Abstract
Details
Keywords
During the 1990s a growing number of firms have been encouraging continuous improvement (CI) in all aspects of working life, and some impressive results have been achieved…
Abstract
During the 1990s a growing number of firms have been encouraging continuous improvement (CI) in all aspects of working life, and some impressive results have been achieved. However, the process of implementing CI is long and challenging. Companies need to know what progress they have made, and the outcome of any interventions, in order to consolidate and further develop CI. The CIRCA CI self‐assessment tool is a research‐based tool which helps users to make an objective assessment of CI in their company. It is designed to be used by any organisation regardless of size, industry, length of time working with CI, and the particular approach taken. The tool went through several phases of development, culminating in a paper‐based Version 3.0 in 1997. Since then further development and testing of the tool has taken place in the UK and abroad, and future plans include an electronic version.
Details
Keywords
Harry Boer, Sarah Caffyn, Mariano Corso, Paul Coughlan, José Gieskes, Mats Magnusson, Sara Pavesi and Stefano Ronchi
Competition today is forcing companies to increase their effectiveness through exploiting synergy and learning in product innovation. Literature, however, is still mainly focused…
Abstract
Competition today is forcing companies to increase their effectiveness through exploiting synergy and learning in product innovation. Literature, however, is still mainly focused on how product development projects, seen largely as isolated efforts, should be organised and managed. This article proposes a model to describe and explain how companies can gain a substantive competitive advantage by extending their innovation efforts to other phases of the product life cycle and by facilitating knowledge transfer and learning both within the company and with other partner organisations. The model is based on collaborative research by the authors, based on their involvement in the Euro‐Australian co‐operation project CIMA (Euro‐Australian co‐operation centre for Continuous Improvement and innovation MAnagement).
Details
Keywords
Wen-Hsing Liu, Sarah Asio, Jennifer Cross, Wiljeana J. Glover and Eileen Van Aken
The purpose of this study is to identify inhibitors and enablers of Kaizen event effectiveness, as perceived by participants, and categorize them into shared mental models to…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to identify inhibitors and enablers of Kaizen event effectiveness, as perceived by participants, and categorize them into shared mental models to understand the factors participants believe to be affecting Kaizen event success. The findings are also interpreted using the lens of attribution bias and previous studies of Kaizen event effectiveness.
Design/methodology/approach
A qualitative approach involving coding responses from participants was adopted. The identified significant inhibitors and enablers were then assigned to shared mental model types using a mapping and categorization approach.
Findings
The results are largely consistent with previous studies and show that job/task and technology/equipment mental models dominate participant views of inhibitors, while enablers were primarily drawn from team and team interaction mental models. This also suggests that attribution bias is present.
Research limitations/implications
The methods used to measure shared mental models in this study are cross-sectional and exploratory in nature. Future research could involve the intensive study of a smaller number of Kaizen events over time.
Practical implications
The findings in this study can be used by organizations to identify training needs for Kaizen event teams by identifying areas of potential attribution bias, by divergence of perceptions between facilitators and team members and by underestimated factor effects.
Originality/value
This investigation offers understanding of the Kaizen event team shared mental models with respect to inhibitors and enablers of event success. Organizations can harness common perceptions among continuous process improvement teams to increases chances of Kaizen event success.