Search results

The purpose of this paper is to present a framework, the CX Framework, for organizational sensemaking of systems-based performance management.

The design/methodology/approach of this paper is theoretical analysis and empirical testing.

The findings on the CX Framework were that organizational sensemaking was aligned with performance management theory and was enhanced with the use of the CX Framework.

The research limitations are that empirical testing has been done on the CX Framework, and therefore, generalizations are not possible.

The practical implications of this paper are that it aids in providing visual management to system complexity as a source of better performance management.

The social implications of this paper are that it informs management science about the importance of sensemaking as both a human and technical act.

The originality of this article is the visual and analytical presentation of enhanced organizational sensemaking as a source of informed performance management.

This paper aims to assess the needs for a lean continuous improvement professional certificate and/or lean leadership cognate for a Doctorate of Education in leadership focused in three main research questions: “What do organizational leaders need from a Lean graduate programming?”; “What are the preferable methods of delivery for Lean teaching/learning?” and “What are the main learner outcomes and do how these impact organizational and continuous improvement outcomes?”

A survey to 37 organizational leaders in a North-American state was conducted via telephone and email that were returned to the researcher. The survey was designed to target a solid cross-section of organizational decision makers in regard to the need for and type of lean training desired, if at all, for employees. Using a mixed methods approach, the survey was designed to collect both qualitative and quantitative information.

Respondents indicated that lean continuous improvement thinking and lean process-project management were most the desirable content options. The method of delivery was not as clear with on-ground and online relying on job-embedded, project-based methods as most desirable approaches. Learner outcomes of mastery of lean content along with the ability to impact organizational and continuous improvement outcomes were favored.

Lean leadership education is valued learning by organizational leaders. As so, higher education institutions must be aware of matching better organizational needs with learning experiences. This paper presents a survey that intended to do this in an original way.

This paper aims to peruse theories and practices of agile and lean manufacturing systems to determine whether they employ sustainability, complexity and organizational learning.

The critical review of the comparative operational similarities and difference of the two systems was conducted while the new views and issues of emerging vital scenarios were analyzed in detail.

In spite of their differences, the two systems of agile and lean manufacturing can co‐exist in one system. The concepts of sustainability, complexity and organizational learning for agile and lean systems highlight outputs of differences in the output of operationalization but there can be substantial alignment in the input of intentions. The two excel at the three areas of consideration.

The organizations of today must consider the applicability of designing both agile and lean systems within one organization for the purposes of achieving fast response time, high levels of productivity and better efficiency.

The paper defines the relationship between agile and lean systems.

This research article is based on the Baldrige National Quality Program Education Criteria for Performance Excellence's conceptualization of improvement as a dual cycle/three element initiative of examining and bettering inputs, processes, and outputs as driven by measurement, analysis and knowledge management work. This study isolates a portion of one input element of leadership, higher education leadership paradigms of concern. These paradigms are analyzed and presented as points of improvement related to lean training for higher education.

This quantitative study utilized an online survey, prior to lean training, to identify leadership paradigms of concern by rank, and by significant paired association, using chi‐square tests and the Yates' correction for several higher education institutions.

The study identifies six highly ranked, and seven highly associated leadership paradigms of concern. The one paradigm that was most highly ranked and most highly associated is confronting ambiguity. The findings highlight that improving leadership paradigms is important.

The study's implications are limited to the higher education respondents' organizations. However, the results of the study provide some insight into the impact of leadership paradigms on improvement work in these higher education settings, where an average of 5.6 paradigms of concern and 114 paired associations were selected.

Much has been written about the explicit elements of the improvement cycle, the processes and outputs of organizational systems. While the improvement elements of inputs are more tacit and harder to define, examining them via force field analysis can be extremely helpful in total quality management work and leadership development.

This editorial aims to introduce the theme of the special issue: “Lean vs agile from an organizational sustainability, complexity and learning perspective”.

The methodology of the editorial is that of a survey. In the first part it presents the relevance of the theme and in the second part it presents the papers included in the special issue, including their themes, findings and novel contributions.

The individual findings by the papers present significant new contributions in a deeper insight of the “lean” and “agile” philosophies, or approaches in, and to, organizations. It could be noticed that the controversies of the issue “lean vs. agile” still remain. However, it could be said that an eventual further investigation in the phenomenology of “lean” and “agile” will be more informed after consideration of the results presented in this special issue.

Further investigation should be undertaken on a more abstract “level” of the theories of “lean” and “agile” and their mutual relationship, such as theories about the internal processes of “lean”/“agile” users, general “lean”/“agile” theories, epistemology of “lean”/“agile”, and ontology of “lean”/“agile”, and relationship with learning organization and chaordic organization.

Readers, both theoreticians and practitioners, will find in this editorial a “guide” to the issues of their interest concerning the valuable explanations, ideas and tools, presented in the special issue, for both concrete applications in enterprises and organizations, and for further research and development of learning, complex and sustainable organizations, and towards new ideas and insights generation.

This editorial presents an analysis of the special issue on “lean vs agile”, contributing to the higher levels of the theories of “lean” and “agile” and their mutual relationship, namely to the theories about the internal processes of “lean”/“agile” users, general “lean”/“agile” theories, and epistemology of “lean”/“agile”.

The internal customer concept is used with different definitions and purposes in research and in practice – an ambiguity with implications for both scholars and practitioners. The purpose of this study is, therefore, to explore the representation of the internal customer concept in quality management literature and reflect on how the user may affect collaboration in health-care processes, in particular between a service function and health-care staff.

A review of the internal customer concept in the literature, followed by a conceptual discussion based on previous studies and theories of organizational discourse.

Three predominant types of relationships related to the internal customer concept were found. The study shows that the ambiguity in the use of the concept may have consequences for the interpretation and application of research results. Potential undesirable consequences with regard to collaboration in processes are discussed.

This study contributes to a new understanding of the internal customer concept in research and practice. As collaboration within and between organizations is increasingly required in many parts of health care, careful considerations become necessary regarding concepts used for relationships to avoid sub-optimization and “us-versus-them” thinking and to strengthen trust-based relationships.