Learning From Less Successful Kaizen Events: A Case Study

Abstract: This paper describes results from an ongoing research program focused on identifying determinants of Kaizen event effectiveness, both in terms of initial event outcomes and the sustainability of outcomes. Although anecdotal published accounts suggest that increasing numbers of companies are using Kaizen events, and that these projects can result in substantial improvement in key business metrics, there is a lack of systematic research on Kaizen events. A particular weakness of the current published accounts is the lack of attention to less successful events – only strongly successful applications of Kaizen events receive much coverage in the accounts; however, the organizational learning literature suggests that understanding less successful cases is a key component of organizational learning. We present a case study from a less successful Kaizen event to demonstrate how the case study event contributed to organizational learning. We also present a set of methods and measures that can be used by practicing engineering managers and engineering management researchers to evaluate and analyze Kaizen event performance. The implications of the case study event for the current body of knowledge on Kaizen events are also examined, and, finally, directions for future research are described.

[1]  J. S. Adams,et al.  Inequity In Social Exchange , 1965 .

[2]  J. Gaito Measurement scales and statistics: Resurgence of an old misconception. , 1980 .

[3]  Leonard R. Sussman,et al.  Nominal, Ordinal, Interval, and Ratio Typologies are Misleading , 1993 .

[4]  Anthony C. Laraia,et al.  The Kaizen Blitz: Accelerating Breakthroughs in Productivity and Performance , 1999 .

[5]  Susan Albers Mohrman,et al.  Quality circles: After the honeymoon , 1987 .

[6]  Bruno D. Zumbo,et al.  Is the selection of statistical methods governed by level of measurement , 1993 .

[7]  S. S. Stevens Mathematics, measurement, and psychophysics. , 1951 .

[8]  R. Yin Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[9]  D. Whitson,et al.  Applying just-in-time systems in health care , 1997 .

[10]  Steven A. Melnyk,et al.  Short-term action in pursuit of long-term improvements: Introducing Kaizen events , 1998 .

[11]  S. Sitkin Learning Through Failure : The Strategy of Small Losses , 1992 .

[12]  T. G. Field,et al.  The quality revolution. , 2007 .

[13]  Jennifer A. Farris,et al.  Development and application of a framework for the design and assessment of a kaizen event program , 2006 .

[14]  S S Stevens,et al.  On the Theory of Scales of Measurement. , 1946, Science.

[15]  James T. Townsend,et al.  Measurement Scales and Statistics: The Misconception Misconceived , 1984 .

[16]  James G. March,et al.  Adaptive Coordination of a Learning Team , 1987 .

[17]  S. G. Cohen,et al.  What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite , 1997 .

[18]  E. Lawler,et al.  Quality circles after the fad. , 1985, Harvard business review.

[19]  George W. Bohrnstedt,et al.  Level of Measurement , 1980 .

[20]  Jennifer A. Farris,et al.  An Empirical Investigation of Kaizen Event Effectiveness: Outcomes and Critical Success Factors , 2006 .

[21]  J. Michell Measurement scales and statistics: A clash of paradigms. , 1986 .

[22]  Frederic M. Lord,et al.  On the Statistical Treatment of Football Numbers. , 1953 .

[23]  Computer Staff,et al.  The Machine That Changed the World , 1992 .

[24]  Kristin N. Cuscela Kaizen blitz attacks work processes at Dana Corp , 1998 .

[25]  R. Likert “Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes, A” , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[26]  G. Groth-Marnat Handbook of Psychological Assessment , 2016 .

[27]  C. Alderfer An empirical test of a new theory of human needs , 1969 .

[28]  D. Handt,et al.  Statistics and the Theory of Measurement , 2010 .