Lean: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
Jose Antonio Yague Fabra
,
J.K.D.D.T. Jayanetti

The term “lean”, as a management concept that allows organizations to remain competitive by removing waste from their processes, has been fully adopted by management researchers.

 

  • lean manufacturing
  • lean production systems
  • lean 4.0
  • systematic literature review

1. Introduction

Over recent decades, markets have become more and more competitive as they progressively demand customized products and services at lower prices and with shorter delivery times [1]. In the operations field, lean has become a widespread management system that is suitable for achieving these competitiveness targets [2][3][4] through more efficient processes, shorter lead times, and greater flexibility in supplying a wide variety of products and services in small quantities [5].

As a consequence, the management concept of lean has spread profusely throughout industry and services over the last 40 years [3]. A huge amount of research is now available for scholars and practitioners, with the present work having identified 4962 academic papers with “lean” in the title and “lean manufacturing” generating 8,910,000 results through a Google search.

From a methodological point of view, this research has followed the principles of the systematic literature review (SLR). Templier and Paré [6] have classified literature reviews into four types: narrative (summarizes previous published research); developmental (provides new conceptualizations or methodological approaches); cumulative (compiles empirical evidence and draws conclusions about a topic of interest); and aggregative (tests specific research hypotheses or propositions, with three subtypes: systematic, meta-analysis and umbrella review). The historical approach of this research falls under both cumulative and aggregative literature reviews.

Tranfield et al. [7] propose methodologically adapting SLR from medical science to management science, while Denver and Transfield [8] developed their method even further. SLR has been used in previous studies on lean topics [3][4][9][10][11][12].

2. Results

In 1991, Delbridge et al. [13] introduced “lean manufacturing” as a synonym for “lean production”, and this term became more popular after 2000. Nowadays, “lean manufacturing” is the preferred expression for referring to lean in industrial operations (Figure 1).

Applsci 11 10318 g005 550
Figure 1. Historical evolution of the main lean categories and their foundational works.

In 2009, Mark Graban published the book Lean Hospitals [14] as a practical guide for adapting lean tools in hospital management.

In 2016 [15], Costa et al. presented a review based on six parameters: research method, country, healthcare area, implementation, lean tools and methods, and results.

At the present moment, only four papers have been found with “lean 4.0” in the title, although increasing interest (see Figure 2) is being generated in the relationships between Industry 4.0 and different lean aspects: lean production [16][17], lean manufacturing [18][19], lean and green [20][21], lean construction [22], lean enterprise [23], lean healthcare [24], lean management [25], lean six sigma [26], lean supply chain [27], and lean thinking [28].

Applsci 11 10318 g019 550
Figure 2. Papers about relationships between lean and Industry 4.0.

3. Conclusions

About the historical origin of the term “lean”: it was created in 1988 as “lean production system”, a generic denomination for the Toyota production system. The best-selling book, The Machine that Changed the World (1990), populated the term “lean production” by absorbing other alternative expressions that existed at that time.

Since 1990, the term lean has evolved over time. Its evolution and diversification can be explained through four mechanisms (combined over time): expansion, transfer, targeting, and combination. This resulted in the creation of a confusing puzzle of lean specifier.

This entry has outlined the paths of evolution by using the most cited specifiers in the academic literature: Between 1990 and 2000, the term lean remained mainly in its original field of operations management, with the following specifiers: lean production, lean manufacturing, lean logistics, lean supply chain, lean product, lean construction, and lean and green. The first attempt to upgrade the concept to a more conceptual level was greeted with initially limited academic interest: lean management, lean enterprise, and lean thinking. In 2000, the combined term “lean six sigma” emerged and up to the present has received much attention in both the manufacturing and service sectors. Since 2006, the term “lean” was progressively applied in the service field with new specifiers: lean service, lean hospital, lean healthcare, lean office, lean startup. The last specifier, lean 4.0., was created in 2017 as a synergetic combination between lean manufacturing (or lean production) and the Industry 4.0 paradigm. At the moment, it focuses only on the manufacturing field.

This entry reveals some implications for future research: The use of lean perspective can be further extended beyond its current development, adapting its principles and tools to different sectors or applications. The diversification mechanisms described above can open new research areas in a fast-changing, complex and competitive world. The lean approach combined with the new emerging disruptive technologies (so-called Industry 4.0) open new avenues for future research as intelligent construction, sustainability, smart cities, environmental improvement or public governance.

 

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/app112110318

References

  1. Jasti, N.V.K.; Kodali, R. Lean production: Literature review and trends. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2014, 53, 867–885.
  2. Moyano-Fuentes, J.; Sacristán-Díaz, M. Learning on lean: A review of thinking and research. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2012, 32, 551–582.
  3. Psomas, E.; Antony, J. Research gaps in Lean manufacturing: A systematic literature review. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 2019, 36, 815–839.
  4. Antony, J.; Psomas, E.; Garza-Reyes, J.A.; Hines, P. Practical implications and future research agenda of lean manufacturing: A systematic literature review. Prod. Plan. Control. 2020, 32, 889–925.
  5. Bhamu, J.; Sangwan, K.S. Lean manufacturing: Literature review and research issues. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2014, 34, 876–940.
  6. Templier, M.; Paré, G. A Framework for Guiding and Evaluating Literature Reviews. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2015, 37, 6.
  7. Tranfield, D.; Denyer, D.; Smart, P. Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br. J. Manag. 2003, 14, 207–222.
  8. Denyer, D.; Tranfield, D. Producing a Systematic Review. In The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Research Methods; SAGE: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2009.
  9. Dorval, M.; Jobin, M.-H.; Benomar, N. Lean culture: A comprehensive systematic literature review. Int. J. Prod. Perform. Manag. 2019, 68, 920–937.
  10. Ciano, M.P.; Pozzi, R.; Rossi, T.; Strozzi, F. How IJPR has addressed ‘lean’: A literature review using bibliometric tools. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2019, 57, 5284–5317.
  11. Danese, P.; Manfè, V.; Romano, P. A Systematic Literature Review on Recent Lean Research: State-of-the-art and Future Directions. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2017, 20, 579–605.
  12. Soliman, M.; Saurin, T. Lean production in complex socio-technical systems: A systematic literature review. J. Manuf. Syst. 2017, 45, 135–148.
  13. Delbridge, R.; Oliver, N. Narrowing the gap? Stock turns in the Japanese and Western car industries. Int. J. Prod. Res. 1991, 29, 2083–2095.
  14. Graban, M. Lean Hospitals: Improving Quality, Patient Safety, and Employee Engagement; CCR Press, Taylor & Francis Group: New York, NY, USA, 2009.
  15. Costa, L.B.M.; Filho, M.G. Lean healthcare: Review, classification and analysis of literature. Prod. Plan. Control. 2016, 27, 823–836.
  16. Rossini, M.; Costa, F.; Tortorella, G.; Portioli-Staudacher, A. The interrelation between Industry 4.0 and lean production: An empirical study on European manufacturers. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2019, 102, 3963–3976.
  17. Wagner, T.A.; Herrmann, C.; Thiede, S. Industry 4.0 Impacts on Lean Production Systems. Procedia CIRP 2017, 63, 125–131.
  18. Sanders, A.; Elangeswaran, C.; Wulfsberg, J. Industry 4.0 implies lean manufacturing: Research activities in industry 4.0 function as enablers for lean manufacturing. J. Ind. Eng. Manag. 2016, 9, 811–833.
  19. Buer, S.-V.; Strandhagen, J.O.; Chan, F.T.S. The link between Industry 4.0 and lean manufacturing: Mapping current research and establishing a research agenda. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2018, 56, 2924–2940.
  20. Piercy, N.F.; Morgan, N.A. The impact of lean thinking and the lean enterprise on marketing: Threat or synergy? J. Mark. Manag. 1997, 13, 679–693.
  21. Duarte, S.; Cruz-Machado, V. An investigation of lean and green supply chain in the Industry 4.0. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Symposium on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management (IEOM), Rabat, Morocco, 11–13 April 2017.
  22. Lekan, A.; Clinton, A.; Fayomi, O.S.I.; James, O. Lean Thinking and Industrial 4.0 Approach to Achieving Construction 4.0 for Industrialization and Technological Development. Buildings 2020, 10, 221.
  23. Koskela, L. Lean production in lean construction. In Proceedings of the National Construction and Management Conference, Sydney, Australia, 17–18 February 1994.
  24. Ilangakoon, T.; Weerabahu, S.; Wickramarachchi, R. Combining Industry 4.0 with Lean Healthcare to Optimize Operational Performance of Sri Lankan Healthcare Industry. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Production and Operations Management Society (POMS), Peradeniya, Sri Lanka, 14–16 December 2018; pp. 1–8.
  25. Sony, M. Industry 4.0 and lean management: A proposed integration model and research propositions. Prod. Manuf. Res. 2017, 6, 416–432.
  26. Yadav, N.; Shankar, R.; Singh, S.P. Impact of Industry4.0/ICTs, Lean Six Sigma and quality management systems on organisational performance. TQM J. 2020, 32, 815–835.
  27. Jones, D.T.; Hines, P.; Rich, N. Lean logistics. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 1997, 27, 153–173.
  28. Bittencourt, V.L.; Alves, A.; Leão, C.P. Industry 4.0 triggered by Lean Thinking: Insights from a systematic literature review. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 59, 1496–1510.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
Video Production Service
Feedback