IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/snopef/v4y2023i2d10.1007_s43069-023-00198-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding Lean—Statistical Analysis of Perceptions and Self-Deception Regarding Lean Management

Author

Listed:
  • Antony Pearce

    (University of Canterbury)

  • Dirk Pons

    (University of Canterbury
    University of Canterbury)

  • Thomas Neitzert

    (Auckland University of Technology)

Abstract

Despite the benefits of a lean business system, many organisations struggle to implement and sustain lean initiatives. The purpose of this work was to explore in what way a leader’s deeper knowledge or different understandings of lean affects the lean implementation and its outcomes. The research methodology incorporated a survey of 757 participants. How respondents understood lean was assessed and later correlated to their extent of lean knowledge and specific understanding. This was supported by exploratory factor analysis and structural equation modelling. What caused participants to pursue lean knowledge was also assessed. Low lean knowledge and experience correlated with a system, tools and processes perspective of lean that was perceived to provide a low competitive advantage. Those of high lean knowledge had a much more holistic view of lean that encompassed both socio and technical aspects and also perceived greater competitive advantages from lean. Results showed 88% of people were (are) not at all familiar with lean, 9% of low knowledge and 3% of high knowledge. This paper promotes the importance of management knowledge in establishing a lean business system and exposes that many are actually self-deceived regarding their knowledge of lean. It identifies the need to develop lean education and recommends further research in this area. It also provides a conceptual framework for the implementation of lean with an emphasis on leadership learning. This paper contributes statistical evidence and a new perspective on the cause of lean success and failure.

Suggested Citation

  • Antony Pearce & Dirk Pons & Thomas Neitzert, 2023. "Understanding Lean—Statistical Analysis of Perceptions and Self-Deception Regarding Lean Management," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 1-43, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:snopef:v:4:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s43069-023-00198-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s43069-023-00198-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s43069-023-00198-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s43069-023-00198-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert M. Grant, 1996. "Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 375-387, August.
    2. Peter Hines & Sarah Lethbridge, 2008. "New Development: Creating a Lean University," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 53-56, February.
    3. Joseph F. Hair & G. Tomas M. Hult & Christian M. Ringle & Marko Sarstedt & Kai Oliver Thiele, 2017. "Mirror, mirror on the wall: a comparative evaluation of composite-based structural equation modeling methods," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 616-632, September.
    4. Sungho Park & Sachin Gupta, 2012. "Handling Endogenous Regressors by Joint Estimation Using Copulas," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 567-586, July.
    5. Danny Samson & Matteo Kalchschmidt, 2019. "Looking forward in operations management research," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-3, June.
    6. John Antonakis & Samuel Bendahan & Philippe Jacquart & Rafael Lalive, 2010. "On making causal claims : A review and recommendations," Post-Print hal-02313119, HAL.
    7. Marcel F. Assen, 2018. "The moderating effect of management behavior for Lean and process improvement," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, June.
    8. Balzer, William K. & Brodke, Michelle H. & Kluse, Christopher & Zickar, Michael J., 2019. "Revolution or 30-year fad? A role for I-O psychology in Lean management," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 215-233, September.
    9. Jörg Henseler & Marko Sarstedt, 2013. "Goodness-of-fit indices for partial least squares path modeling," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 565-580, April.
    10. Jarl Kampen & Marc Swyngedouw, 2000. "The Ordinal Controversy Revisited," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 87-102, February.
    11. Cox, Andrew & Chicksand, Dan, 2005. "The Limits of Lean Management Thinking:: Multiple Retailers and Food and Farming Supply Chains," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 648-662, December.
    12. Claire McInerney, 2002. "Knowledge management and the dynamic nature of knowledge," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 53(12), pages 1009-1018, October.
    13. Farrell, Andrew M., 2010. "Insufficient discriminant validity: A comment on Bove, Pervan, Beatty, and Shiu (2009)," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 324-327, March.
    14. Naga Vamsi Krishna Jasti & Rambabu Kodali, 2015. "Lean production: literature review and trends," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(3), pages 867-885, February.
    15. Maurizio Zollo & Sidney G. Winter, 2002. "Deliberate Learning and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 339-351, June.
    16. Sarstedt, Marko & Hair, Joseph F. & Ringle, Christian M. & Thiele, Kai O. & Gudergan, Siegfried P., 2016. "Estimation issues with PLS and CBSEM: Where the bias lies!," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 3998-4010.
    17. Fuller, Christie M. & Simmering, Marcia J. & Atinc, Guclu & Atinc, Yasemin & Babin, Barry J., 2016. "Common methods variance detection in business research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 3192-3198.
    18. Pearce, Antony & Pons, Dirk, 2019. "Advancing lean management: The missing quantitative approach," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 6(C).
    19. Marko Sarstedt & Erik Mooi, 2014. "A Concise Guide to Market Research," Springer Texts in Business and Economics, Springer, edition 2, number 978-3-642-53965-7, June.
    20. Hicks, B.J., 2007. "Lean information management: Understanding and eliminating waste," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 233-249.
    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. Pearce, Antony & Pons, Dirk & Neitzert, Thomas, 2018. "Implementing lean—Outcomes from SME case studies," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 94-104.
    2. Pearce, Antony & Pons, Dirk, 2019. "Advancing lean management: The missing quantitative approach," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 6(C).
    3. Schlägel, Christopher & Sarstedt, Marko, 2016. "Assessing the measurement invariance of the four-dimensional cultural intelligence scale across countries: A composite model approach," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 633-649.
    4. Enrico Ciavolino & Massimo Aria & Jun-Hwa Cheah & José Luis Roldán, 2022. "A tale of PLS Structural Equation Modelling: Episode I— A Bibliometrix Citation Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 1323-1348, December.
    5. Milad Mirbabaie & Felix Brünker & Nicholas R. J. Möllmann Frick & Stefan Stieglitz, 2022. "The rise of artificial intelligence – understanding the AI identity threat at the workplace," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(1), pages 73-99, March.
    6. Antonia Madrid‐Guijarro & Antonio Duréndez, 2024. "Sustainable development barriers and pressures in SMEs: The mediating effect of management commitment to environmental practices," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 949-967, February.
    7. Cheah, Jun-Hwa & Waller, David & Thaichon, Park & Ting, Hiram & Lim, Xin-Jean, 2020. "Price image and the sugrophobia effect on luxury retail purchase intention," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    8. Hair, Joseph F. & Astrachan, Claudia Binz & Moisescu, Ovidiu I. & Radomir, Lăcrămioara & Sarstedt, Marko & Vaithilingam, Santha & Ringle, Christian M., 2021. "Executing and interpreting applications of PLS-SEM: Updates for family business researchers," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 12(3).
    9. Salgado, Stéphane & Hemonnet-Goujot, Aurelie & Henard, David H. & de Barnier, Virginie, 2020. "The dynamics of innovation contest experience: An integrated framework from the customer’s perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 29-43.
    10. Ostovan, Nima & Khalili Nasr, Arash, 2022. "The manifestation of luxury value dimensions in brand engagement in self-concept," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    11. Osama Sohaib & Kyeong Kang & Mohammad Nurunnabi, 2018. "Gender-Based iTrust in E-Commerce: The Moderating Role of Cognitive Innovativeness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    12. Ortiz García Navas, Beatriz & Donate Manzanares, Mario Javier & Guadamillas Gómez, Fátima, 2019. "Social capital as a theoretical approach in Strategic Management," Cuadernos de Gestión, Universidad del País Vasco - Instituto de Economía Aplicada a la Empresa (IEAE).
    13. Lussier, Bruno & Philp, Matthew & Hartmann, Nathaniel N. & Wieland, Heiko, 2021. "Social anxiety and salesperson performance: The roles of mindful acceptance and perceived sales manager support," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 112-125.
    14. Xiao Zhang & Luqun Xie & Jiatao Li & Li Cheng, 2022. "“Outside in”: Global demand heterogeneity and dynamic capabilities of multinational enterprises," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(4), pages 709-722, June.
    15. Reid, Gavin C. & Smith, Julia A., 2009. "A coevolutionary analysis of organisational systems and processes: Quantitative applications to information system dynamics in small entrepreneurial firms," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 762-781.
    16. Sarker, Moniruzzaman & Mohd-Any, Amrul Asraf & Kamarulzaman, Yusniza, 2021. "Validating a consumer-based service brand equity (CBSBE) model in the airline industry," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    17. Mehran Nejati & Azadeh Shafaei, 2023. "Why do employees respond differently to corporate social responsibility? A study of substantive and symbolic corporate social responsibility," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(4), pages 2066-2080, July.
    18. Schriber, Svante & Löwstedt, Jan, 2015. "Tangible resources and the development of organizational capabilities," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 54-68.
    19. Khalid Rasheed Memon & Say Keat Ooi & Heesup Han, 2024. "Responsible innovation and corporate sustainability performance: A structural equation modeling‐neural network approach," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 2712-2730, May.
    20. Bhattarai, Charan Raj & Kwong, Caleb C.Y. & Tasavori, Misagh, 2019. "Market orientation, market disruptiveness capability and social enterprise performance: An empirical study from the United Kingdom," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 47-60.

    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:spr:snopef:v:4:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s43069-023-00198-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.