Defining the foundation of lean manufacturing in the context of its origins (Japan). C. Herron*, P.M.

Braident
*One

t ecsl

North East, UK. colin.herron@onenortheast.co.uk University, UK. p.m.braiden@newcastle.ac. uk

Key words: Lean manufacturing, Genba kanri. Abstract Manufacturing companies in the west are preoccupied with a contest for survival with emerging economies. One of the established tools in the contest is lean manufacturing. This paper reports work with a recognised exemplar in lean manufacturing combined with a study visit to Japanese companies, which has identified a core of manufatcturing best practice. This has, in turn, supported a regional research programme designed to increase productivity in general manufacturing. The outcomes of this programme lead to questions regarding current westemn thinking/writing with respect to the introduction of lean manufacturing, along with the associated tools/techniques. The result is three propositions; the central point is that the cultural difference between the original source of a concept and the intended recipient is a major factor in the potential success or failure of a change programme. The second is that the techniques of lean manufacturing are explicit but have become confused by re-classifications and the apparent desire in the west to present 'solution packages'. Typical packages include: Six-Sigma, Theory of Constraints, Lean manufacturing and recently Lean Six-sigma. A further proposition is that the imposition of 'solution packages' can be both confusing and potentially harmful. Whilst the basic tools of manufacturing best practice are discrete, for maximum benefit and sustainability they are dependent on each other, which is often not appreciated. 1. Introduction This paper addresses elements of confusion surrounding lean manufacturing in order to establish those elements that should constitute a first level of abstraction and application [1], in a technology transfer process [2], [3]. An example of what is potentially confusing to manufacturers may be found in [4], who defines lean manufacturing as JIT and one-piece flow. In his paper Cooney compares lean manufacturing with batch flow. His conclusion is that lean manufacturing only applies to one-piece flow. This begs the question as to whether 5S, standard operations and skill control are applicable to batch manufacturing? This also leads to the question as to whether Genba Kanri' can be applied to batch production? A second example is CANDO [5]. They define CANDO as a structured approach to creating discipline in an area which is sometimes referred to as "housekeeping", hence CANDO stands for: C= Clean up, A = Arranging, N = Neatness, D = Discipline and 0 = Ongoing improvement. This is, in essence, the original 5S, which has been translated to 5C by some, and then referred to as CANDO. The reasons for this change are not justified. In an article by [6] he has also considered the anomalies of what is marketed as lean and what actually happens at companies such as Toyota. The points raised include how the TPS operates and what is sold as lean (in America). This paper will cover the definition of lean manufacturing, associated tools and their application within the study group. Nissan and Japan application (culture) are used to compare. 2. A plethora of tools and techniques The lack of classification of lean tools and expressed concern that "the headlong rush to lean has resulted in many misapplications of the existing lean tools often due to the inadequate understanding of the purpose of the tools" [7] Misappropriation falls into 3 types: use of the wrong tool to solve a problem; use of a single tool to solve all problems; use of the same set of tools on all problems. [7] identify' 100 tools of lean manufacturing and also note that some are not tools but concepts and that some may overlap. These authors also state that there is no way of systematically linking a manufacturing organisation to its problems and the possible tools to eliminate these problems. In a study of kaizen in Japan [8] comment that: "The effort needed in this study to ensure that the managers and workers understood what we were talking about, and the subtlety and nuance of their answers imply that we must be highly sceptical of question-based research in this area". 1Genba Kanri [9], consists of 3S, skill control, standard operations and kaizen

148

This additional level of confusion is due to the nuances of the Japanese language and culture combined with the possible difficulty in understanding what a question is actually asking due to translation. The outcome of these disparate efforts within manufacturing is a level of confusion contributing to a high failure rate for lean initiatives. A literature search to support longitudinal research into the transference of automotive lean manufacturing techniques into general manufacturing [10], revealed an improvement initiative failure rate of up to 90% [11], quoting [12], [13], and [14]. This paper expands the observations of [7] by adding a fourth point, which is: 'lack of understanding of the tools'. An example being that 5S is often sold simply as housekeeping (a clean workplace is a welcome outcome) when it is an integral step for the application of Kan ban. An additional objective was to explore the difficulty of linking a manufacturing organisation to its problems and the tools to create an effective solution. The research programme methodology adopted for the research reported in this paper was to apply a selected set of tools to all participating companies as a first step to introducing lean manufacturing as a concept. Thus the emphasis was transferred from the branding or marketing of a particular lean tool or technique to the application in the workplace. This paper has also been compiled using several years experience working with Nissan Motor Manufacturing UK (NMUK) and through visits to automotive companies in Japan. These visits commenced in 1989 when a period of 6 weeks was spent working in the Nissan Oppama plant. Subsequent visits (specifically those in 1999, 2004 and 2006) involved 27 companies (Appendix 4) to observe the elements of best practice currently being applied. Further supporting evidence is taken from research into applying manufacturing best practice to improve productivity in the North East region of the UK'. In this investigation more than 200 companies have been examined utilising a new Productivity Needs Analysis [15]. This has provided a unique insight into the operations of companies with regard to data collection and the impact of basic tools. The experience of 'hands on' best practice introduction with Nissan and its suppliers, combined with research into original concepts, has identified a conflict, between the work of academics, suppliers and practitioners of 'lean manufacturing' and the customer.

The definition of lean manufacturing 2. Due to the confusion regarding lean manufacturing, the following definition has been adopted: 'lean manufacturing is the identification and application of best manufacturing practice to eliminate waste and variation' [16]. Within a lean manufacturing production system such as the Toyota production System (TPS) there is a base operating methodology, utilised by manufacturers in Japan under the heading of Genba Kanri [9]. These basic operating rules have been developed over many years in several Japanese companies to the point where they are now implicit in manufacturing operations. Within Japanese production systems researchers can identify those tools, which the west calls 'lean tools' such as SMED, JIT, Kaizen etc. However, they have not been adopted in isolation; they were developed for a reason, which was to support an overall strategy. Measuring the level of 'richness of adoption' [17], regarding the application of certain tools is, therefore, meaningless as tools such as JIT are simply the by-products of a production system. Asking a question such as: do you have Kan ban controls? Where a yes or no response is required suggests a lack of understanding of lean manufacturing. For example, the most productive car plant in Europe (NMUK) does not have Kan ban because it has developed in a different way. A reasonable response to the question of what is the goal regarding manufacturing is proposed by Taiichi Ohno [18] "All we are doing is looking at the time from the moment the customer gives us an order to the point where we collect the cash. And we are reducing the time line by removing the nonvalue-added wastes". Lean suggests and, in fact, demands of a manufacturer minimal buffer stocks between operations, which require levels of predictability. That is, if a process over a working shift performs within predictable levels of variation to agreed standards it will satisfy quality and delivery targets. Cost will also be automatically stabilised; however it should be noted that cost is a function of more than manufacturing factors. Focussing on waste (Muda) is the most common approach to "implementing lean tools" as it is easy to identify process waste. What many companies fail to do is stabilise the system [18]. Hourly outputs will vary due to breaks, tool changes etc; however, any stoppage must be planned so that it does not impact on the average output beyond the limits set. 1Teprogramme is known as the North East Productivity Alliance (NEPA), which is funded by the regional development agency One NorthEast and contributed to a PhD thesis by one of the authors.

149

Without adherence to. and the correct application of. basic manufacturing best practice, operating systems such as the Toyota Production System (TPS) would fail to deliver [18]. Japanese manufacturing strives to eliminate waste, as this requirement is an integral part of any operating system, It is therefore not an option. Within any production system there is a simple operating methodology, which is used by manufacturers in Japan under the heading of Genba kanri [9]. This simple format is still the foundation of several organisations' operating systems including that of NMUK. 3. Which tools form the basis of best practice (Geaba kanri)? The tools in question are: (i) problem solving and small team activities (kaizen), (ii) skill control, (iii) standard operations, (iv) 3S (discussed later in 3.0 observations and results), (v) basic autonomous plant maintenance (not full TPM) and (vi) Dandori Kaizen (SMED). These tools form the base of NMUK's operating methods. The context of the six points are that; if an operator has a controlled environment together with a defined method of working and the correct level of skill to perform the task in hand, the potential for error or output failure is minimised. In the event of failure, systematic problem solving will be applied to ensure a repeat failure does not happen. The above tools can be easily abstracted and applied into a willing company; they will not create a lean enterprise but are key stepping-stones to leaming [18]. 4.0 Observation and results To create the correct environment for an operator within an organisation is a major step forward towards manufacturing best practice. The concepts are quite simple. However, the application can create complex management problems for individual companies. The successful companies are those who accept that they have problems and then address them. For any feature of a process the outcome at the end of a time period (such as a working shift) will be predictable if process variation is under control. This is the basic concept of NMUK's production system or the Nissan Production Way (NPW) which has at its core a basic concept of 'quality driven, waste free' in every department. Core to NPW is the operating philosophy of sequenced manufacturing or Douki-seisan, of which Nissan has developed key measures for use on the full manufacturing process of the vehicle. Scheduled sequence achievement (SSA) ratio indicates the extent to which vehicles remain in the scheduled sequence through the production process. The

reasoning being that if a vehicle is out of its original sequence, additional unplanned work must have been required. SSA Ratio (%)
=

OK* Vehicles x 109

Total number of vehicles processed The scheduled time achievement (STA) ratio indicates the extent to which vehicles reach the process end point at the scheduled time. The vehicle may be in sequence but if it is late the question is why? STA Ratio ()=OK* Vehicles x 100 Total number of vehicles processed The prime objective of Douki seisan is to maintain a smooth uninterrupted flow of vehicles & allow for sequential delivery from suppliers enabling finished stock reductions and on time delivery to customers. A highly predictive flow of vehicles will allow suppliers to supply with minimum stocks. 4.1 Summary of the basic tools observed in Japan One of the authors first visited Japan's automotive industry 15 years ago, and on the most recent visits (2004 and 2006) did not see any major deviation in techniques from the first or any other visit in the intervening years. Exponents of lean might expect to see 5S in the list of Genba kanri tools, however experience and observations are that Nissan in the UK work to 3S as the final two steps to 5S are cultural. Here, cultural means they are natural in Japan but mainly enforced in Europe. Surprisingly, even in Japan one Honda supplier displayed 3S as the target. The companies visited (appendix 4) did not conceal the fact that they were facing similar challenges to those in the west with regard to emerging economies, which in their case was China. Pressures existed within the automotive 1I" tier supply base with Honda and Nissan requesting 30% cost reductions. Of some surprise was the high level of immigrant workers (Brazilian), which in the case of one supplier to Honda made up 70% of the workforce. In the other companies levels of 40% were not uncommon as the pay rates of a Japanese worker with social costs were double that of a guest worker. 'Professor Katsutoshi Ayano of Tokai University (a Deming award judge) was asked by the delegation during a lecture in Tokyo (December 2006) "what is the main cause of failure"? The answer he gave was "variability".

150

Operators compiled data on simple charts, one of the most frequently used being a simple tally chart. In two companies operators presented the outcome of a Quality Circle activity. In both cases the structure was first a Pareto analysis followed by: a group brainstorm, a fishbone analysis then application of the '5 why' technique. The final ingredient was culture, which to be experienced fully requires a visit to Japan. Basic disciplines that the West find so difficult to implement are part of their every day life. An industrial example of the application of good manufacturing practice is shown in Figure 1. The use of basic lean manufacturing tools and techniques were applied repeatedly and well and are illustrated by the following points: (A) a request light for help from a supervisor or team leader; (B) the minimising of head movement to allow the operator to view information required to perform the required function; (C) the location of parts and tools to minimise waste through unnecessary body movement; (D) the location of tools to complete the required tasks under the rules of 5S; (E) the application of a strike zone, which reduces human bending and twisting; These techniques are applied at very little cost and need to be in place to maximise and stabilise production at a cell level. The attention to detail shown in this cell is what the authors call 'the basics' or 'best practice' and is seen many times over in Japanese factories and at NMUK. 4.2 Examples of Japanese culture relating to manufacturing: It is important to introduce aspects of the Japanese culture to the discussion in an attempt to explain why it is possibly easier to maintain techniques in Japan than in the West. The first example chosen was observed on a platform in a Japanese Metro station (Figure 2). The people are simply waiting for a train. However they have: formed a natural flow; are within pre-defined boundaries as marked on the platform; confidence that the train (next delivery) will stop at the mark on the platform; access to advertising and visual information which is placed on the wall opposite the marked standing area. Here the advertisers know where the audience will be standing. This type of behaviour is natural to the Japanese but counter-cultural in the West and must be considered when trying to abstract and apply techniques from another culture.

A second example of best practice was observed in a high tumnover Japanese restaurant. A book was placed in reception so that diners could write in the next space their name, the number in the party and any smoking preference (part number and quantity with special details). The attendants simply matched the tickets with free tables or spaces. On every table was located a bell, which was wired to a central electronic board. When activated, the bell illuminated table numbers in the order in which they were rung i.e. the next customer, who was addressed by the next free attendant. By allowing any attendant to attend any table they had levelled the load between themselves, thus creating, in effect, a simple scheduling system. Also, in Japan, it is customary to welcome each customer with a glass of water, which is free. This restaurant had recognised that this activity was non-value adding so they provided a central water fountain from which people could help themselves. Use of lean tools in the UK 4.3 Preliminary research using a productivity needs analysis (which was applied to 60 companies) indicates that, with the exception of a few companies, an unsatisfactory condition prevails with regard to best practice in manufacturing and the measurement of performance. The 60 companies were interviewed to determine the level of understanding and the application of: 5S/C, Standard operations, Skill control, Kaizen, Process flow, Problem solving, Work measurement techniques (WMT), and Poka Yoke (mistake proofing). The companies studied were from a range of size (not SME restricted) and sectors. The findings suggest that there is a need for basic training. For example, 34% of the companies declared no understanding of Skill control and 42% were not applying it in the workplace. The respective figures for Standard operations were 44% and 52%. With regard to structured problem solving the figures were 37% and 42% and the figures for kaizen were 37% and 42%, which was of some surprise The most concerning feature was the figure for the number of companies who had no real understanding or application of any of the tools, which was 13% and 22%. This result means that almost one quarter of the companies questioned were not applying any of the basic lean tools. Preliminary observations from the first 40 participating companies in this research identified similar pattemns to those noted by [7]. An additional, specific, concern was the difficulty of selecting tools from a wide portfolio and problems in their implementation. Data from a regional study utilising a productivity

needs analysis [151 has also revealed the lack of

151

control within manufacturing across various sectors. The main problems appear to lie within the Schedule Achievement (SA), Not Right First Time (NRFT) and the Overall Equipment Effectiveness (GEE). Analysis of the data produces the following figures: Average SA (to warehouse) was 78%, and was only measured by 6 1%of companies. Average NRFT was 7%, and was only measured by 67% of companies. Average OBE was 58%, and was only measured by 39% of companies. It may be concluded that an unsatisfactory manufacturing performance, combined with a lack of performance data is resulting in companies who cannot schedule accurately and respond with high levels of work in progress and finished parts stock simply to protect the customer. People productivity proved very problematical as those companies who did measure it used measures, which had evolved within their own companies. The companies who did measure also admitted that they had little confidence in the figures. 4.4 Knowledge and application of lean manufacturing tools and techniques within NMUK The next stage was to ascertain the level of adoption of lean tools within Nissan UK), which has been in operation for 20 years and has been the most productive in Europe for the last 7 years'. A questionnaire was therefore issued to all supervisors within the Sunderland plant. The tools investigated were 5S, Standard operations, Production Led Maintenance (PLM), QC story (problem solving), 7 old quality tools, 7 new quality tools and Douki seisan. As an example the following is taken from the questionnaire: Knowledge- Against each of the topics in the questionnaire, if I was to interview yourself, or any of your zone, would they be able to give me not a textbook reply but a good idea of the subject and what percentage of them could give such an explanation. For yourself (supervisor) what percentage reflects your knowledge of the subject? Application- As above but what percentage of the zone is actively applying the tools and techniques? Also for yourself what percentage reflects your daily application of the subject? 1The Harbour report

The results (Figure 3) clearly show the high level of supervisor knowledge. The most significant factor is that the team appear to be applying the knowledge they have been given which is not the case in the other companies surveyed in the region. The supporting data for Figure 5 can be found in Appendix 1, 2, and 3.

5.

Discussion and Conclusions

Referring back to the comments of Cooney one conclusion is that; what is sold as lean manufacturing in the west and what the 'Big 3'(Honda, Nissan and Toyota) actually do is not quite the same. The tools may be the same but the context and method of application is not. Some lean tools such as Value Stream Mapping (VSM) are not in evidence at the Big 3 or their suppliers. Each tool has its own value. However, the value may be enhanced by another tool. This is due to 7 dependence i.e. SMED (Y ) is dependant upon y,

y; 2y',

y4

recognise/understand the interaction of the tools and when to apply them is illustrated in Figure 4 which is a change over activity. 3S ................................... y Standard operations ................. Y

y' and Y6. The impact of the inability to

Skill control .......................... Work measurement ..................

Y y

Kaizen............................... PLM.................................y5 SMED...............................

-

y6

y7

3S -will ensure that everything is in place for the change over activity; standardoperations- ensure that the change over is repeatable; skill control - will ensure that all operators perform the standard operation; kaizen- will ensure ongoing improvement; PLM- will ensure tools and machine are in good condition; and work measurement- will support kaizen activities to reduce waste.

Western society cannot emulate Japanese culture and hence it must abstract and apply those techniques which are culturally transferable and install them through objectives and discipline utilising a medium which understands the philosophy of a production system [2]. All the Japanese companies visited presented the same message, which was: do the basics and then do them again and again until there is no waste in the processes. Once all the waste has been removed use the experience gained to join the processes together to eliminate overall process waste. For example, on the December 2006 visit, one of the

152

Honda suppliers was keen to explain that it was about to remove a wall and relocate an associated machine shop to produce an integrated flow of parts. The uncritical and unthinking application of labels, and the adoption of concepts are frequently to the detriment of these basics. A further good adage is "1never stop asking why 5 times". Once predictability can be demonstrated within defined limits, the strategy moves to be challenged and set new limits. It is at this point that experience gained through the 'Genba kanri years' will allow for selective application of more advanced tools to support the end goal of the production system [19]. This is simply good manufacturing practice or in other words it should be done anyway! An essential prerequisite to ensuring the maximum advantage from lean manufacturing in any company is to ensure that the methodology and tools adopted satisfy' the organisational needs based upon a coherent strategy, which, in turn, supports the requirements of both the organisation and its markets [20], [21]. Any lean manufacturing tools employed should, therefore, be in support of a business plan and must be combined with a diagnosis, which determines the actual problems impacting on the manufacturing facility. The experience of the research conducted for this paper is that Genba kanri will remove the major elements of waste in a system and provide stability. Without stability it will not be possible to achieve

sustainability or to develop the production system. The regional programme has shown benefits in both make to order and batch production [101. During the Japanese plant visits it was noticeable that the senior plant management attended all of the opening presentations, the plant tours and the closing question and answer sessions without any interruptions. It was observed that In 10 visits of 2.5 hrs, not one hosting Japanese member of staff took a mobile phone call. 6. Strength and weaknesses of approaches The Japanese system is one, which is inherent in their culture and is 'the way they do things'. The benefit of the approach is that, when a receptive culture is combined with training it has a greater chance of sustaining change. The package solution provides a start point for a company to change, which can be bought already developed. The weakness of this approach is that the tacit knowledge for the implementation rests with the provider of the package. The western method is also open to progression beyond the point where the last stage has become embedded. Acknowledgements: One NorthEast, Nissan Motor Manufacturing UK LTD (Keith Copeland), SMMT Industry Forum and all companies visited in Japan for their help and information.

Work flow direction

153

Figure 1. Example of a simple manufacturing cell (Japan, 2004)

Figure 2. Example of Genba-kanri on the Tokyo Metro system (Japan, 2004)

Knowledge and applicatlo 5 -4.543.5 3 2.5

-* -

n wihin MIJKSupervisor know ledge Team know ledge U a- - Team application

021.51 0.50
3S std ops PLMV JIT

A 0C

7Old

7New

DS

Lean tools
Figure 3. The level of basic lean tool knowledge and application within NMUK. (2006)

154

A scale of 1 to 5,was utilised with the following scoring mechanism: 1-0Oto 20%,2=21 to 40%,3 41 to 60%,4 61 to 80 %and 5=81ltol100%. Initial impact

~Cumulative effect of:

2 No 5S
* No standard operations

Work
Tim

4
0-20% 6% 21% 0 0 0 0 0 4% 0 21-40% 0% 8% 0 2% 2-%, 0 6% 10% 8%+ 41-60% 16% 28% 0 10% 13% 4% 37% 361% 24%

No skill control

Figure 4. The simulated dependence of outcome to tool application in a change over reduction activity Appendix 1. Response to the question: What percentage reflects your knowledge of the subject?
_______

owledge Supervisor Supervisor Supervisor Supervisor Supervisor Supervisor _Supervisor Supervisor ISupervisor

61-80% 37% 25% 14% 38% 40% 38% 33% 38% 41%

81-100% 41% 18% 86% 50% 44% 58% 24% 12% 27%

>61 % 78% 43% 100% 88% 84% 96% 57% 50% 68%

3S 5S Std ops PLM JIT QC story Old 7 tools New 7 tools ouki Seisan

Appendix 2. Response to the question: If 1 was to interview any of your team. What Percentage would be able to give not a textbook reply, but a good idea of the subject?
Kn_______ owledge

0-20%

2140%

41-60%

61-80%

81-100%

>61 %

3S 5S Std ops PLM

JT QC stor

tearn tearn team team

teamn tearn tearn tearn

13% 38% 0 2%
13%

10% 20% 0 4%
31% 27% 125% 27%

44% 24% 122% 30%

27% 25% 33% 17%

21% 18% 48% 38%

21% 25% 18% 19%

12% 0 38% 26%

8% 15% 2% 40X

33% 18% 186% 64%

29%

8%
22%

40%
20% 23%

Ild 7 tools
New 7 tools

33%

Douki Seisan

tearn29

24%

33%

8%

6%

14%

155

Appendix 3. Response to the question: What percentage of your team is actively applying the tools and techniques?
A_______ pplication

0-20% 6% 42% 4%

21-40% 4% 21% 2%

41-60% 15% 23% 29% 1

61-80% 49% 9% 31%

81-100% 26% 5% 34%

>61% 75%

3S 5S Std ops

tearn tearn tearn

14%
65%

PLM JT OCstory Old 7tools New 7tools Pouki Seisan

tearn tearn tearn tearn tearn fearn

10% 26% 21% 33% 38% 45%

6% 30% 25% 23% 27% 1 18%

37% 28% 23% 31% 17% 26% 1 1

23% 16% 20% 13% 17% 6%

24% 0% 11% 0% 1% 5%1%

47% 16% 31% 13% 18%

Appendix 4 Companies visited in Japan: 1999

Nissan Oppama Hashimnoto Kinugawa

2004
Nissan Tochigi Honda Sayarna Hashimnoto Nissan Oppama

2006 Honda Sayarna Toyota Motor Motomachi Yamada Industry H-One Yanagawa Seiki Honda Foundry
Musahsi Seirnitsu

Yamada Ichiko OHI

Hitachi Nihon Plas Kansei Unisa Jecs

Showa Unipres Calsonic Kansei

Daido Metal TS Tech

Showa Denko F. Tech Inc

Yoruzu Kinryo
Calsonic

The 1999 visit was arranged by Ikira Kikuchi Nissan advisor to the NMUK Supplier Development Teamn and as such focused on Nissan suppliers. The 2004 and 2006 visits were part of the

UK Automotive Academy best practice visit to Japan programme organised by Arthur David and Koji Wanaka (ex. Honda) of the SMMT Industry Forum.

References [1] P. Lillrank. The Transfer of Management Innovations from Japan. Organisational studies, volume, 16, no.6: 97 1-989, (1995). [3] C. Herron, C. Hicks, Utilising technology transfer and change agents to introduce selected lean manufacturing techniques into general manufacturing. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Manufacturing Research (incorporating the 21st National NCMR). Cranfield University. 6-8th September. Accepted for publication to appear. (2005).

[2] C. Herron, P.M. Braiden. Critical factors influencing the introduction of sustainable, quantifiable, productivity improvements in manufacturing companies. Proceedings of the 14 'h International Working Seminar for Production [4] R. Cooney. Is lean manufacturing a universal Economics. Innsbruck. Seminar papers. volume, 1, pp. production system? Batch production in the 179-192, (2006). automotive industry. International Journal of

156

Operations and Production Management. volume, 22,

No. 10, pp. 1130-1147, (2002).

[5] L. Massey, S. Williams, CANDO: implementing change in a NHS trust International Journalof Public Sector Management. Volume, 18, (2005) [6] A. Smalley, Lean and the Law of Unintended Consequences. Super Factory www.lean.org. (2005). [7] S.J. Pavnaskar, J.K. Gershenson and A.B. Jambekar Classification scheme for lean manufacturing tools, Int. J. Production. Research. volume, 4 1, no, 13, pp. 3075-3090, (2003).

[15] C. Herron, P.M. Braiden. A methodology for developing sustainable quantifiable productivity companies. in manufacturing improvement International Journal of Production Economics. volume, 104, pp. 143-153, (2006). [16] N. Bhuiyan, and A. Baghel. An overview of continuous improvement: from past to present. Management Decision. Volume, 43, no. 5, pp. 761771, (2005). [17] M. A. Lewis, Lean production and sustainable competitive advantage. International Journal of Operations and Production Management. Volume, 20 number 8, pp 959-987, (2000).

[8] P.B. Brunet, and S. New, Kaizen in Japan: an empirical study. InternationalJournal of Operations [18] J. Liker, The Toyota Way. McGraw-Hill. ISBN and Production Management. Volume, 16, no. 9, pp. 0-07-139231-9, (2004). 48-59, (2003). [19] P. Hines, M. Holwe, N. Rich, Learning to evolve. [9] E. Handyside, Genba Kanri The Disciplines of A review of contemporary lean thinking. International Real Leadership in the Workplace. Gower. London. Journal of Operations and Production Management. Volume, 24, no. 10, pp. 994-1011. (2004). (1997). [10] C. Herron, A methodology to Disseminate Selected Lean Manufacturing Tools into General Manufacturing. Doctoral Thesis. University of Newcastle upon Tyne, (2006) for [20] C.A. Voss, Alternative paradigms manufacturing strategy. International Journal of Operations and Productionmanagement. Volume, 15,

no. 4, pp. 5-6, (1995).

[11] S. Bhasin, P. Burcher. Lean manufacturing [2 1] J. Bessant, D. Francis, Developing strategic viewed as a philosophy. Journal of Manufacturing continuous improvement capability. International Technology Management. volume, 17, no. 1, pp. 56- Journalof Productivity and Performance Management. Volume, 19 no. 11. pp. 1106-1119. 72, (2006). [ 12] E. Mora,. "Management initiatives". Available at: http://www. m.e.umist.ac.uk./ (1999) [13] A. Sohal, A.Eggleston, Lean manufacturing production: experience among Australian organisations. InternationalJournal of Operations and Production management. Volume, 14, pp. 1-17, (1994). [14] D. O'Corrbui, M. Corboy,. "The seven deadly sins of strategy ". Management Accounting. No. 10, pp. 1-5, (1999).

157