P. 1


|Views: 9|Likes:
Published by Haneen Saif

More info:

Published by: Haneen Saif on May 28, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less






Assignment No. 1




In literature review first of all the relation of employee development with lean implementation has been studied. Due to the diversity in the types of teams there is no definite set of variables describing the team effectiveness. The author recommends a further research on the topic. 2. some authors suggest a negative while others conclude that a positive relation exists between lean implementation and employee satisfaction. Goal Clarity Goal Difficulty Team Autonomy Team Kaizen Experience Team Leader Experience Team Functional Heterogeneity Management Support Event Planning Process Work Area Routineness Action Orientation Affective Commitment to Change Intemal Processes Tool Quality y Process factors . 8.SUMMARY CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS FOR HUMAN RESOURCE OUTCOMES IN KAIZEN EVENTS: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY This paper uses results from a field study of 51 events in manufacturing organizations to identify the set of input process factors that most strongly relate to the development of employee attitudinal outcomes and problem solving capabilities in kaizen events. 6. rather the results were drawn on qualitative basis. 3. as they were not expected to vary substantially at the event level. 2. Again most of the studies rely on qualitative data and not quantitative measures. 4. 9. The second topic reviewed is Kaizen event research. 3. Findings have been mixed up. Again a limited study is found on the topic with no clear methodology or enough conclusion. Most of the studies focus on relationship between event characteristics and technical performance outcome without empirically measuring human resource outcomes. 5. 1. Environmental factors related to the external market context of the organization were not included in the research. 7. most of the work has not empirical or quantitative. The initial model for research on Kaizen event consists of the following: y Input 1. In addition. 4.

Team activities log measures High-level description of event activities broken down by days and by half hour increments Report out questionnaire measures Attitude. affective commitment to change. goal difficulty. 6. perceived benefits from Kaizen event program. skills. y For data collection. team kaizen experience. All participating organizations use kaizen events as part of a formal organizational improvement strategy rather than as a single use change mechanism. 2. 5. product design. Kickoff questionnaire measures Goal clarity. engineering and related activities. 4. steel component manufacturer). electronic motor manufacturer and manufacturer of large transportation equipment). customer service and technical support.e. 1. understanding of CI. sales and marketing. 4. 2. Two out of 6 were private sector organizations (specialty equipment manufacturer. production planning and inventory control. y Kickoff questionnaire: once per event y Team activities log: once per event y Report out questionnaire : once per event y Event information questionnaire: once per event Kaizen program interview measures Organizational characteristics. The selection criteria for study participants should have following characteristics: y y y All participating organizations manufacture products of some type. one event per month on average. the targeted processes were operations. All participating organizations had been conducting kaizen events for at least one year prior to the start of study. 3. process design. team autonomy. Understanding of CI Skills Attitude Goal Achievement Impact on Area Overall Perceived Success This research used a multi site field study of 6 manufacturing organizations out of which 4 were public sector organizations (secondary wood products.5. approach to conducting events. action orientation. . 3. five factors were used in the research including: y Kaizen program interview: conducted once per organization. internal processes. management support. Tool Appropriateness y Outputs 1. All participating organizations conduct kaizen events relatively frequently i.

Event information questionnaire measures Team functional heterogeneity. Cronbach s was used to evaluate the reliability of the scales. Following the conclusion of the study. The values were evaluated against the commonly applied thresholds of 0. affective commitment to change. the factor analysis resulted in two underlying dimensions i. Then factor analysis was used to evaluate the validity of multi item scales. Three factors analysis were performed and the same items were loaded to single component as:  Kickoff questionnaire measures  Goal clarity  Goal difficulty  Affective commitment to change  Report out questionnaire input and process measures  Internal processes  management support  Team autonomy  Action orientation  Report out questionnaire outcome measures  Understanding of continuous improvement  Skills  Attitude However. .70 and most scales (six out of nine) had values of 0.60 for newly developed scales. goal difficulty. the study provided partial support for the three broad research hypotheses. findings were reported to the participating organizations to evaluate the validity of study conclusions and to allow the organizations to benefit from the results. event planning process.5. As mentioned. All scales except one had values greater than 0. Specific findings of the study areas follow: y y y Internal processes and goal clarity were the strongest predictors of both kaizen capabilities and attitude. work area routineness. but not kaizen capabilities. team kaizen experience and team leader experience were significant predictors of kaizen capabilities but not attitude. tool appropriateness and tool quality. Management support and team functional heterogeneity were significant predictors of attitude. team leader experience. Team autonomy. participating organizations found the study results convincing and used study feedback to evaluate the effectiveness of their current practices and to identify potential changes. Some factors were measured through perceptual scales and others were measured through factual data.e Kaizen Capabilities and Attitude.70 for established scales and 0.80 or greater. revised scales. In general. work area routine-ness.

. and event planning process. tool appropriateness.e. tool quality. i. showed no significant relationship to either outcome in this study. action orientation.y Some variables proposed to affect Kaizen event outcomes.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->