Search results

1 – 2 of 2
Per page
102050
Citations:
Loading...
Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 12 March 2019

Andre Eduardo Staedele, Sandra Rolim Ensslin and Fernando Antônio Forcellini

The purpose of this paper is to focus on the analysis of the characteristics and gaps of a literature fragment from the international scientific publications on performance…

1160

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to focus on the analysis of the characteristics and gaps of a literature fragment from the international scientific publications on performance evaluation in lean production, aiming to generate new knowledge and suggestions for future scientific research.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors have adopted “ProKnow-C” methodology, a qualitative research approach that is used for literature selection, identification, analysis and reflection on the established characteristics.

Findings

From a bibliographic portfolio of 67 research works, 91 per cent of the works have individual metrics and 84 per cent have sets of metrics. Evaluating the focus of the performance measurement system, 34 per cent of works measure performance, 43 per cent compare performance and only 18 per cent assist in strategic planning. Evaluating the phases of the PMS life cycle, 87 per cent attend to the design, and 66 per cent attend to the activities of data collection, allow diagnosis, evaluate performance and communicate results. However, only 3 per cent of the studies analysed the use of PMS after its implementation and no research evidenced the review of metrics and objectives based on strategic planning.

Research limitations/implications

The search formula to capture the bibliographic portfolio (BP) was limited to the following terms: performance measurement, performance evaluation, performance assess*, performance appraisal, management, indicator*, critical factors, best practices, lean production, lean manufacturing and lean system. The BP was determined based on the limitations set by the research authors: articles published in English and Portuguese languages, from 2000 to 2018, in the Engineering Village, Scopus, EBSCO, Web of Science, ProQuest and Science Direct databases, which were freely available on the internet. Lastly, conceptual knowledge was used to select the articles, so there is a chance that unintentional losses could happen.

Practical implications

As practical implications for practitioners, the authors have identified that a PMS from an organisation that aims to become “lean” needs to be defined and revised considering its strategy, adjusting its set of metrics and targets to the internal and external challenges. As practical implications for researchers, opportunities have been identified to develop longitudinal studies in PMS utilisation and review to understand how the measurement system must evolve over time through changes in the internal and external environments of organisations.

Originality/value

This research adds value because its results allow researchers and practitioners to visualise the boundaries of the knowledge from the BP, about performance management in lean production, and what their gaps are in relation to the reference model of performance evaluation. This research is original because it was not observed in the literature review, a research that used the ProKnow-C methodology for analysis of the alignment and gaps between lean production and performance evaluation.

Details

Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, vol. 30 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1741-038X

Keywords

Access Restricted. View access options
Article
Publication date: 13 April 2020

Mauricio Uriona Maldonado, Matheus Eduardo Leusin, Thiago Carrano de Albuquerque Bernardes and Caroline Rodrigues Vaz

Business process management (BPM) and lean management (LM) are both recognized for improving organizational performance through continuous improvement, yet their similarities and…

2477

Abstract

Purpose

Business process management (BPM) and lean management (LM) are both recognized for improving organizational performance through continuous improvement, yet their similarities and differences have been poorly discussed so far. This paper aims to find their main differences and similarities using a systematic method for literature review.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper uses a structured literature review known as SYSMAP (Scientometric and sYStematic yielding MApping Process). The method integrates bibliometrics and content analysis procedures to perform in-depth analysis of the literature at hand.

Findings

Both methodologies seek continuous improvement with focus on the customer and process standardization, but they are divergent mainly in relation to the flow they intend to improve. The impossibility of implementing both methodologies in an effective way was also observed, mainly due to the differences they present in relation to how to achieve the continuous improvement cycle.

Research limitations/implications

As any other literature reviews, the major limitation is to have omitted relevant literature even though all available procedures have been used to avoid this situation.

Practical implications

This paper offers a novel perspective from the practitioner side. LM may be better used in human-intensive process improvement whereas BPM in technology-intensive ones. Such characteristics open up new opportunities for practitioners aiming at integrating both approaches.

Originality/value

This is the first paper that systematically analyses the body of literature of BPM and LM with the means to better understand their similarities and differences.

Details

Business Process Management Journal, vol. 26 no. 7
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1463-7154

Keywords

1 – 2 of 2
Per page
102050