Search results

Introduction Consider a hi‐fi loudspeaker manufacturing company acquired on the brink of insolvency by an American multinational. The new owners discover with growing concern that the product range is obsolete, that manufacturing facilities are totally inadequate and that there is a complete absence of any real management substance or structure. They decide on the need to relocate urgently so as to provide continuity of supply at the very high — a market about to shrink at a rate unprecedented in its history.

Over the past few years, SINTEF Industrial Management has carried out several network projects on quality improvement for small‐ and medium‐size enterprises (SMEs). The projects have been conducted according to the standardised SINTEF Quality Improvement Programme (QIP). The main activities of the programme are initial education, planning and organisation of company projects, the reactive problem solving process, company‐wide work unit analysis and initiation of a continuous improvement process. This paper focuses on the improvement section of the programme, especially the activities related to the Reactive Problem Solving Conference (RPSC). The article gives an argument for using RSPC and problem solving as early as possible in the programme to increase interest in and understanding of the quality improvement process. An example of a problem‐solving process in a SME is described, showing how relatively simple activities are used to improve the production process.

In recent years, three key topics under the big umbrella of business process improvement (BPI) have been continuous process improvement (CPI), business process reengineering (BPR), and business process benchmarking (BPB). Each has received much attention and has been supported by a considerable amount of literature and empirical research and findings from business consultants and academics. Within the manufacturing domain, these three topics have been accepted by many manufacturing process analysts striving to improve productivity and efficiency of companies. However, organization structures in manufacturing enterprises are complex and involve many different processes. Their needs may be quite different. One process may require an incremental improvement in critical areas or technology updating in its existing operation while others may need a total enterprise‐wide process revamp. In other words, CPI, BPR, and BPB’s usefulness and applicability may not be universal; one or a combination of the two or three may be more appropriate, depending on the process, organization and its environment. An improvement framework which incorporates the characteristics of the three approaches has been developed. This paper describes the methodology, SUPER, and its use in a real case study.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the history and existing research on continuous improvement (CI).

Extensive review of the literature.

This paper provides an overview of CI, its inception, how it evolved into sophisticated methodologies used in organizations today, and existing research in this field in the literature.

The literature on classification of CI has so far been very limited. The paper reviews a large number of papers in this field and presents the overview of various CI implementation practices demonstrated by manufacturing organizations globally. It also highlights the sophisticated CI methodologies suggested by various researchers and practitioners in the field of CI.

The literature on classification of CI has so far been very limited. The paper reviews a large number of papers in this field and presents the overview of various CI implementation practices demonstrated by manufacturing organizations globally. It also highlights the sophisticated CI methodologies suggested by various researchers and practitioners in the field of CI.

The paper contains a comprehensive listing of publications on the field in question and its classification. It will be useful to researchers, improvement professionals and others concerned with improvement to understand the significance of CI. It should be of value to practitioners of CI programmes and to academics who are interested in how CI has evolved, and where it is today. To the authors’ knowledge, no recent papers have provided an historical perspective of CI.

Adopting the dynamic capability perspective, this study aims at exploring which problem-solving capabilities result in fundamental solutions with a potentially low likelihood for problems to recur. This can also shed light on why, despite many attempts, process improvement programs often fail to produce such long-term solutions.

A case study is carried out to inductively describe and classify problem-solving in companies and to indicate why problem-solving efforts are typically bounded to short-term solutions. The empirical findings are triangulated with findings from the extant literature.

First, the authors propose three problem-solving modes with different characteristics and potential impacts on operational performance: intuitive problem-solving, semi-structured problem-solving and systematic problem-solving. Second, by emphasizing dynamic capabilities' micro-foundations and with the focus on learning mechanisms, the authors show that, among these modes, only systematic problem-solving can serve as a dynamic capability with fundamental solutions. Third, based on insights from the case study, the authors address behavioral and organizational impediments that curb dynamic capabilities and limit systematic problem-solving adoption.

This study is an empirically informed attempt to understand systematic problem-solving as a dynamic capability. The authors uncover the micro-foundations and the learning mechanisms through which systematic problem-solving becomes a dynamic capability. By highlighting problem-solving orientation as a hardly investigated dimension of improvement programs, the authors show that a mixture of a static problem-solving approach and a set of impediments at both individual and organizational levels is the major reason of failures of improvement programs over time.

Although lean methods are considered easy to be implemented during the initial phases of the lean transformation process, few companies are able to maintain them in long term. One of the key factors for this maintenance is the role played by the leaders in their teams. The purpose of this paper is to show the outcomes of an action research that analyzed and developed leadership practices, using the lean leadership model for developing people as reference and considering the factors: to promote employees’ self-development; to coach and develop employees; to support daily kaizen; to create vision and align goal.

The results of this study are based on the action research method applied in a large Brazilian industrial company. The study was structured considering the phases of problem diagnosis, action plan, implementation and evaluation of practical and theoretical results.

The leadership practices implemented from the model were shown to be adequate to the lean production system (LPS) and it was observed that reflecting on the processes and the organizational learning are two main concepts that these practices support in the organization.

Since this study is based on action research in a single company, the generalization of results is limited. Suggestions for future research include the development of a quantitative research in different industrial contexts.

The practical implications of this research are to present activities that must be developed by the leadership of organizations to maintain LPS.

This paper raises the problems of organizational leadership that limit the implementation and maintenance of LPS, presenting the planning and implementation of changes in leadership practices to solve these problems.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) processes within a flow-line production-improvement activity. Investigation can lead to understanding of how a process improvement framework influences the decision and fulfillment of the potential to successfully change the operation process.

The improvement process selection (IPS) framework is built systematically by incorporating all related decision criteria with suitable tools required to select improvement alternatives. The process consists of three phases: identification, prediction, and selection. The IPS framework is validated through a case study of a company that was carrying out a flow-line production-improvement project.

The developed framework is used to prioritize the problem scope and select the solutions from various options. The case study illustrates the process through which the developed framework provided a systematic approach in identifying the solutions and achieving the desired performance improvement. Prediction result analysis shows the framework achieved sustainable process improvement changes and prevents management levels from higher risks in failure improvement. The feedback of the case study has verified the robustness of the framework.

Quantitative improvement tools, such as MCDM employed in the IPS framework are vital for better understanding of the improvement impact of changes. Thus, the improvement solution alternatives can be analyzed in more comprehensive ways by considering numerous performance metrics in order to select the best improvement alternatives.

The IPS framework can assist the company in determining optimal decisions in relation to selection of improvement alternatives. As a result, production performance can be affected positively.

The purpose of this paper is to define a method for sustain lean tools and philosophies on a manufacturing environment.

An in-depth action research (AR) methodology procedures applied in two cycles were conducted in an automobile company located in southeastern Brazil. The objective is to test the applicability of the shop floor management (SFM) implementation model as presented by Hanenkamp (2013).

The SFM model presented by Hanenkamp (2013) has been outlined, detailed and applied in practice. Opportunities for improvement during the application process of this model were verified by changes in its steps. After developing the AR, the authors have shown that the SFM model, as proposed in this paper, can indeed assist managers in applying and maintaining lean manufacturing practices on the shop floor.

This paper contributes by aiding in filling the gap between practical applications and the sustainability of lean manufacturing concepts and solutions. Furthermore, the guidelines introduced serve as a benchmark for other companies interested in the topic.