IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aif/journl/v22y2023i1p53-70.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A study of Lean Production and Quality Management on Production Performance: The Evidence in High-tech Manufacturing Companies in China

Author

Listed:
  • HUANG XUELIANG

    (Asia Metropolitan University, Malaysia.)

Abstract

Based on the relevant studies of lean production, production technology improvement, quality management and production performance, the relationship model of lean production, production technology improvement, quality management and production performance of high-tech manufacturing companies is constructed, and the influence mechanism of lean production and production technology improvement on production performance of high-tech manufacturing companies is revealed. Specifically, by systematically reviewing relevant theories and existing research results, this paper proposes a logical idea of “lean production, production technology improvement — quality management — production performance†, discusses and proposes relevant research hypotheses according to the relationship between variables in the theoretical model, and sends out questionnaires to Chinese high-tech manufacturing companies on a large scale, and recovers 425 questionnaires. The incomplete or invalid questionnaires with obvious errors were eliminated, and 411 valid questionnaires were finally obtained. The statistical analysis software SPSS 24.0 and AMOS 24.0 were used for reliability analysis, validity analysis, exploratory factor analysis, typical correlation analysis of the collected data, multiple linear regression analysis model and mediation effect model was established. Test the theoretical paper. In this paper, a total of 7 research hypotheses are proposed, among which 7 hypotheses are supported by the survey data. Combining qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis, this paper draws the following conclusions: (1) Lean production has a significant positive impact on the production performance of high-tech manufacturing companies; (2) The improvement of production technology has a significant positive effect on the production performance of high-tech manufacturing companies; (3) Quality management has a significant positive effect on the production performance of high-tech manufacturing companies; (4) Quality management has a partial mediating effect between lean production and production performance of high-tech manufacturing companies; (5) Quality management plays a partial mediating role between production technology improvement and production performance of high-tech manufacturing companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Huang Xueliang, 2023. "A study of Lean Production and Quality Management on Production Performance: The Evidence in High-tech Manufacturing Companies in China," International Journal of Science and Business, IJSAB International, vol. 22(1), pages 53-70.
    • Handle: RePEc:aif:journl:v:22:y:2023:i:1:p:53-70
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ijsab.com/wp-content/uploads/2095.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ijsab.com/volume-22-issue-1/5690
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Garcia‐Macia & Chang‐Tai Hsieh & Peter J. Klenow, 2019. "How Destructive Is Innovation?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(5), pages 1507-1541, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Catherine Fuss & Angelos Theodorakopoulos, 2018. "Compositional Changes in Aggregate Productivity in an Era of Globalisation and Financial Crisis," Working Papers of VIVES - Research Centre for Regional Economics 627696, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), VIVES - Research Centre for Regional Economics.
    2. Francisco Queiró, 2022. "Entrepreneurial Human Capital and Firm Dynamics [How Large Are Human-Capital Externalities? Evidence from Compulsory Schooling Laws]," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(4), pages 2061-2100.
    3. Daisuke Miyakawa & Koki Oikawa & Kozo Ueda, 2022. "Reallocation Effects Of Monetary Policy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(2), pages 947-975, May.
    4. Nicholas Bloom & Charles I. Jones & John Van Reenen & Michael Webb, 2020. "Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(4), pages 1104-1144, April.
    5. Chu, Angus C. & Liao, Chih-Hsing & Xu, Rongxin & Chen, Ping-Ho, 2024. "Dynamic effects of tourism shocks on innovation in an open-economy Schumpeterian growth model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    6. Patrick Bajari & Zhihao Cen & Victor Chernozhukov & Manoj Manukonda & Jin Wang & Ramon Huerta & Junbo Li & Ling Leng & George Monokroussos & Suhas Vijaykunar & Shan Wan, 2023. "Hedonic prices and quality adjusted price indices powered by AI," CeMMAP working papers 08/23, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    7. Jess Benhabib & Jesse Perla & Christopher Tonetti, 2021. "Reconciling Models of Diffusion and Innovation: A Theory of the Productivity Distribution and Technology Frontier," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(5), pages 2261-2301, September.
    8. Laurent Cavenaile & Pau Roldan-Blanco, 2021. "Advertising, Innovation, and Economic Growth," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 251-303, July.
    9. Jose Asturias & Sewon Hur & Timothy J. Kehoe & Kim J. Ruhl, 2023. "Firm Entry and Exit and Aggregate Growth," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 48-105, January.
    10. Tommaso Ciarli & André Lorentz & Marco Valente & Maria Savona, 2019. "Structural changes and growth regimes," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 119-176, March.
    11. Pierre Lortie, 2019. "Nurturing Global Growth Companies: Time For A New Policy Toolkit," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 12(27), September.
    12. Thomas Sampson, 2023. "Technology Gaps, Trade, and Income," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(2), pages 472-513, February.
    13. Michael Peters, 2020. "Heterogeneous Markups, Growth, and Endogenous Misallocation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(5), pages 2037-2073, September.
    14. Laurent Cavenaile & Pau Roldan-Blanco & Tom Schmitz, 2023. "International Trade and Innovation Dynamics with Endogenous Markups," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 133(651), pages 971-1004.
    15. Vincent Dortet-Bernadet & Michaël Sicsic, 2017. "The effect of R&D subsidies and tax incentives on employment: an evaluation for small firms in France," Economie et Statistique / Economics and Statistics, Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques (INSEE), issue 493, pages 5-22.
    16. de Ridder, Maarten, 2016. "Investment in productivity and the long-run effect of financial crises on output," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 86180, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Thomas von Brasch & Arvid Raknerud, 2022. "The impact of new varieties on aggregate productivity growth," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 124(3), pages 646-676, July.
    18. Argente, David & Lee, Munseob & Moreira, Sara, 2018. "Innovation and product reallocation in the great recession," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 1-20.
    19. Ufuk Akcigit & William Kerr, 2015. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovation, Second Version," PIER Working Paper Archive 15-020, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 25 Mar 2015.
    20. Maarten de Ridder, 2022. "Market power and innovation in the intangible economy," POID Working Papers 064, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

    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:aif:journl:v:22:y:2023:i:1:p:53-70. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Farjana Rahman (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.