This article was downloaded by: [New York University]

On: 20 May 2015, At: 22:21

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Production Research

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tprs20

Production management model integrating the

principles of lean manufacturing and sustainability
supported by the cultural transformation of a company
a a
José Roberto Xavier Alves & João Murta Alves
a
Aeronautics and Mechanical Engineering – Production, Technological Institute of
Aeronautics, São José dos Campos, Brazil
Published online: 21 Apr 2015.

Click for updates

To cite this article: José Roberto Xavier Alves & João Murta Alves (2015): Production management model integrating the
principles of lean manufacturing and sustainability supported by the cultural transformation of a company, International
Journal of Production Research, DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2015.1033032

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1033032

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 International Journal of Production Research, 2015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1033032

Production management model integrating the principles of lean manufacturing and

sustainability supported by the cultural transformation of a company
José Roberto Xavier Alves* and João Murta Alves

Aeronautics and Mechanical Engineering – Production, Technological Institute of Aeronautics, São José dos Campos, Brazil
(Received 14 June 2014; accepted 1 March 2015)

The search for superior production performance has been used by companies to overcome competition in the current glo-
bal economic scenario. Efficient manufacturing connected to environmental initiatives provides a company with favour-
able conditions for maintaining uniform and continuous improvement in its competitive performance, while providing
operational versatility to respond quickly to volatile markets. As production is one of the most expensive areas for a
company, many organisations have sought a new management model for their production system that provides substan-
tial productivity gains, cost saving opportunities and higher customer satisfaction. This study proposes a model of pro-
Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

duction management and an implementation method integrating the principles of lean manufacturing and sustainability,
supported by cultural transformation at the company. Its objective was to achieve productivity gains and improvements
on customer satisfaction, as well as develop the ability to provide quick responses to market changes in a globalised
economy. The implementation of the proposed model should be gradual, initially addressing fundamental principles, and
should operate simultaneously with, and in the same environment as, workforce development and organisational
transformation initiatives, to create sustainable improvements.
Keywords: lean manufacturing; production management; cultural transformation; sustainability

1. Introduction
With the enlargement of markets in recent decades, through commercial agreements between economic trading blocks
and a large supply of products from so-called low-cost regions, nations have become part of a process of globalisation,
which has increased industry competition. Trade barriers have been reduced, facilitating the entry of new competitors in
the global scene that offers diversified products as well as price and quality differentials. This has forced companies to
rethink their strategies to survive in a market in which demanding consumers have greater bargaining power.
The search for greater operational efficiency has become a vital requirement for companies that want to remain
involved in the global economic scene, and performance improvement in the production process has been one of the
most common strategies used by organisations trying to address competition in this increasingly globalised economy.
According to Silva, Santos, and Castro (2012), a sound manufacturing strategy is one that makes a company more
competitive and provides a differential that is perceived by its customers in the market. Alves (2001) emphasises that
for a manufacturing company to develop and maintain a competitive advantage in an increasingly globalised market, it
should provide the production department with a strategic vision and continually seek to improve the management
model of the production process. Singh and Mahmood (2014) mention that a high-performance manufacturing process
can primarily be achieved through high-quality products, processing speed, cost, flexibility and reliability, with an aim
to enabling the company to leverage its business performance, increasing market share and accelerating sales growth.
One of the ways to incorporate such characteristics in manufacturing is through the adoption of a strategy focused
on the company’s production system. To this end, lean manufacturing is an alternative that has been widely adopted by
various segments of the industry (Ramesh and Kodali 2012). Lean manufacturing aims for productivity gains by com-
bating waste generated in the production environment. Additionally, Moori, Pescarmona, and Kimura (2013) demon-
strate that management systems based on the principles of lean manufacturing have a positive impact on business
performance.
Sustainability initiatives, which recommend a balance between operating results, respect for people and the preserva-
tion of the environment, are also important to, and valued by, the customers and should therefore be considered by the
company (Milne and Gray 2013). Furthermore, there is a positive correlation between lean manufacturing and

*Corresponding author. Email: j.robertoalves@r7.com

© 2015 Taylor & Francis

 2 J.R.X. Alves and J.M. Alves

environmental management practices, which may lead to maximise waste reduction benefits through a combined and
cohesive approach of both initiatives (Chiarini 2014; Yang, Hong, and Modi 2011).
Having a strategy focused on manufacturing, encompassing the practices of continuous improvement and waste
reduction, is a key success factor in raising the level of a company’s competitiveness within an industry, considering
today’s globalised scenario (Lucato et al. 2012).
In the light of the above, it is pertinent to consider whether it is possible to develop a production management sys-
tem incorporating the principles of lean manufacturing and sustainability. In this context, this study aimed to propose a
model of production management and its method of implementation that incorporate the principles of lean manufactur-
ing and sustainability, supported by a cultural transformation at the organisation.
The research methodology adopted was qualitative, initially involving a literature review on lean manufacturing, pro-
duction management, sustainability and organisational culture, conducted through a review of scholarly books, academic
theses, journal papers and various online sources, followed by exploratory research that opened up possibilities for
future research. This paper is structured into four sections, in addition to this introduction. In Section 2, a brief biblio-
graphic review of organisational culture, sustainability and lean manufacturing is performed. In Section 3, the model for
managing production and its method of implementation is presented. Finally, in Section 4, the conclusions of this study
are presented.
Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

2. Theoretical reference
Considering that concepts involving organisational culture, sustainability and lean manufacturing have been widely
exploited in the academic environment and that a wide range of material on these subjects is available in books, articles,
conference proceedings, theses, dissertations and on line sources, we have chosen to focus on proposing a management
model and its method of implementation, integrating these referenced concepts.

2.1 Organisational culture

Organisational culture comprises a set of values, norms, beliefs, habits and customs that are shared collectively. From
this perspective, organisations also differ from each other because of their culture. Diverse sectors and departments
experience the structure, authorities, technological use and communication processes of the organisation as well as the
spheres and atmosphere of the organisation (Schein 2010). Aydin and Ceylan (2011) add that understanding organisa-
tional culture is critical to predicting the outcome of decisions made and preventing and anticipating any consequences,
thereby being crucial in supporting a company’s performance, competitive advantage, and quick adoption of new
initiatives.
According to Stahl and Bounds (1991), effective organisational transformations are actually cultural transformations,
since the change will only be effective if significant organisational systems remain unchanged, even if the mentors and
strongest advocates of these projects and initiatives are no longer active in the company. As long as this occurs, the
transformation will then be incorporated into a new culture at the organisation.
Through symbolic management, leaders attempt to influence deeply entrenched norms and values, modelling superfi-
cial cultural elements such as stories, rites and ceremonies, so that people can express and convey cultural agreement.
This implies a deliberate decision by the leaders to convey signals that symbolise and strengthen a desirable culture.
However, a key aspect of strategic change refers to the modification of the basic beliefs of key decision-makers, given
that the beliefs of senior management play a critical role as regards inhibiting or facilitating changes in the company
(Schein 2010).
Along with symbolic administration, management should apply organisational development initiatives to reinforce
cultural changes. This is a method of planned change among individuals in an organisation and its working relation-
ships. It represents a collective long-term effort supported by senior management to promote the growth and develop-
ment of employees’ potential by changing attitudes, values, behaviour and the organisational structure, so that the
company can best adapt to new situations.
Wood (2009) states that depending on the project or intended change, organisational development can be achieved
through (1) workshops and group sessions to improve aspects of leadership and interpersonal skills; (2) methods to man-
age conflicts, measurement of attitude and organisational climate profile; and (3) methods for designing organisational
structures.
Efforts to change culture, motivated by strategic reasons, aim to transform the organisation from an undesired
condition to a promising and sustainable future state. For Vilppola (2014), it means improvement and alignment on atti-
tudes, values, goals, principles and practices of all individuals in the company. Aydin and Ceylan (2011) highlight that
 International Journal of Production Research 3

organisational culture should change as a consequence of the company’s strategic efforts in placing primary focus on
the customer and sustaining this by developing the skills of employees and improving their motivation, accountability
and satisfaction.
Cultural change is fundamental to improving employees’ performance and competitiveness and helps achieve the
company’s strategic goals. It is also linked to the development of leadership and staff skills by means of a planned
learning process, aiming to provide knowledge and to change attitudes, values and behaviours in such a way that the
company can adapt better to new circumstances (Zangiski, Lima, and Costa 2013).
Therefore, we conclude that managing the process of cultural transformation is essential to ensure the necessary
changes in the organisation, to achieve successful and sustainable project deployment in the long term.

2.2 Sustainability
The concept of sustainable development has achieved great notoriety in recent decades, driven by environmental move-
ments and concerns about climate change that is presumably caused by human interference in ecosystems that impact
life and society. In 1987, the Brundtland Commission defined sustainable development as ‘development that meets the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’ (WCED 1987).
According to Zaman (2014), the global population has been increasing along with economic expansion and greater
Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

consumption accompanied by rising demand for natural resources. Consequently, there has been a significant depletion
of global, non-renewable natural resources over the last few decades, with an increase in waste generation causing an
environmental impact.
Ji, Gunasekaran, and Yang (2014) demonstrate that regulatory agencies in several countries are still implementing
new environmental policies addressing the production, distribution, use and disposal of products. The most important
aspect of these policies is a focus on the dual impacts on the environment (i.e. atmosphere and soil). As examples, these
authors cite two policies – the ‘end of life vehicles directive’, enacted in the European Union (EU) in 2006, which
demands that manufacturers’ prevailing recycling rate of 85% of used raw material reach 95% by 2015, and the Waste
Electrical and Electronic Equipment policy, which is focused on recycling electronic products in the EU.
Another example cited is the European Union Emission Trade Scheme (EU ETS) launched in January 2005 by the
EU member countries to combat climate change by addressing the trade of carbon emissions. More than 11,000 compa-
nies from various sectors, regulated by the EU ETS, have their carbon emissions monitored and limited and, when the
set limit is reached, they can buy carbon credits or seek alternatives provided in the policy to compensate for surplus
emissions (Black et al. 2013; Falkner 2013).
Sustainability has been recognised by organisations as a competitive advantage. As a result, many actions or atti-
tudes that had been innovative in the past have today become fashionable and now form the basis of government laws
and regulations that have made the market progressively more restrictive. Further, there is a growing concern in society
about the degradation of the environment and therefore, companies that are prepared to meet government policies and
comply with international trade and consumer expectations have a competitive advantage over those that do not meet
these requirements (Black et al. 2013).
As part of the sustainable development strategy, Elkington (2000) introduced the triple bottom line (TBL) concept,
also known as people, planet and profit. The TBL provides a balanced relationship among economic, social and envi-
ronmental aspects of business management so that sustainability goals are included in business practices. It measures
the economic results of the company, taking the degree of social and environmental responsibility into account. Figure 1
illustrates the interactions among the three pillars of sustainability proposed by Elkington (2000).
The three pillars that support the concept include:
(1) Profit: focuses on the economic value generated by the company through viable enterprises to meet the expecta-
tions of shareholders or to provide economic benefit to the surrounding community and society;
(2) People: focuses on the establishment of fair practices for employees, partners and the community in which the
company develops its activities;
(3) Planet: focuses on the use of sustainable environmental practices and reducing the environmental impact by
decreasing the generation of pollutants and waste in production processes.
The intersection between the pillars of society (social responsibility) and the environment (environmental responsi-
bility) results in a ‘possible’ or bearable relationship, with increasing environmental awareness and appropriate practices
in internal processes resulting in the lowest possible impact on the surrounding community and region. There is a ‘feasi-
ble’ relationship between the environment and economic (generation of economic value) pillars, due to investments in
technologies aligned to the concepts of cleaner production and reduction of pollutants, recycling practices and
 4 J.R.X. Alves and J.M. Alves

Generation of
Economic
Value

Fair Feasible

Sustaina-
bility
Social Environmental
Responsibility Responsibility
Possible

Figure 1. Pillars of sustainability (TBL).

Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

Source: Adapted from Oliveira et al. (2012).

participation in the carbon credit programme. In terms of the social and economic pillars, the relationship is ‘fair’, where
there is profit sharing driven by a partnership with suppliers, dealers, employees, the community and others stake-
holders, and the establishment of a structure to support other activities in the region where the company activities are
focused. The intersection of all three pillars results in a sustainability relationship (Oliveira et al. 2012; Savitz and
Weber 2013).
Santos (2010) states that the opening of markets in the last decades, with the intensification of trade agreements
between countries and the removal of economic barriers, has caused industry to seek production system development in
a sustainable manner through several measures. These measures include reducing the use of materials, thereby minimis-
ing waste generation, reusing scrap raw materials in sub-products or adapting them for use as main raw materials, and
recycling practices that aim to reuse the waste in the production cycle from which it arose. In addition, materials that
become waste, or that are discarded, can be separated, collected and processed for the use as raw material for the manu-
facturing of new products. These are vital measures for manufacturing companies to thrive in this new market environ-
ment. Silva and Quelhas (2006) add that corporations have sought a balance between what is economically feasible and
what is ecologically sustainable and socially desirable. In this context, organisations adopting internal policies related to
sustainability have developed a competitive advantage for operating in markets that are difficult to enter and where
sustainable manufacturing is a critical factor.

2.3 The system of lean manufacturing

Lean manufacturing system concepts, derived from the just-in-time production philosophy developed in the 1950s in
Japan, were conceived by the Toyota Motor Company under business conditions that were very different from those of
the Western car giants of that time, namely Ford and General Motors. The latter used mass production, economies of
scale and large equipment to produce the maximum possible number of parts at the lowest possible cost. After the war,
in Japan, Toyota had a reduced market, while also having to produce a variety of vehicles on the same assembly line to
satisfy its customers. Consequently, the key to its operations was flexibility (Liker 2004).
According to Womack and Jones (2003), one of the major goals of lean manufacturing is to implement a philosophy
of continuous improvement that allows companies to reduce costs, improve processes and eliminate waste to increase
customer satisfaction and profit. Lean manufacturing provides companies with the tools to survive in a global market
that demands higher quality, faster delivery and lower prices, at the volumes required to sustain the business. Specifi-
cally, its main objectives are to: (a) drastically reduce waste in the supply chain, (b) reduce inventory and space occu-
pied on the production floor, (c) create stronger production systems, (d) create appropriate systems for the delivery of
materials and (e) improve the organisation’s production areas in order to increase flexibility. These authors also state that
lean thinking, encompassing continuous improvement to achieve the above objectives and to ensure that products or ser-
vices add value for customers, can be created through five principles: (1) specify value from the point of view of the
end customer by product family; (2) identify all the steps in the process value stream for each product family,
 International Journal of Production Research 5

eliminating whenever possible those steps that do not add value; (3) make the value-creating steps occur in a tight
sequence to ensure that the product flows smoothly towards the customer; (4) as flow is established, let customers pull
value from the next upstream activity; (5) once value is specified, value streams are identified, wasteful steps are elimi-
nated, and flow and pull are established (this process is performed iteratively until a state of perfection is reached, in
which perfect value is created with no waste).
Maskell and Baggaley (2006) warn that one of the most difficult changes to be made by the senior leadership of the
organisation when starting a lean transformation process is to cease viewing production improvements merely as a
means to obtain cost reduction in the short term. This is because such typical mass production thinking will limit the
progress that the company can make with lean initiatives.
According to Mann (2010), the typical conversion of a mass production system to a lean system, involving the usual
physical changes we see, such as layout changes to improve the flow, the implementation of lean tools, development of
ways to enable smooth production, inventory reduction and standardised methods does not represent more than 20% of
lean manufacturing system implementation measures in a company. The remaining 80% are less obvious and more diffi-
cult to implement and are linked to the cultural transformation of the organisation.
Lean manufacturing is a revolutionary set of techniques that are conceptually different from traditional production
systems. Its principles are simple and logical, focused on identifying and eliminating waste. However, it is based sub-
stantially on a new way of thinking and of executing daily work within a company, requiring a radical change in the
Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

way people look at the manufacturing process. Therefore, it requires a cultural change to achieve the discipline neces-
sary to apply these new concepts and principles, thereby increasing the chances of a successful implementation of the
lean manufacturing system (Alves 2010).

3. The proposed model and its implementation method

The pursuit of performance improvement in the production process is desirable in any organisation as it directly links to
operating results and profitability within the business. The complexity of the business situation and the uncertainties that
the market presents has motivated an increasing number of companies to seek ways to improve the management of their
production processes (Singh and Mahmood 2014). Recently, solutions based on the principles of lean manufacturing
have been generally adopted by industries to obtain productivity gains and to reduce operational costs (Ramesh and
Kodali 2012).
Due to the focus mostly being placed on physical changes and the application of tools, many companies fail to
effectively implement the lean manufacturing system, resulting in the eventual degradation of improvements and regress-
ing to previous practices (Mann 2010). For Pham and Thomas (2012), in most cases, there is very limited attention
given to different leadership styles and employees’ behaviour working within organisation and the need for cultivating a
culture and employee mindset that will welcome and develop lean behaviours, and suggest a holistic approach for a
management system implementation.
The purpose of this section was to present a proposal for a model of production management, integrating the princi-
ples of lean manufacturing and sustainability, supported by a cultural transformation at the organisation, to maintain
improvements on a long-term basis.

3.1 Criteria for the elaboration of the proposed model

The proposed model was prepared using the studies mentioned in this paper’s bibliographic review as reference sources,
introducing them gradually into the organisation while involving areas that support manufacturing, forming an integrated
and structured production management system based on the concepts of lean manufacturing, sustainability and organisa-
tional cultural transformation. The implementation methodology proposed for this model, its respective stages and steps,
as well as its proposed sequence and recommendations is based on more than 10 years of the authors’ practical experi-
ence in the deployment of lean manufacturing and management systems in the automotive industry, achieving relevant
and sustainable results leveraged by improvements in production processes.

3.2 Structuring the proposed model

This model was built by integrating the concepts of lean manufacturing, sustainable development and the cultural trans-
formation of the organisation coupled with organisational development, to ensure long-term support for business
improvement. Henceforth, this model will be addressed in this work as integrated system of management (ISMA).
 6 J.R.X. Alves and J.M. Alves

Changes in the Organizational

Culture:
- Hierarchical Structure
- Communication Process
Lean - Organizational Development
Manufacturing:

-Principles of
-Lean Thinking Productive
Operational Strategy Process of
-Tools to high
-Eliminate Waste
Performance

Sustainability:
- Environment
- Workplace Health & Safety
- Social Responsibility
Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

Figure 2. Basic structure of the proposed model.

Source: The Author.

Figure 2 illustrates the basic structure of the proposed model, and the main objective of which is to develop a high-
performance production process aimed at improving a company’s competitiveness. Although this study’s concepts have
great relevance to business as a whole by being applicable to any area of the company, its focus is restricted to areas
related to the production sector. It promotes a comprehensive integration of such areas, generating sustainable results in
inventory reduction, production costs, product quality improvement, shorter production cycles, faster delivery to end
customers and improved worker safety.
In this model, the principles of lean manufacturing and the associated tools facilitate the elimination of waste in the
production environment, creating a mindset of continuous improvement. Sustainability introduces to the model the ele-
ments of environmental preservation, concern for the health and safety of workers, and social responsibility. A focus on
culture accelerates cultural transformation through a change in characteristics such as work routines, habits, values and
behaviours. Organisational development aims to reinforce cultural changes through identifying and solving critical prob-
lems within the organisational structure related to the roles and responsibilities of each organisation’s chart. It is a col-
lective long-term effort supported by senior management to promote the growth and development of the potential of
people by changing attitudes, values, behaviour and the structure of the organisation, so that the company can best adapt
to new situations.

3.3 Operation of the proposed model

The proposed model integrates the concepts of lean manufacturing and sustainability, supported by a cultural transforma-
tion at the organisation. It thus becomes a structured approach for the development of performance improvement in the
production process, enabling positive results in both the short and long term through an implementation methodology
that establishes a direct connection between operational activities and the objectives of internal company performance.
Figure 3 shows the interactions among the pillars of the proposed model.

3.3.1 Interaction between lean manufacturing and sustainability

The principles of sustainable development comprise a balanced combination of operating results, respect for people and
environmental preservation and provide the company with healthy manufacturing resulting from the rational use of raw
materials and natural resources as well as low waste.
The lean manufacturing system is based on the elimination of waste generated in the production environment and all
activities that do not add value to the enterprise. The principles of sustainability influence the lean manufacturing system
concept, creating environmental awareness, and resulting in reduced waste and a limited use of resources. In this con-
text, from the manufacturing perspective, these two concepts are complementary, since greater efficiency of production
processes would generate larger economic gains and lower consumption of natural resources and production inputs, as
 International Journal of Production Research 7

Lean
Manufacturing

Productive
Process of
High
Performance

Organizational Sustainability
Culture
Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

Community Actions
Social Responsibility

Figure 3. The proposed ISMA model and its interactions.

Source: The Author.

well as lower waste generation. Consequently, there is also a reduction in the environmental impact arising from indus-
trial activities.
The effectiveness of this interaction can be measured by specific performance indicators, such as electricity con-
sumption per unit of output – kW/unit (kilowatt per unit), water consumption per unit produced – l/unit (litres per unit),
waste generated in the industrial process per unit produced – kg/unit (kg per unit) and the number of accidents at work
per hour worked, among others.

3.3.2 Interaction between lean manufacturing and organisational culture

The implementation of a competitive strategy based on lean manufacturing requires organisational change to be success-
ful. It is necessary to have employees effectively engaged, committed and motivated to support the implementation pro-
cess and facilitate subsequent behavioural and cultural change in the organisation. Cultural change enables the support
of the lean manufacturing system, leveraging human capital to its fullest, with regard to not only physical work capacity
but also the capacity for innovation and creativity. This results in the development of a culture of continuous improve-
ment, whereby all employees seek ways to improve their work, making the company increasingly competitive.
Organisational development involves using knowledge to develop employee potential with the goal of changing atti-
tudes, values and behaviours so that the company can most effectively adapt to new situations.
This interaction can be measured periodically by specific performance indicators such as number of improvement
suggestions per employee, number of training hours per employee, internal surveys of employee satisfaction and internal
surveys on the organisation’s maturity regarding the concepts of lean manufacturing.

3.3.3 Interaction between organisational culture and sustainability

Organisational culture is comprised of a set of values, norms, beliefs, habits and customs that are shared collectively,
thereby defining a company’s identity. Sustainability is concerned with sustainable development, seeking to meet the
needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs; the princi-
ples of sustainability address the balance between operating result, respect for people and environment preservation. The
culture of the organisation is impacted by the policies and processes designed for sustainability, strengthening the beliefs
and values disseminated at all levels of the organisation. By doing so, the organisation conveys the message that its con-
cern is not only the creation of economic value, but also creating a positive impact on the society and the environment
and on the future of its own businesses. An organisational culture based on the principles of sustainability assigns to
 8 J.R.X. Alves and J.M. Alves

business a social function, through projects aimed at socially responsible management, investing in ethics, transparency
and quality in regard to all its relationships. Such a corporate culture also motivates employees to engage in social
actions and to provide services to society.
This interaction can be measured by specific indicators including the number of social action projects promoted by
the company, number of employees involved in volunteering and number of people impacted by social actions promoted
by the company.

3.4 Requirements for the implementation of the proposed methodology

In order to successfully implement the ISMA, the engagement of employees at all levels of the organisation is essential,
especially leaders of production support areas, since everyone has a role to play in the model. The highest entity in the
hierarchy of the company’s manufacturing department, often represented by the plant manager or operations manager, is
the person who is primarily responsible for leading the implementation process. It is this person’s responsibility to
involve other functional leaders as well as to provide the necessary resources for the learning and structuring of work
teams and their functions. Having a specialist in programmes for continuous improvement and an organisational
development expert on the team is a vital prerequisite to support system training activities, assess gaps in leadership and
organisational structure, and provide a plan to address them, as well as to assume the role of change agents in the
Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

organisational culture.
The implementation method presented in Section 3.5 describes specific actions in a logical sequence to bring
sustainable results as the implementation process progresses, developing employee skills through continuous and life-
long learning to promote the engagement of the whole team and bringing greater stability to the relevant processes.
This is mainly where the ISMA implementation method differs from the existing models, and it starts addressing
essential elements, building a solid foundation on Steps 1 and 2 and going forward through Steps 3–5 in a structured
manner fostering to keep working properly each one of the elements implemented. Another important difference to
mention is the level of details described in each step, which is useful to support the implementation by others lean
practitioners.

3.5 The implementation methodology

The implementation methodology of this model is divided into five stages:
(1) Structuring the implementation process,
(2) Implementation planning,
(3) Implementation of improvements,
(4) Stabilisation of the processes and
(5) Sharing knowledge and continuous improvement.
Table 1 shows in detail the stages and their respective steps.

3.5.1 First stage: structuring the implementation process

This stage sets the basic conditions and preparatory activities to initiate the change process in a structured manner.
Step 1: Conduct a preliminary diagnosis of the company
This preliminary assessment aims at evaluating the structure of the company, the production process and its stability,
and performance indicators, while highlighting priority areas for the beginning of the project.

Step 2: Establish a leader for the implementation process

A full-time dedicated agent of change with extensive knowledge in lean manufacturing should be appointed to lead the
implementation process. This leader will, among other duties, be responsible for forming and integrating the work
teams, planning and detailing the stages of the project and periodically reporting the results.

Step 3: Create a team to lead the implementation process

A team composed of the leaders of the functional departments, usually managers, must be created to plan and monitor
the work progress and remove barriers. This team should meet once a week and be led by the person with the highest
position in the company, having the project leader, defined in Step 2, as the main supporter.
 International Journal of Production Research 9

Table 1. Stages and steps of the implementation of the ISMA.

Sequence for the implementation of the ISMA

First stage – structuring the implementation process

Step 1 Conduct a preliminary diagnosis of the company
Step 2 Establish a leader for the implementation process
Step 3 Create a team to lead the implementation process
Step 4 Select a representative pilot area to begin the process

Second stage – implementation planning

Step 5 Define and standardise performance indicators and visual controls
Step 6 Develop a pilot area for a map of the value stream of the current and future state
Step 7 Assess the organisational gaps and create development plans
Step 8 Set a plan for certifying the standards ISO 14001/OHSAS 18001/SA8000

Third stage – implementation of the improvements

Step 9 Implement a continuous improvement programme
Step 10 Implement 5S, TPM and SMED by means of kaizen events
Step 11 Implement poka-yokes by means of kaizen events
Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

Step 12 Implement the system of pull production/production levelling/kanban

Fourth stage – stabilisation of the processes

Step 13 Attain the accreditation of the standards ISO 14001/OHSAS 18001/SA8000
Step 14 Establish the verification audit of the elements implemented in the pilot area
Step 15 Establish a methodology for a quick solution of problems

Fifth stage – sharing knowledge and continuous improvement

Step 16 Evaluate results of the pilot area and take corrective actions if necessary
Step 17 Update the value stream map of the pilot area (current and future state)
Step 18 Reassess the organisational gaps and create development plans
Step 19 Define the next steps and plans to expand to other areas
Step 20 Incorporate the lessons learnt into the integrated system

Notes: TPM, total productive maintenance; SMED, single minute to exchange of die (quick set-up); 5S, housekeeping method repre-
sented by Siri, Seiton, Seiso, Seiketsu and Shitsuke; ISO 14001, environmental management norms; OHSAS 18001, Occupational
Health and Safety Assessment Services norms; SA8000, Social Accountability norms.
Source: The Author.

Step 4: Select a representative pilot area to begin the process

Depending on the size of the company, a representative area of production diagnosed in Step 1 must be selected to go
through the initial transformation process. This area will serve to test the model, make adjustments to maximise the
results, collect the lessons learnt and understand its functionalities using practical experience.

3.5.2 Second stage: implementation planning

In this stage, opportunities for improving the pilot area are identified and prioritised by the implementation team. The
work teams are trained and prepared to assimilate new knowledge and become involved more actively in the change
process.

Step 5: Define and standardise performance indicators and visual controls

The key process indicators need to be reviewed or validated to represent the performance measurements comparable
with the other production sectors; these may include indicators of productivity, efficiency, effectiveness, quality (rework/
scrap) and cost. These indicators need to be translated into visual controls, with a clear definition of the target, in order
to allow monitoring in the shortest period of time possible. The implementation team, taking as reference the guidance
of The Global Report Indicators (GRI), determined the most suitable indicators to clearly demonstrate information about
the economic, environmental and social performance of the organisation. Thus, the performance indicators represent
qualitative or quantitative information about the results associated with the organisation that are comparable and able to
demonstrate improvements over time (GRI 2011). Aligned with this statement and with the objectives of the proposed
project, four indicators are determined:
 10 J.R.X. Alves and J.M. Alves

(1) Lead time of the process: comprises the time between the input of a product into the first processing step and
the output of the finished product at the last step. This is a macro-indicator of the production system, which
represents the interaction among the three pillars of the proposed model.
(2) Generation of waste per unit produced: in a given period, this is a measure of the relative environmental
effectiveness by comparing the amount of items produced with the generation of industrial waste. This indicator
is expressed in kilogrammes per unit (kg/unit).
(3) Organisational culture: expressed in percentage (%), this is the result of the simple average of three sub-indica-
tors, which are obtained by means of internal and external research: (i) internal knowledge of the ISMA, (ii)
internal customer satisfaction and (iii) external customer satisfaction. These surveys are conducted periodically
by means of specific questionnaires and tabulated from 0 to 100% for each of their questions.
(4) Social responsibility: this concerns the number of people from the surrounding community who are affected by
social actions initiated by the company.
Step 6: Develop a pilot area for a map of the value stream of the current and future state
The value stream map (VSM) enables a complete understanding of the current condition of the process and exposes
opportunities for improvement at all stages. The VSM is an important tool for continuous improvement. Once the future
condition has been implemented, it becomes the current condition, allowing the elaboration of a new map for a future
Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

condition, and so on.

The working team appointed for the creation of the maps of the current and future conditions, previously defined by
the implementation team, must be multifunctional and have the authority to implement the proposed improvements.

Step 7: Assess the organisational gaps and create development plans

A change in strategy requires the development of new abilities, knowledge and skills for employees to position them-
selves as agents of continuous transformation, optimising processes, and creating a culture of improvement that inno-
vates and adapts to new situations and new environments. Organisational development, focused on expanding the skills,
knowledge and behaviour of people, must keep up with the transformation of the company in order to support manufac-
turing strategy and operational effectiveness.
To succeed with the implementation of lean manufacturing, leaders directly involved in the project need to be on the
same level in terms of their knowledge of the system, to facilitate fruitful discussions and a quick understanding of the
problems for a suitable referral of solutions. Therefore, an effective training programme based on organisational
development initiatives should be developed to meet the new training needs of the leadership team and the whole team
impacted by the change.

Step 8: Set a plan for certifying the standards ISO 14001/OHSAS 18001/SA8000
The implementation of the ISMA envisages the incorporation of the following standards: ISO 14001 for environmental
management, the reduction of waste and the consumption of natural resources; OHSAS 18001 to motivate the
elimination of production process interruptions caused by work accidents and the costs related to the loss of employees;
and SA8000 to enable productivity gains driven by respect for employees, avoiding excessive hours or employee abuse
that causes fatigue. A plan to attain these certifications must be created in parallel with the activities of model
implementation.

3.5.3 Third stage: implementation of the improvements

The planning performed in the previous stage enables the identification of opportunities for the improvement, the cre-
ation of a training plan and the preparation of the leadership and work teams. In this stage, the changes begin to be
implemented along with the key supporting elements. New learning is acquired through practice and the first results start
to emerge.

Step 9: Implement a continuous improvement programme

Developing a culture of continuous improvement in a company is the central point of the ISMA model. Having people
that are motivated to use their innovation capacity and creativity to find ways to improve their daily jobs is among the
challenges to be addressed through cultural change. A programme for continuous improvement, based on the suggestion
of ideas, must be implemented to enable the individual and collective participation of employees at all levels of the
organisation. The programme should be structured to collect suggestions, analyse them quickly and implement and
transform the suggestions into a new standard.
 International Journal of Production Research 11

A plan for conducting monthly kaizen events, typically lasting one week, must be designed to reinforce the concepts
of the model, focusing on improvements regarding 5S, safety, ergonomics, productivity and waste reduction in a prede-
termined area. The one-week kaizen event is structured as follows: Day 1: team training concerning the concepts and
objectives of the event, Day 2: diagnosis of the current condition, Day 3: proposal for improvement, Day 4: imple-
mentation of improvements, and Day 5: standardisation and measurement of the results.

Step 10: Implement 5S, TPM and SMED by means of kaizen events
In order to create a clean, organised and safe working area, 5S is an important tool. It helps to identify waste and pro-
vides a basic foundation for the development of other elements of lean manufacturing.
TPM focuses on reducing waste associated with low equipment availability, resulting from unplanned interruptions
due to breakdowns or malfunctions; the goal is achieved through the involvement of the operators in maintaining their
own equipment.
The time elapsed between the last item of a batch produced and the first good item of the next batch is called equip-
ment changeover time or set-up time. This time does not add value; therefore, it is wasteful and needs to be minimised
in order to provide flexibility to the production system.
The implementation team must establish a working group to put these elements into practice in the pilot area by
means of a kaizen event, as mentioned in Step 9, with the direct involvement of the operators of the pilot area.
To ensure the proper functioning of these elements, a plan for periodic monitoring must be established through
Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

audits, with any possible deviation being corrected immediately.

Step 11: Implement poka-yokes by means of kaizen events

Delivering high-quality products is one of the essential requirements for the growth of businesses and for maintaining
long-term relationships with customers. The use of mistake proofing systems (poka-yokes) to prevent unintentional
errors on the production lines makes the task of system inspection independent of the operator and strengthens the qual-
ity of the system process. This element should be implemented by means of a kaizen event, as mentioned in Step 9.
In order to ensure the proper operation of the mistake proofing systems, a plan for periodic monitoring must be
established through a checklist that records the result of the system functionality tests.

Step 12: Implement the system of pull production/production levelling/kanban

The system for replenishment of materials within a lean thinking organisation aims to have at the place of production:
(i) the correct parts, (ii) at the time, they are needed and (iii) only in the required amounts. This system is supposed to
control total inventory levels within a cell of production and among the workstations, triggering refuelling only when
the amount of inventory is below established limits. The function of materials planning of the company must implement
a system of material replenishment that conforms to these assumptions, aiming to stabilise the flow of materials within
the cells and production lines, avoiding deficiency or excess and controlling the amount produced.

3.5.4 Fourth stage: stabilisation of the processes

The changes performed must be stabilised in order to avoid deterioration. The elements of this stage aim mainly at the
standardisation of improvements and establishment of the methodologies of supervision and problem solving.

Step 13: Attain the accreditation of the standards ISO 14001/OHSAS 18001/SA8000
The implementation team has to identify a working team linked to the area of HSE (health, safety and environment) in
order to proceed with the implementation of the ISO 14001, OHSAS 18001 and SA8000 standards.

Step 14: Establish a verification audit of the elements implemented in the pilot area
The involvement and commitment of employees in the implementation of the ISMA is one of the key success factors.
Thus, in order to monitor and assess the evolution and maturity of the elements implemented in the third stage, imple-
mentation of the improvements, a method of auditing should be established, aiming to assess the behaviour, knowledge
and correct application of the tools of lean manufacturing.
The implementation team has to establish a working team in order to develop an audit methodology that serves this
purpose.

Step 15: Establish a methodology for a quick solution to problems

The occurrence of problems in the production areas, caused by deviations from the established pattern or instability
in the processes, impacts the flow of materials and causes undesirable effects if they are not quickly solved.
 12 J.R.X. Alves and J.M. Alves

A methodology for fast troubleshooting must be developed to provide both a structured approach to the problems as
well as quick solutions that allow the processes to return to normal conditions.
The method adopted for rapid problem solving should be easy to understand and capable of generic application in
problems of varying natures in the production environment, allowing the solving of quality deviations, equipment break-
downs, accidents at work, abnormally long processing times, lack of supply and any other type of wastes. Its basic
structure should focus on: (i) understanding the facts, (ii) finding the failure mode, (iii) finding the root cause, (iv)
implementing corrective actions, (v) evaluating the corrective actions and (vi) standardising with the update of all
relevant documents.

3.5.5 Fifth stage: sharing knowledge and continuous improvement

Upon reaching this stage, the implementation of the ISMA in the pilot area has been completed with substantial
improvements in the productive system and in the skills and knowledge of the leaders and members of the working
teams. The basis of continuous improvement has been set. This stage incorporates the lessons learnt into the model and
defines the next steps for the expansion of the project to other areas of the company.

Step 16: Evaluate results of the pilot area and take corrective actions if necessary
Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

After the complete implementation of the ISMA elements in the pilot area and a complete stabilisation of the processes,
demonstrated by improvements in the performance indicators defined in Step 5, the implementation team should conduct
a critical analysis of these results, together with the results of the audits implemented in Step 14, and assess further
opportunities for improvement. Corrections should be made for later reapplication of the critical analysis and so on, until
it reaches a satisfactory condition.
As an auxiliary action to assess the obtained results, the diagnosis performed in Step 1 can be repeated in order to
compare the conditions ‘before’ and ‘after’ the implementation.

Step 17: Update the VSM of the pilot area (current and future state)
The VSM of the future state, elaborated in Step 6 and now fully implemented, becomes the present condition. There-
fore, the execution of a new round is recommended to update the VSM of the present condition and to create a new
map of the future condition, thus applying the philosophy of continuous improvement in the pilot area.

Step 18: Reassess the organisational gaps and refresh the development plans
A review of the organisational development plan, prepared in Step 7, has to be conducted by the human resources
department with the support of the leadership, to analyse the skills and knowledge obtained by the employees. The gaps
identified have to be filled by new organisational development actions.

Step 19: Define next steps and plans to expand to other areas
Once the implementation cycle in the pilot area has been completed, with the evidence of substantial improvements and
process stability achieved through the application of the ISMA and demonstrated through the performance indicators, it
is necessary to share best practices and learning acquired in other areas in the company. Therefore, a new focus area
should be established for one more cycle of the practical application of the model.

Step 20: Incorporate the lessons learnt into the ISMA

For the sake of continuous improvement, the lessons learnt throughout the implementation of the ISMA in the pilot area
must be incorporated into the model. The implementation team should conduct a critical analysis of any difficulties or
doubts regarding the implementation or interpretation of the steps as reported by the work teams and provide the neces-
sary improvements and clarifications, turning these into a new standard.

4. Conclusion
Finding a way to improve the performance of the production process has been a challenge for many manufacturing
organisations that aim to address competition in an increasingly globalised economy. Incorporating environmental con-
siderations into manufacturing provides the company with favourable conditions for maintaining the continuous
improvement of its processes and its image in society. In response to the research question, this study proposes a model
of production management and its implementation methodology, integrating the principles of lean manufacturing and
sustainability, supported by a cultural transformation in the organisation. The model utilises the tools of lean manufac-
turing to eliminate waste in the production environment and to generate productivity gains. Integrating sustainability
 International Journal of Production Research 13

concepts into the model allows further gains through initiatives that reduce both the use of natural resources and the
generation of industrial waste. Social responsibility policies provide a more humane image of the company through the
mechanism of community work. Cultural transformation is infused in the model by organisational actions that provide
knowledge and facilitate the development of employee potential, aiming to change attitudes, values, behaviours and out-
comes. The implementation methodology defines a logical sequence of events. It initially provides activities for analysis,
structure and planning and prepares the environment for the steps of implementation, stabilisation and the assessment of
the results.
The next step will be to test the model proposed in this paper in an actual application to validate its effectiveness.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID
José Roberto Xavier Alves http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5523-1709
Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

References

Alves, J. M. 2001. Proposta de um modelo híbrido de gestão da produção: aplicação na indústria aeronáutica [Proposal for a
Hybrid Model of Production Management: Application in the Aircraft Industry]. Campinas: Tese (Doutorado em Engenharia
Mecânica), Faculdade de Engenharia Mecânica, Universidade Estadual de Campinas. http://www.bibliotecadigital.unicamp.
br/document/?code=vtls000232622.
Alves, J. R. X. 2010. Aplicação de um modelo de gestão da manufatura enxuta com foco na transformação cultural: aplicação em
uma empresa da indústria automotiva [Application of a Management Model of Lean Manufacturing with Focus on Cultural
Transformation: Application in a Company of the Automotive Industry]. São José dos Campos: Tese (Mestrado em Engenharia
Aeronáutica e Mecânica), Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica. http://www.bd.bibl.ita.br.
Aydin, B., and A. Ceylan. 2011. “What is the Joint Effect of Employee Satisfaction and Customer Orientation on the Organizational
Culture in Metalworking Manufacturing?” The International Journal of Human Resource Management 22 (5): 1203–1215.
doi:10.1080/09585192.2011.556805.
Black, B. C., D. M. Hassenzahl, J. C. Stephens, G. Weisel, and N. Gift. 2013. Climate Change: An Encyclopedia of Science and
History. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio.
Chiarini, A. 2014. “Sustainable Manufacturing-greening Processes using Specific Lean Production Tools: An Empirical Observation
from European Motorcycle Component Manufacturers.” Journal of Cleaner Production 85 (1): 226–233. doi:10.1016/j.jcle-
pro.2014.07.080.
Elkington, J. 2000. “Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business.” Journal of Business Ethics 23 (2):
229–231. doi:10.1023/A%3A1006129603978.
Falkner, R. 2013. The Handbook of Global Climate and Environment Policy. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
GRI (The Global Reporting Initiative). 2011. Sustainability Reporting Guidelines-Version 3.1(2000-2011). https://www.globalreport
ing.org/resourcelibrary/G3.1-Guidelines-Incl-Technical-Protocol.pdf.
Ji, G., A. Gunasekaran, and G. Yang. 2014. “Constructing Sustainable Supply Chain under Double Environmental Medium
Regulations.” International Journal of Production Economics 147 (2): 211–219. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.04.012.
Liker, J. K. 2004. The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World’s Greatest Manufacturer. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lucato, W. C., M. V. Junior, R. M. Vanalle, and J. A. A. Salles. 2012. “Model to Measure the Degree of Competitiveness for Auto
Parts Manufacturing Companies.” International Journal of Production Research 50 (19): 5508–5522. doi:10.1080/
00207543.2011.643252.
Mann, D. W. 2010. Creating a Lean Culture. 2nd ed. New York: Productivity Press.
Maskell, B. H., and B. L. Baggaley. 2006. “Lean Accounting: What’s It All About?” Association for Manufacturing Excellence
22 (1): 35–43.
Milne, M. J., and R. Gray. 2013. “W(h)ither Ecology? The Triple Bottom Line, the Global Reporting Initiative, and Corporate
Sustainability Reporting.” Journal of Business Ethics 118 (1): 13–29. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1543-8.
Moori, R. G., A. Pescarmona, and H. Kimura. 2013. “Lean Manufacturing and Business Performance in Brazilian Firms.” Journal of
Operations and Supply Chain Management 6 (1): 91–105. doi:10.12660/joscmv6n1p91-105.
Oliveira, L. R., R. M. Medeiros, P. B. Terra, and O. L. G. Quelhas. 2012. “Sustainability: The Evolution of Concepts to Implementa-
tion as Strategy in Organizations.” Production 22 (1): 70–82. doi:10.1590/S0103-65132011005000062.
Pham, D. T., and A. J. Thomas. 2012. “Fit Manufacturing: A Framework for Sustainability.” Journal of Manufacturing Technology
Management 23 (1): 103–123. doi:10.1108/17410381211196311.
 14 J.R.X. Alves and J.M. Alves

Ramesh, V., and R. A. Kodali. 2012. “A Decision Framework for Maximising Lean Manufacturing Performance.” International
Journal of Production Research 50 (8): 2234–2251. doi:10.1080/00207543.2011.564665.
Santos, R. F. 2010. Proposta de um modelo de gestão integrada da cadeia de suprimentos: aplicação no segmento de eletrodomésti-
cos [Proposal for an Integrated Management Model of the Supply Chain: Application in the Home Appliance Segment].
São José dos Campos: Tese (Doutorado em Engenharia Aeronáutica e Mecânica), Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica. http://
www.bd.bibl.ita.br.
Savitz, A., and K. Weber. 2013. Talent, Transformation, and the Triple Bottom Line: How Companies Can Leverage Human
Resources to Achieve Sustainable Growth. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Schein, E. H. 2010. Organizational Culture and Leadership. 4th ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Silva, E. M., F. C. A. Santos, and M. Castro. 2012. “Analysis of the Relationship between Manufacturing Strategy, Practices and
Operational Performance.” Production 22 (3): 502–516. doi:10.1590/S0103-65132012005000009.
Silva, L. S. A., and O. L. G. Quelhas. 2006. “Sustainable Development and Consequences for Equity Costs in Public Companies.”
Gestão & Produção 13 (3): 385–395. doi:10.1590/S0104-530X2006000300003.
Singh, H., and R. Mahmood. 2014. “Manufacturing Strategy and Export Performance of Small and Medium Enterprises in Malaysia:
Moderating Role of External Environment.” International Journal of Business & Commerce 3 (5): 37–52. http://www.ijbc
net.com/3-5/IJBC-14-3507.pdf.
Stahl, M. J., and G. M. Bounds. 1991. Competing Globally through Customer Value: The Management of Strategic Supra-systems.
New York: Quorum Books.
Vilppola, K. 2014. “Enhancing Quality Management in a Finnish Oil Refining and Marketing Company.” Thesis (Master in
Downloaded by [New York University] at 22:21 20 May 2015

Mechanical Engineering), University of Oulu Faculty of Technology, Oulu. http://jultika.oulu.fi/Record/nbnfioulu-

201409021815/Description.
WCED-World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. “Towards Sustainable Development.” Chap. 2 in Our Common
Future. http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-02.htm.
Womack, J. P., and D. T. Jones. 2003. Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation. New York: Simon and
Schuster.
Wood Jr., T. 2009. Mudança organizacional [Organizational Change]. 5th ed. Sao Paulo, SP: Atlas.
Yang, M. G. M., P. Hong, and S. B. Modi. 2011. “Impact of Lean Manufacturing and Environmental Management on Business
Performance: An Empirical Study of Manufacturing Firms.” International Journal of Production Economics 129 (2): 251–261.
doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.10.017.
Zaman, A. U. 2014. “Identification of Key Assessment Indicators of the Zero Waste Management Systems.” Ecological Indicators
36: 682–693. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.09.024.
Zangiski, M. A. S. G., E. P. Lima, and S. E. G. Costa. 2013. “Organizational Competence Building and Development: Contributions
to Operations Management.” International Journal of Production Economics 144 (1): 76–89. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.01.021.