IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eurman/v17y1999i2p120-134.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Overcoming the improvement paradox

Author

Listed:
  • Keating, Elizabeth
  • Oliva, Rogelio
  • Repenning, Nelson
  • Rockart, Scott
  • Sterman, John

Abstract

Despite the demonstrated benefits of improvement programs such as total quality management and reengineering, most improvement programs end in failure. Companies have found it extremely difficult to sustain even initially successful process improvement programs. Even more puzzling, successful improvement programs sometimes worsen business performance, triggering layoffs, low morale, and the collapse of commitment to continuous improvement. We term this phenomenon the `Improvement Paradox.' For the last four years, we have worked with a variety of firms to understand the paradox and design policies to overcome it. Our findings suggest that the inability to manage an improvement program as a dynamic process is the main determinant of program failure. Improvement programs are tightly coupled to other functions and processes in the firm, and to the firm's customers, suppliers, competitors and capital markets. Failure to account for the feedbacks among these tightly coupled activities leads to unanticipated and often harmful side effects. We describe these dynamics and offer some guidance for managers seeking to design sustainable process improvement programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Keating, Elizabeth & Oliva, Rogelio & Repenning, Nelson & Rockart, Scott & Sterman, John, 1999. "Overcoming the improvement paradox," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 120-134, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:17:y:1999:i:2:p:120-134
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263237398000723
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Glover, Wiljeana J. & Farris, Jennifer A. & Van Aken, Eileen M. & Doolen, Toni L., 2011. "Critical success factors for the sustainability of Kaizen event human resource outcomes: An empirical study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 197-213, August.
    2. Armenia Androniceanu & Ioana-Catalina Enache & Elena-Narcisa Valter & Florin-Felix Raduica, 2023. "Increasing Energy Efficiency Based on the Kaizen Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-24, February.
    3. Ingrid M. Nembhard & Anita L. Tucker, 2011. "Deliberate Learning to Improve Performance in Dynamic Service Settings: Evidence from Hospital Intensive Care Units," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 907-922, August.
    4. Gary, Linnéusson & Amos, Ng H.C. & Tehseen, Aslam, 2018. "Towards strategic development of maintenance and its effects on production performance by using system dynamics in the automotive industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 151-169.
    5. Scott F. Rockart & Nilanjana Dutt, 2015. "The rate and potential of capability development trajectories," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 53-75, January.
    6. Farris, Jennifer A. & Van Aken, Eileen M. & Doolen, Toni L. & Worley, June, 2009. "Critical success factors for human resource outcomes in Kaizen events: An empirical study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 42-65, January.
    7. Besiou, Maria & Georgiadis, Patroklos & Van Wassenhove, Luk N., 2012. "Official recycling and scavengers: Symbiotic or conflicting?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 563-576.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:17:y:1999:i:2:p:120-134. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/115/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.