadership principles refer to improvement culture, self-development, qualification, genchi genbutsu, i.e. go and see directly to gemba (shopfloor), and hoshin kanri, i.e. target management or policy deployment. Schwagerman and Ulmer (2013) explained and supported through the NUMMI case study, the attention of the lean leaders to quality. In their study, the authors put on evidence that, during genchi genbutsu, this attention is explicated in the A3, also known as quality circles. Just like Dombrowski and Mielke (2013), Schwagerman and Ulmer (2013) identified five core values of lean leadership. They are the spirit of challenge, the continuous improvement mind, genchi genbutsu, teamwork, and respect for the people. Lean leaders are sensitive to learning from self and from others, a feature highly adherent to the requirements of new adventure such as lean start up (Bortolini et al. 2018).

5.5.kaizen benefits The importance of Kaizen in the body of literature devoted to the link between lean and HRM o OB was already mentioned in the main path analysis. In paragraph 4.1.1., the comments on the works by Farris et al. (2008, 2009) highlighted the association between kaizen and teams,

325


especially regarding problem-solving. This cluster adds other shades of kaizen, namely its link with productivity and quality. Singh and Singh (2009) stated that the small and regular changes that characterized kaizen lead to a continuous productivity improvement, sometimes reaching even almost 90% of increase. Glover et al. (2011) highlighted also the frequent and successful use of Kaizen events to address quality-related issues. However, the authors emphasized that the focus on quality issues can be interpreted by the work area teams as the identification of their mistake. To avoid the consequent resistance to kaizen, more research is needed to identify the cultural aspect and support mechanisms to sustain work area commitment and attitude for quality kaizen events (Glover et al. 2011).

Figure 4. Authors keywords' co-occurrence network

6.Conclusion and research agenda This study represents an attempt to depict an overview of the existing literature about the link between lean and HRM or OB. The contribution to the body of knowledge was in identifying and analysing the development trajectories and research areas within the topic. This study gives also practical contributions: first, it highlighted that the journal that addresses the most this topic and the subject area to which most publications belong are in the production/engineer field, thus it seems that OBHR scholars do not consider that much the topic, even if the analysis conducted in this work demonstrated that lean has a strong link with OB and HRM. This fact is also reflected by the author keywords clusters: referring to HRM or OB, the keywords are quite general, few practices are captured, thus this suggests the need of more cross-fertilization between the fields. Moreover, nowadays lean is combined with the newest strategies and technologies, as mentioned in the introduction and as confirmed by the first author keywords cluster. This combination leads to different requirements in HRM and OB matters: new support structures and patterns should be formalized and deepen in research. References Arnheiter, E. D., & Maleyeff, J. (2005). The integration of lean management and Six Sigma. The TQM magazine, 17(1), 5-18. Assarlind, M., Gremyr, I., & Bäckman, K. (2013). Multi-faceted views on a Lean Six Sigma application. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 30(4), 387-402.

Bamber, G. J., Stanton, P., Bartram, T., & Ballardie, R. (2014). Human resource management, Lean processes and outcomes for employees: towards a research agenda. Berlec, T., Kleindienst, M., Rabitsch, C., & Ramsauer, C. (2017). Methodology to Facilitate Successful Lean Implementation. Strojniski Vestnik/Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 63. Biazzo, S., & Panizzolo, R. (2000). The assessment of work organization in lean production: the relevance of the worker’s perspective. Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 11(1), 6-15. Bonavia, T., & Marin-Garcia, J. A. (2011). Integrating human resource management into lean production and their impact on organizational performance. International Journal of Manpower, 32(8), 923-938. Bortolini, R. F., Nogueira Cortimiglia, M., Danilevicz, A. D. M. F., & Ghezzi, A. (2018). Lean Startup: a comprehensive historical review. Management Decision. Ciano, M. P., Pozzi, R., Rossi, T., & Strozzi, F. (2019). How IJPR has addressed ‘lean’: a literature review using bibliometric tools. International Journal of Production Research, 1-34. Clemente, J., & Cachadinha, N. (2013). Bim-Lean synergies in the management on mep works in public facilities of intensive use–A case study. IGLC 21, 751-759. Colicchia, C., & Strozzi, F. (2012). Supply chain risk management: a new methodology for a systematic literature review. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(4), 403-418. Cooney, R., & Sohal, A. (2004). Teamwork and total quality management: a durable partnership. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 15(8), 1131-1142. Dahlgaard, J. J., & Mi Dahlgaard-Park, S. (2006). Lean production, six sigma quality, TQM and company culture. The TQM magazine, 18(3), 263-281. Dave, B., Kubler, S., Främling, K., & Koskela, L. (2016). Opportunities for enhanced lean construction management using Internet of Things standards. Automation in construction, 61, 86-97. De Haan, J., Naus, F., & Overboom, M. (2012). Creative tension in a lean work environment: Implications for logistics firms and workers. International Journal of Production Economics, 137(1), 157-164. De Vries, H., & Van der Poll, H. M. (2018). Cellular and organisational team formations for effective Lean transformations. Production & Manufacturing Research, 6(1), 284-307. Dombrowski, U., & Mielke, T. (2013). Lean leadership–fundamental principles and their application. Procedia CIRP, 7, 569-574. Emiliani, M. L. (1998). Lean behaviors. Management decision, 36(9), 615-631. Farris, J. A., Van Aken, E. M., Doolen, T. L., & Worley, J. (2008). Learning from less successful Kaizen events: a case study. Engineering Management Journal, 20(3), 10-20. Farris, J. A., Van Aken, E. M., Doolen, T. L., & Worley, J. (2009). Critical success factors for human resource outcomes in Kaizen events: An empirical study. International Journal of Production Economics, 117(1),

326


42-65 Forza, C. (1996). Work organization in lean production and traditional plants: what are the differences?. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 16(2), 42-62. Furlan, A., Vinelli, A., & Dal Pont, G. (2011). Complementarity and lean manufacturing bundles: an empirical analysis. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 31(8), 835-850. Gamal Aboelmaged, M. (2010). Six Sigma quality: a structured review and implications for future research. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 27(3), 268-317. Glover, W. J., Farris, J. A., Van Aken, E. M., & Doolen, T. L. (2011). Critical success factors for the sustainability of Kaizen event human resource outcomes: An empirical study. International Journal of Production Economics, 132(2), 197-213. Jabbour, C. J. C., de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L., Govindan, K., Teixeira, A. A., & de Souza Freitas, W. R. (2013). Environmental management and operational performance in automotive companies in Brazil: the role of human resource management and lean manufacturing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 47, 129-140. Jones, G. R., & George, J. M. (1998). The experience and evolution of trust: Implications for cooperation and teamwork. Academy of management review, 23(3), 531-546. Krafcik, J. F. (1988). Triumph of the lean production system. MIT Sloan Management Review, 30(1), 41. Liu, J. S., & Lu, L. Y. Y. (2012). An integrated approach for the main path analysis: The development of the hirsch index as an example. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(3), 528–542. Longo, F., Nicoletti, L., & Padovano, A. (2017). Smart operators in industry 4.0: A human-centered approach to enhance operators’ capabilities and competencies within the new smart factory context. Computers & industrial engineering, 113, 144-159. Lowe, J., Delbridge, R., & Oliver, N. (1997). High-performance manufacturing: evidence from the automotive components industry. Organization Studies, 18(5), 783-799. Lucio‐Arias, D., & Leydesdorff, L. (2008). Main‐path analysis and path‐dependent transitions in HistCite™‐based historiograms. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(12), 1948-1962. Mahalingam, A., Yadav, A. K., & Varaprasad, J. (2015). Investigating the role of lean practices in enabling BIM adoption: evidence from two Indian cases. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 141(7), 05015006. Mostafa, S., Dumrak, J., & Soltan, H. (2013). A framework for lean manufacturing implementation. Production & Manufacturing Research, 1(1), 44–64 Niepce, W., & Molleman, E. (1998). Work design issues in lean production from a sociotechnical systems perspective: Neo-Taylorism or the next step in sociotechnical design?. Human relations, 51(3), 259-287.

Ōhno, T. (1988). Toyota production system: Beyond large-scale production. Portland: Productivity Press. Olivella, J., Cuatrecasas, L., & Gavilan, N. (2008). Work organisation practices for lean production. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 19(7), 798-811. Pinho, C., & Mendes, L. (2017). IT in lean-based manufacturing industries: systematic literature review and research issues. International Journal of Production Research, 55(24), 7524-7540. Pozzi, R., & Strozzi, F. (2018). How assembly systems are adopting the technologies of I40: a preliminary landscape. XXII Summer School “Francesco Turco”–Industrial Systems Engineering, 2018, 369-375. Rodríguez, D., Buyens, D., Van Landeghem, H., & Lasio, V. (2016). Impact of lean production on perceived job autonomy and job satisfaction: An experimental study. Human factors and ergonomics in manufacturing & service industries, 26(2), 159-176. Sacks, R., Koskela, L., Dave, B. A., & Owen, R. (2010). Interaction of lean and building information modeling in construction. Journal of construction engineering and management, 136(9), 968-980. Salas, E., Cooke, N. J., & Rosen, M. A. (2008). On teams, teamwork, and team performance: Discoveries and developments. Human factors, 50(3), 540-547. Sangwa, N. R., & Sangwan, K. S. (2018). Development of an integrated performance measurement framework for lean organizations. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 29(1), 41-84. Schwagerman III, W. C., & Ulmer, J. M. (2013). The A3 Lean Management and Leadership Thought Process. Journal of Technology, Management & Applied Engineering, 29(4). Shokri, A., Waring, T. S., & Nabhani, F. (2016). Investigating the readiness of people in manufacturing SMEs to embark on Lean Six Sigma projects: An empirical study in the German manufacturing sector. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 36(8), 850-878. Singh, J., & Singh, H. (2009). Kaizen philosophy: a review of literature. IUP journal of operations management, 8(2), 51. Strozzi, F., Colicchia, C., Creazza, A., & Noè, C. (2017). Literature review on the ‘Smart Factory’concept using bibliometric tools. International Journal of Production Research, 55(22), 6572-6591. Tortorella, G. L., & Fettermann, D. (2017). Implementation of Industry 4.0 and lean production in Brazilian manufacturing companies. International Journal of Production Research, 1-13. Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. (2010). A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 629-635. Wickramasinghe, V., & Wickramasinghe, G. L. D. (2016). Variable pay and job performance of shop-floor workers in lean production. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 27(2), 287-311. Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., Roos, D., 1990. The Machine that Changed the World. Rawson Associates, New York..

327


Appendix A.

The five most cited papers about lean and human resource management or organizational behaviour.

Appendix B.

Clusters of author keywords

1.lean and BIM - collaboration

centrality 2. teamwork and lean

practices 3.training in lean six

sigma 4.lean leadership 5.kaizen benefits

lean construction human resource management

lean lean manufacturing lean production

continuous improvement

lean management lean six sigma human resources quality management

kanban human resource development

six sigma management productivity

supply chain management

lean thinking human resources management

leadership kaizen

building information modeling

toyota production system

implementation case study organizational behaviour

last planner system hrm process improvement quality teams

lean culture operational performance

training lean organization

collaboration tps critical success factors lean startup

lean implementation lean practices human factors manufacturing

production teamwork

visual management tqm

Authors Title Year Source title Citations on Scopus

Main path

Jabbour C.J.C., De Sousa Jabbour A.B.L., Govindan K., Teixeira

A.A., De Souza Freitas W.R.

Environmental management and operational performance in automotive companies in Brazil: The role of human

resource management and lean manufacturing

2013 Journal of Cleaner Production 119 No

Farris J.A., Van Aken E.M., Doolen T.L.,

Worley J.

Critical success factors for human resource outcomes in Kaizen events: An

empirical study 2009 International Journal of

Production Economics 106 Yes

Furlan A., Vinelli A., Pont G.D.

Complementarity and lean manufacturing bundles: An empirical

analysis 2011

International Journal of Operations and

Production Management 99 No

Niepce W., Molleman E.

Work design issues in lean production from a sociotechnical systems

perspective: Neo-taylorism or the next step in sociotechnical design?

1998 Human Relations 98 Yes

Emiliani M.L. Lean behaviors 1998 Management Decision 96 No

328

the link between lean and human resource management or … · 2019. 9. 3. · human resource...

Documents