Search results

Continuous improvement has become an important strategy in improving organizational performance. Unfortunately, product development is often excluded in continuous improvement programs due to the special characteristics of product development activities. The overall purpose of this paper is to contribute to a better understanding of continuous improvement in the context of product development.

A central aspect in this context is that many organizations find it difficult to improve and learn if work is carried out in the form of projects. In this paper, a quality perspective on continuous improvement is introduced and its usefulness is tested empirically through three case studies in Swedish organizations. The focus is on the improvement programs used and the quality principles displayed in a product development context.

The results show that the three investigated organizations have multiple improvement programs, but that some configurations of improvement programs seem to be more successful than others. For instance, co‐ordination of multiple improvement programs, scope creep, and separating between product development processes and project management models are important success factors for continuous improvement. In addition, an introduction of an improvement program without adoption of a critical mass of quality principles is doomed to fail.

The research initiative is one of the first to conduct an empirical investigation of how organizations design and work with improvement programs in the context of product development. It provides knowledge to both academics and practitioners on how organizations can design and implement initiatives on quality management, especially in the context of product development.

Business process management (BPM) and lean management (LM) are both recognized for improving organizational performance through continuous improvement, yet their similarities and differences have been poorly discussed so far. This paper aims to find their main differences and similarities using a systematic method for literature review.

The paper uses a structured literature review known as SYSMAP (Scientometric and sYStematic yielding MApping Process). The method integrates bibliometrics and content analysis procedures to perform in-depth analysis of the literature at hand.

Both methodologies seek continuous improvement with focus on the customer and process standardization, but they are divergent mainly in relation to the flow they intend to improve. The impossibility of implementing both methodologies in an effective way was also observed, mainly due to the differences they present in relation to how to achieve the continuous improvement cycle.

As any other literature reviews, the major limitation is to have omitted relevant literature even though all available procedures have been used to avoid this situation.

This paper offers a novel perspective from the practitioner side. LM may be better used in human-intensive process improvement whereas BPM in technology-intensive ones. Such characteristics open up new opportunities for practitioners aiming at integrating both approaches.

This is the first paper that systematically analyses the body of literature of BPM and LM with the means to better understand their similarities and differences.

Examines the literature to identify the essential components of kaizen or continuous improvement programmes. Relying on published sources on the North American experience with continuous improvement, also tries to identify organizational structures and practices likely to lead to successful implementation of such programmes. Distinguishes between kaizen and more radical, “strategic leap” improvement approaches, and describes the North American record of success with continuous improvement programmes. An emergent theme is that success with continuous improvement requires a wide array of systems, processes, and orientations to be congruent within the organization. Argues that the study of when, how, and why kaizen succeeds is by no means complete, and proposes a set of open research questions whose investigation is likely to be useful to both scholars and practitioners. Finally, discusses some of the ways in which the existing literature can be immediately useful for practice in organizations.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and validate a new framework for continuous improvement.

The literature review on customer value and strategic quality provides the basis for the identification of a conceptual framework for continuous improvement. This conceptual framework is validated using the in-depth interview and the survey approach.

The empirical study concluded that the new framework contains all the core components or forces of continuous improvement. These forces are customer value focused co-leadership, customer value focused strategic objectives, improvement specialists with people performance knowledge and improvement methodology. By adopting this framework, all process personnel can have a role to play in process improvement leading to increased organisational returns on investment. Overall, it is an effective framework that is easily understood and can be applied throughout any process led organisation. This is supported by the empirical data.

This new framework can demonstrate to each organisational employee where they fit into the organisational continuous improvement strategy. This paper provides practitioners with a new validated continuous improvement framework that has application in all organisations that are involved in process customer value improvement. The researchers contend that this new framework can compliment existing continuous improvement frameworks.

This paper develops and validates a new framework for continuous improvement. By adopting this framework, all process personnel can have a role to play in process improvement leading to increased organisational returns on investment. This is supported by the empirical data. Also, the authors contend that this framework embraces the systems thinking approach (Conti, 2010) or systemic approach as people interact with customers, processes, improvement methodologies and each other to drive customer value improvement. Consequently, this generates a need to take global view of the combined effect of all customer value improvement components. This systems thinking can feed into future research.

The purpose of the paper is to study the interconnections between visual management, performance management and continuous improvement programmes and to suggest a practical framework to establish an effective visual management programme in association with performance management and continuous improvement systems. For the sake of simplicity, this paper refers to such a programme as integrated visual management (IVM) throughout this paper.

The following research included proposals and discussion, which were based on a case study which took place at a quality assurance (QA) department in PACCAR Australia, a global premium truck manufacturer, as well as authors’ own findings and experience, in addition to a literature-based review on visual management, performance management and continuous improvement. A systematic approach was followed to establish an effective IVM system. This paper is composed of two sections. Some of the most important literatures on visual management, performance management and continuous improvement are reviewed in the first section. Then the findings, as well as some other author findings, on why visual management works are summarised. The second section is dedicated to the case study.

Visual management can provide a simple and yet effective solution to enhance information flow in organisations. However, for visual management to yield its full benefit, it needs be part of a bigger plan. It has to be linked to a performance management programme, which provides input into visual management, and a continuous improvement initiative, which receives inputs from visual management. This paper proposes a practical framework to establish an IVM programme and provides a detailed description of its phases. The paper also presents the results achieved, during our case study, and views on the integration benefits, as well as on how to successfully implement an IVM programme. A systematic approach to establish an effective IVM system was followed. It laid a solid foundation to facilitate an effective flow of information in QA in its respective areas. This programme not only improved an understanding of the processes and raised awareness about the performance and associated issues, it also boosted transparency, discipline, shared ownership, team involvement and scientific mindset. It assisted in achieving significant and concrete process improvements. It helped in establishing a productive continuous improvement programme. It was observed that while visual management, performance management and team or company continuous improvement programmes each served a benefit individually, when they were linked together, as a whole, their synergy allowed for more significant achievements.

The scope of this research is limited to use of visual management to manage performance and to lead continuous improvement initiatives. The research was performed in a manufacturing environment. Even though it is believed that the suggested framework for IVM and the findings are applicable to other business environments as well, further research in this direction is required. Also, the interconnection between visual management, continuous improvement and performance management based on a case study was investigated. More quantitative researches, on bigger scales, are required to better understand the mentioned interactions and to enhance our knowledge of these tools in a holistic manner.

The originality of the papers comes from its holistic approach to visual management, performance management and continuous improvement programmes and the suggested framework to establish an IVM programme.

The current state of the art on continuous improvement takes into consideration that capabilities and organizational behaviors are more important elements for conduction and sustainability than the technical aspects. This set of capabilities and behaviors, initially addressed by Bessant and Caffyn in the 1990s, essentially considers that organizations should build an environment focussed on continuous learning. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to analyze the development of capabilities that support continuous improvement programs in two distinct productive environments: the automotive sector and the custom made capital goods sector.

From a theoretical reference on the subject, a set of capabilities that are related to the practice of continuous improvement is raised and, through a qualitative approach, four companies of the two sectors considered are analyzed using a case study strategy.

The research results suggest that the companies researched in the automotive sector have a higher level of employee engagement in relation to continuous improvement programs compared to the companies in the capital goods sector, which is justified by the strategy adopted by the organizations.

As any qualitative approach, this research presents restrictions regarding the generalization of the results for the studied sectors.

The contribution of this paper can be divided into two parts. The first one refers to the identification of a current framework of capabilities that support continuous improvement, and the second one is the evaluation of the development of these capabilities in two sectors with different productive contexts (automotive and custom made capital goods).

Spurred by the globalization of competition, organizational learning and continuous improvement have attracted a great deal of research and managerial interest in recent years. Notwithstanding the growing literature on these topics, there is still considerable conceptual ambiguity about organizational learning and continuous improvement among researchers. The paper clarifies the underlying processes through which organizations “learn,” highlights the role of learning in continuous improvement programs, and shows how an organization may go about building a continuous improvement culture. Specific tools and techniques of organizational learning which may be used in continuous improvement programs are also discussed.

Considers the relationship between the types of targets or benchmarks used and reward structures adopted in two contrasting performance improvement strategies – continuous improvement and radical change. Hypothesises that the process of target setting and the reward structures adopted will be different between the two strategies. The propositions are that organisations involved in continuous improvement of a process will base their performance targets on past performance and internal benchmarking, arrived at through consultation and with a mixture of financial and non‐financial rewards for achieving targets. For processes involving radical change, targets will be based on external benchmarks imposed by senior management, with financial rewards for their achievement. The findings from a semi‐structured questionnaire conducted in 40 UK service organisations reveal that most continuous improvement targets were based on past performance and that processes undergoing radical change made limited use of external benchmarks. In the majority of cases, targets were imposed by managers without consultation, with rewards linked to theachievement of those targets. Financial rewards, particularly financial bonuses, predominated in both improvement strategies. The implications are that the potential benefits of adopting process changes are being constrained. In continuous improvement the lack of participation in target setting could be undermining the team‐based empowerment philosophy of the strategy. The aim of radical change is to achieve a paradigm shift involving revolutionary rather than evolutionary change which is less likely to be fulfilled with targets based on past performance.

The firm’s structural inertia seems to be a crucial roadblock in continuous improvement efforts. The management paradigm shift required in the transition towards a continuous improvement culture is from individual‐based learning to system‐based learning. Explores the role of an organizational learning mechanism in overcoming the barriers for continuous improvement. Examines the implications of the creation of a parallel learning structure mechanism and its concomitant impact on continuous improvement in a paper mill firm over an eight‐year period. Concludes with the identification and discussion of some theoretical issues.

Unveils the myth that process breakthrough methodologies like business process improvement, process re‐engineering, and process innovation, provide a greater total organizational improvement than continuous improvement methodologies. Also shows how to combine continuous improvement and breakthrough improvement methodologies to maximize the improvement effort.