The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1463-5771.htm

Country-related future research Lean

Manufacturing
agenda of Lean Manufacturing–
A systematic literature review
Evangelos Psomas 1185
Business Administration of Food and Agricultural Enterprises, University of Patras,
Agrinio, Greece Received 19 January 2021
Revised 24 June 2021
Accepted 1 July 2021
Abstract
Purpose – Many future research proposals of Lean Manufacturing (LM) are presented in the literature. The
purpose of this paper is to determine these future research proposals of LM which are country-related and
classify them.
Design/methodology/approach – A systematic literature review (SLR) of peer-reviewed journal articles in
LM was conducted. A total of 145 articles published in 34 journals during 2010–2020 were collected from four
major management science publishers namely, Emerald Online, Elsevier/Science Direct, Springer Link and
Taylor and Francis. The country-related future research proposals of LM identified in the literature were
classified according to, firstly, the continent of the country of reference, and secondly, some form of natural
affinity of these proposals creating meaningful themes. The quality tool “affinity diagram” was applied to
classify the country-related future research proposals of LM.
Findings – The country-related future research proposals of LM, which are increasing in the literature over
time, refer mostly to studies to be conducted in several continents/countries and to multinational studies.
Conducting studies specifically in Asia, Europe, South and North America, Africa and Australia–New Zealand
is also suggested. The plethora of the country-related future research proposals of LM were classified, based on
the affinity of their content, into 18 meaningful themes. These themes were also classified based on their affinity
into two broad categories, namely “themes concerning the LM approach itself” and “themes concerning factors
outside the LM approach”.
Research limitations/implications – The restricted number of the databases searched and the subjectivity
of classifying the large number of the country-related future research proposals into themes are the main
limitations of the present SLR. Based on these limitations, future literature review studies can be carried out.
Practical implications – Useful proposals are provided to researchers of several countries for conducting
original and country-specific research studies which can enrich the knowledge of the implementation of LM
under the specific circumstances of a country for the benefit of practitioners.
Originality/value – This study goes beyond previous literature review studies on LM by focusing
exclusively on the LM future research agenda which is country related. The analytical presentation of the
country-related future research proposals as well as the formulation of clusters of these proposals make the
present SLR study substantially different from those carried out worldwide so far.
Keywords Lean manufacturing, Country-related future research proposals, Systematic literature review
Paper type Literature review

1. Introduction
Lean Manufacturing (LM) is applied by companies operating all over the world, in the
developed countries of Europe and North America as well as in the developing countries of
Asia and South America (Nawanir et al., 2013; Jasti and Kodali, 2016; Filho et al., 2016; Chaplin
et al., 2016; Negrao et al., 2017). The widespread application of LM has increased the research
interest in this discipline (Pinho and Mendes, 2017; Erthal and Marques, 2018), especially in
the last decade (Samuel et al., 2015). So, research on LM has been conducted across the globe
(Bhamu and Sangwan, 2014; Jasti and Kodali, 2016) leading to the publication of articles
Benchmarking: An International
which present empirical and exploratory studies from developed, emerging and Journal
underdeveloped countries (Bhamu and Sangwan, 2014). These studies show that there is a Vol. 29 No. 4, 2022
pp. 1185-1213
stark contrast between the rhetoric and reality of Lean. In other words, there are considerable © Emerald Publishing Limited
1463-5771
differences between Lean as practiced in reality compared to many descriptions in the DOI 10.1108/BIJ-01-2021-0037
BIJ literature (Langstrand and Drotz, 2016). According to Marodin et al. (2016), LM
29,4 implementation is affected by the substantial social, cultural and economic differences
between developed and emergent markets. Moyano-Fuentes and Sacristan-Diaz (2012) and
Jasti and Kodali (2014a) also state that the different results that derive from the adoption of
LM are related to the country’s economic and cultural context. Thus, researchers from
developed countries should collaborate with other countries’ researchers in the field of LM to
study samples of companies from multiple countries and get region/culture independent
1186 results (Jasti and Kodali, 2014a; Jasti et al., 2020) as well as geography dependent results
(Kumar and Vinodh, 2020). Taking this into consideration and following the suggestions of
Ciano et al. (2019), Uriarte et al. (2020), and Antony et al. (2021) for conducting future literature
review studies in the field of LM as well as the suggestions of Psomas (2021) for identifying in
the LM literature future research methodologies which are related to the country where a
company operates, this study extracts from the literature and analyzes the country-related
future research proposals of LM.
The present study contributes to the LM literature, firstly, by identifying the country-related
future research proposals through a Systematic Literature Review (SLR), which, according to
Tranfield et al. (2003), is a fundamental scientific activity and produces a reliable stock of
knowledge in the management field, and secondly, by classifying these research proposals
applying the “affinity diagram” quality tool, based on the continent of the country of reference
and some form of natural affinity of these proposals, creating thus meaningful themes. In other
words, the following research questions are answered through the present study:
RQ1. What are the country-related future research proposals of LM?
RQ2. Which continents are represented in the country-related future research proposals
of LM?
RQ3. What are the main themes of the country-related future research proposals of LM?
Literature review studies determining the future research agenda of LM have already been
conducted. For example, Belhadi et al. (2018) reviewed articles with regard to Lean in SMEs
which were published between 1986 and 2018 and identified the gaps in the literature and the
future research areas. Rachman and Ratnayake (2019) relied on articles in the field of Lean in
the petroleum industry which were published between 1990 and 2017 and revealed respective
research gaps. Staedele et al. (2019) focused on articles studying the performance evaluation in
LP which were published from 2000 to 2018 and made suggestions for future scientific research.
Ciano et al. (2019) analyzed IJPR publications in the field of Lean which were published between
2005 and 2018 and determined the most recent research areas. Uriarte et al. (2020) reviewed
articles focusing on the combination of Lean and simulation which were published between
1990 and 2017 and identified the key research perspectives and challenges. Tomasevic et al.
(2020) based their study on articles with regard to Lean in high-mix/low-volume industry which
were published up to September 2019 and identified directions for future research. Peralta et al.
(2020) reviewed articles focusing on the practices employed to identify customer value through
Lean which were published up to May 2019 and determined the future research agenda.
Ejsmont et al. (2020) focused on articles with regard to the integration of LM and I4.0
methodologies which were published between 2011 and 2019 and identified directions for
future research. Antony et al. (2021) focused on articles in the field of LM which were published
between 2010 and 2019 and revealed future research directions. Finally, Psomas (2021)
reviewed LM articles published between 2010 and 2020 and determined the LM future research
methodologies suggested in the literature. The above-mentioned studies do not focus on the
country-related future research proposals of LM and their objectives are different from those of
this study. Thus, the present study differs significantly from previous literature review studies
in the field of LM. Moreover, the originality of the present SLR study is further enhanced
through formulating meaningful themes of the country-related future research proposals of Lean
LM, which is achieved by applying the “affinity diagram” quality tool. So, researchers and Manufacturing
academics from several countries, based on the country-related future research proposals of LM
as well as the key themes revealed, can design country-specific LM research studies of high
originality and value. Furthermore, practitioners from specific countries can also benefit from
the present study findings by taking into consideration the unexplored LM issues in their LM
implementation plans.
The structure of the paper is as follows: in the next sections, a brief theoretical background 1187
is presented as well as the SLR methodology. The results of the SLR are then presented
describing the profiles of the articles reviewed and the country-related future research
proposals of LM. In the following sections, the results are discussed, and the conclusions and
the implications of the present study are presented. Finally, the limitations of the study and
the author’s suggestions for further literature review studies are presented.

2. Theoretical background
Authors attribute the origins of Lean to the culmination of research conducted during the
1980s at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) within the International Motor
Vehicle Programme (IMVP), to explain the success of Toyota Motors (Samuel et al., 2015;
Al-Tahat and Jalham, 2015). More specifically, Toyota produced automobiles with less
inventory, human effort, investment and defects and introduced a greater and ever-growing
variety of products (Bhamu and Sangwan, 2014). Out of this practice was born what Toyota
came to call the Toyota Production System (Cil and Turkan, 2013). LM is an update of the
Toyota Production System (Fullerton et al., 2014; Barbosa et al., 2014; Al-Tahat and Jalham,
2015) and means using less of everything compared with mass production, and more
specifically half the human effort in a factory, half the manufacturing space, half the
investment in tools, half the engineering hours to develop a new product in half the time
(Womack et al., 1990). By utilizing the least amount of the available resources more
effectively, customer requirements are satisfied at minimum cost (Hodge et al., 2011).
Bhamu and Sangwan (2014) distinguishes two aspects of LM, the philosophical aspect
which is related to guiding principles and overarching goals, and the practical aspect
including a set of management practices, tools and techniques. The Lean principles
constituting the philosophical aspect of Lean are the following (Womack and Jones, 1996):
define value precisely from the perspective of the end customer in terms of a specific product
with specific capabilities offered at a specific price and time, identify the entire value stream
for each product or product family and eliminate waste, create flow within the value stream,
design and provide what the customer wants only when the customer wants it and pursue
perfection. On the other hand, the practices/tools/techniques that constitute the practical
aspect of Lean and precisely reflect the Lean principles include, for example (Bhamu and
Sangwan, 2014): value stream mapping, kanban/pull, just-in-time, total production
maintenance, 5S, cellular manufacturing, continuous improvement, TQM, kaizen, single
minute exchange of dies, multifunctional teams, production smoothing (heijunka), visual
control (andon), poke yoke, standardized work, simulation and automation (jidoka).
The ideas of Lean do not begin and end on the manufacturing floor; they extend to all
functions, tiers and concerns of a specific industry (Cil and Turkan, 2013). In other words,
Lean is designed to eliminate waste in every functional area (Samuel et al., 2015), extending
from product and process design to production, customer relations and supplier networks
(Karim and Arif-Uz-Zaman, 2013). So, LM can be employed in any manufacturing company
and supply chain, regardless of the activity, sub-sector and the geographic region a company
operates in (AL-Najem et al., 2013; Nawanir et al., 2013; Dora et al., 2013; Matawale et al., 2014;
Sharma et al., 2016). Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) can also derive significant
BIJ benefits from LM implementation, similar to large manufacturing companies (Bhamu and
29,4 Sangwan, 2014; Rymaszewska, 2014; Alaskari et al., 2016). The above mentioned justify the
growing number of manufacturing companies all around the world which have adopted LM
practices successfully (Lucato et al., 2014; Bhamu and Sangwan, 2014; Bortolotti et al., 2015).

3. Methodology
1188 According to Tranfield et al. (2003) and Hu et al. (2015), SLR is a replicable, scientific and
transparent process and provides high-quality evidence and an audit path of the reviewers’
decisions, procedures and conclusions. Taking this into consideration and following the
approaches of the literature review studies on Lean of Erthal and Marques (2018), Cocca et al.
(2019), Uriarte et al. (2020) and Antony et al. (2021), an SLR study was conducted in order to
achieve the objectives of the present study and retrieve the country-related future research
proposals of LM. The SLR approach followed consists of the following three stages: the
planning stage, the conducting stage and the reporting/dissemination stage (Figure 1)
(Tranfield et al., 2003).

3.1 Stage I–Planning the review

According to Tranfield et al. (2003) this stage includes the development of the review protocol,
and more specifically the determination of the population (or sample) of the articles of interest
of the present study, the search strategy for their identification, the criteria for their inclusion
and exclusion in the review and finally the quality assessment method.

Systematic Literature Review

Planning the Conducting the Reporting and

Review Review dissemination

Research Apply the Report the

Purpose Criteria Research

Research Search the Dissemination

Protocol Literature

Selection of
Studies

Quality
Assessment

Data
Extraction and
Synthesis

Figure 1.
The SLR methodology
Source(s): Tranfield et al. (2003), Albliwi et al. (2014),
Psomas (2021)
 Similar to the literature reviews of Erthal and Marques (2018) and Antony et al. (2021), Lean
only academic journals were considered in the present study, while books, online sites and Manufacturing
grey literature were excluded. Following the approach of Psomas (2020), Psomas and Antony
(2019), and Antony et al. (2021), the search of the articles was based on the databases of four
well-known management science publishers of peer-reviewed academic journal articles,
namely, Emerald Online, Elsevier/Science Direct, Springer Link and Taylor and Francis. The
ABS (Association of Business Schools) 2018 list of journals was used as the guide for the
journals considered in the present SLR (Antony et al., 2021). All the article types were 1189
considered meaning the literature review, the conceptual and the empirical (case studies and
surveys) articles (Antony et al., 2021).
The year 2010 was chosen as the starting date for the search of LM articles, given that
from that moment on, a substantial increase in the LM publications was observed (Pinho and
Mendes, 2017; Erthal and Marques, 2018; Antony et al., 2021). The starting date for the review
period of the SLR studies of Antony et al. (2021) and Psomas (2021) was also established as
2010. It is worth noting that in this SLR, articles which were published up to the end of 2020
were considered. The selection of the last decade for reviewing the literature is in line with the
suggestion of Moghadam et al. (2021), according to which future researchers should analyse
recent papers to extract the developing and emerging trends in the field of quality
management.
Similar to the SLR studies on LM of Psomas and Antony (2019) and Antony et al. (2021),
articles related only to the manufacturing sector were considered in the present SLR, excluding,
thus, articles related to the services sector, the construction industry or the whole supply chain.
The search was based on the following terms reflecting the philosophical and practical aspect of
LM (Bhamu and Sangwan, 2014): Lean, Lean manufacturing, Lean production, Lean principles
and Lean practices/tools/techniques, which were also used in the literature review studies of
Psomas and Antony (2019), Psomas (2020), Antony et al. (2021) and Psomas (2021). Terms
describing specific Lean principles or practices/tools/techniques (e.g. value stream mapping,
kanban/pull, 5S, kaizen, etc.) (Bhamu and Sangwan, 2014) or bundles of Lean practices (e.g. just-
in-time, total quality management, total preventative maintenance and human resource
management) (Taylor et al., 2013) were not taken into consideration, similar to the approach
followed by Psomas and Antony (2019) and Psomas (2020). This is justified given that many
empirical studies follow the suggestion of Shah and Ward (2007) and examine LM from a
multidimensional perspective covering several highly inter-related individual management
practices in an integrated system (Camacho-Minano et al., 2013). The inclusion and exclusion
criteria for the article selection are presented in Table 1.

3.2 Stage II–Conducting the review

According to Tranfield et al. (2003), in this stage the authors following the SLR methodology
should identify the research, select the relevant studies, assess their quality, extract the
relevant data, monitor the progress and synthesize the data. So, having in mind the inclusion
and exclusion criteria as well as the search terms identified at the planning stage of the SLR,
the following search string was constructed, similar to the approach followed by Antony et al.
(2021) and Psomas (2021): (Lean) or (Lean manufacturing) or (Lean production) and
(principles) or (practices) or (tools) or (techniques) and (manufacturing companies). As a result
of this search process, numerous articles were available, all of which were screened
thoroughly for their fit with the aims of the present study. The author’s decision on the fit of
the article with the study aims was based on the article title, abstract and keywords. In the
event that no clear decision could be made, the author read the full text of the article. So, based
on the article screening process, a final sample of 145 articles published in 34 journals
(Table 2) were revealed (Figure 2).
BIJ Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria
29,4
Articles published between 2010 and 2020 Any publication before the year 2010 and after 2020
Academic journals Books, online sites and grey literature (conferences,
master’s theses, doctoral dissertations, textbooks,
reports, working papers from research groups,
technical reports, etc.)
1190 Well-known databases: Emerald online, Elsevier/ Non-academic databases
Science direct, Springer link and Taylor and Francis
Articles published in journals included in the ABS Articles published in journals not included in the ABS
2018 list list
Articles studying Lean implementation issues (e.g. Articles studying an individual Lean principle,
Lean principles, practices, tools/techniques, practice or tool/technique, and Lean-Six sigma, Lean-
performance, assessment, Leanness) Agile and Lean-Green implementation issues
Articles related to the manufacturing sector Articles related to the services sector, construction
Table 1. industry and the supply chain
Inclusion and Articles highlighting country-related future research Articles not highlighting country- related future
exclusion criteria for proposals research proposals
the literature review Articles written in the English language Articles written in a language other than English

Publisher–journals Number of articles Percent

Emerald 83 0.572
(1) Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 16 0.110
(2) International Journal of Lean Six Sigma 14 0.097
(3) International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 12 0.083
(4) International Journal of Operations and Production Management 8 0.055
(5) Benchmarking: An International Journal 8 0.055
(6) International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management 6 0.041
(7) The TQM Journal 5 0.034
(8) Supply Chain Management: an International Journal 2 0.014
(9) Measuring Business Excellence 2 0.014
(10) Industrial Management and Data Systems 2 0.014
(11) International Journal of Logistics Management 2 0.014
(12) Journal of Organizational Change Management 1 0.007
(13) International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research 1 0.007
(14) British Food Journal 1 0.007
(15) Cross Cultural and Strategic Management 1 0.007
(16) Corporate Governance 1 0.007
(17) Employee Relations 1 0.007
Taylor and Francis 45 0.310
(18) Production Planning and Control 18 0.124
(19) International Journal of Production Research 11 0.076
(20) Total Quality Management and Business Excellence 9 0.062
(22) The International Journal of Human Resource Management 2 0.014
(21) Cogent Business and Management 2 0.014
(23) Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal 1 0.007
(24) Knowledge Management Research and Practice 1 0.007
(25) International Journal Of Logistics Research and Applications 1 0.007
Elsevier/Science direct 14 0.097
(26) International Journal of Production Economics 7 0.048
(27) Journal of Business Research 2 0.014
(28) Journal of Cleaner Production 2 0.014
(29) European Management Journal 1 0.007
(30) Journal of Safety Research 1 0.007
(31) Journal of International Management 1 0.007
Springer link 3 0.021
Table 2. (32) Systemic Practice and Action Research 1 0.007
The list of journals (33) Small Business Economics 1 0.007
considered in the study (34) Scientometrics 1 0.007
 1093 initial LM articles were Lean
identified (through the search Manufacturing
string entered in the scientific
databases) and screened
80 articles published in
Journals not included in the
ABS list
1013 LM articles
published in Journals included
1191
186 articles studying an
in the ABS list
individual Lean principle,
practice or tool/technique,
and Lean-Six Sigma, Lean-
Agile, Lean-Green, Lean in
supply chain, and Lean in
both manufacturing and
service/construction
827 LM articles kept
314 articles not highlighting
future research proposals of
LM
513 articles highlighting
future research proposals of
LM
368 articles not highlighting
country-related future
research proposals of LM

Final sample of 145 articles Figure 2.

highlighting country-related Search process and
future research proposals of results
LM

The quality of the sample articles was ensured, as suggested by Tranfield et al. (2003),
through examining the fit between the study’s methodology and its research questions.
Similar to the methodology followed in the SLR studies by Psomas and Antony (2019) and
Antony et al. (2021), all the useful information contained in the sample articles was extracted
in an excel spreadsheet and placed in respective cells. More specifically, the excel spreadsheet
included information with regard to the article’s title, year of publication, journal title, authors
and type, the geographical research area of the study, the industrial sub-sectors involved, the
number of the participating companies or respondents in the study as well as the country-
related future research proposals of LM. It is worth noting that these future research
proposals were reported by authors in the LM articles through the following statements
(Antony et al., 2021): “there is a need to conduct further research on this subject . . .”, “it is
necessary to continue examining the. . .”, “future studies should consider the. . .”, “more
empirical research is needed to clarify and validate the. . .”, etc.
In order to better manage the huge amount of the country-related future research
proposals of LM identified, the approach of Psomas and Antony (2019) and Antony et al.
(2021) was followed. More specifically, the quality tool “affinity diagram” was applied,
through which the country-related future research proposals of LM were classified according
to, firstly, the continent of the country of reference, and secondly, some form of natural
affinity of the future research proposals. So, meaningful themes were created and prioritized
according to the number of their supporting literature references.
BIJ 3.3 Stage III Reporting and dissemination
29,4 In the final stage, in accordance with Tranfield et al. (2003), the report of the SLR is presented
including the country-related future research proposals of LM, the respective themes revealed
and their translation into useful guidelines. So, not only are the profiles of the sample articles
critically discussed but also the country-related future research proposals of LM which are
presented both analytically and in summary through the framework of the meaningful
themes formulated. Thus, clear research directions are provided to researchers from several
1192 countries.

4. Results
4.1 The profiles of the reviewed articles
Table 2 presents the number and the percentages of the sample articles per publishing house
and academic journal. Half of the journals (17 out of 34) which published the sample articles are
included in the database of Emerald, while more than half of the sample articles (83 out of 145, a
percentage of 57.2%) were published in Emerald journals. Taylor and Francis is the publishing
house with the second highest number of the journals publishing the sample articles (8 out of
34), followed by Elsevier (6 out of 34) (Table 2). Moreover, Taylor and Francis is the publishing
house with the second highest number of the sample articles (45 out of 145) followed by Elsevier
(14 out of 145). It is worth noting that Springer is the publishing house with the lowest number
of the journals publishing the sample articles (3 out of 34), and moreover the publishing house
with the lowest number of the sample articles (3 out of 145) (Table 2).
From Table 2 it is also obvious that the majority of the sample articles of three out of the
four publishing houses, were published in few journals. More specifically, 83.1% of the
sample articles of Emerald were published in a percentage of 41.2% (7 out of 17) of the
journals of this publisher, 84.4% of the sample articles of Taylor and Francis were published
in a percentage of 37.5% (3 out of 8) of the journals of this publisher, and finally, 78.6% of the
sample articles of Elsevier were published in a percentage of 50.0% (3 out of 6) of the journals
of this publisher. Moreover, based on the journals of the four publishers and the whole sample
of articles, it is apparent that 114 out of the 145 sample articles (78.6%) were published in 11
out of the 34 journals (32.4%, the first seven in the Emerald list, the first three in the Taylor
and Francis list and the first one in the Elsevier list) (Table 2).
Figure 3 shows that the majority of the sample articles (112 out of 145, 77.2%) were
published between 2017 and 2020. A high percentage of the sample articles describe surveys
(71.0%), 14.5% case studies, 11.7% literature reviews and 2.8% conceptual studies.

Articles/Year
45 41
40
35
35
30
25
20
20 16
15
10 7 8 8
Figure 3. 3 4
5 1 2
Articles per
publication year 0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
While most of the surveys and case studies (83 out of the 124) did not specify the Lean
manufacturing sub-sectors examined, in the remaining studies the manufacturing sub- Manufacturing
sectors examined included automotive and parts, food/drinks, petrochemicals, machinery,
electrical/electronics, textiles and apparel, aerospace, plastics and rubber, pharmaceuticals,
etc. A percentage of 16.1% of the surveys and case studies (20 out of 124) were multinational
studies, while the remaining surveys and case studies were conducted in 31 countries
(Table 3) on 6 continents. More specifically, 50 surveys and case studies were conducted in
Asia, 27 in Europe, 19 in South America, 5 in North America, 2 in Africa and finally 1 in 1193
Australia–New Zealand. The countries with the highest number of LM surveys and case
studies were India and Brazil (Table 3).

4.2 Country-related future research proposals of LM

The country-related future research proposals of LM identified in the reviewed articles were
classified, through applying the “affinity diagram” quality tool, according to the continent of
the country each future research proposal refers to. Table 4 presents the number of the
supporting literature references of the future research proposals per continent.
The country-related future research proposals of LM are analytically presented in
Table 5. Through applying the “affinity diagram” quality tool, these proposals were
classified into meaningful themes (Table 5). The themes revealed are the following, in
descending order based on the number of the supporting literature references of the
country-related future research proposals (Figure 4): culture, emergent economies–
developing countries and developed countries, SMEs/large companies and sectors, Lean
effects, research methods, geographical differentiation in Lean implementation, factors
influencing Lean, other management theories/approaches/practices integrated with Lean,
extent of Lean use/implementation, Lean implementation framework/model, human
resources involved in Lean, Leanness, Lean knowledge and training, Lean barriers,
multinational corporations, Lean drivers, Lean elements/constructs and waste. The
themes per continent are also presented in Table 4.

5. Discussion
5.1 Discussing the profile of the reviewed articles
Useful information regarding the publishers and journals publishing the sample articles is
revealed. The publisher which outperforms in terms of the number of the journals and sample

Countries Number of studies Countries Number of studies

Multi-national 20 Iran 1
India 30 Australia 1
Brazil 17 Thailand 1
China 8 South Africa 1
Italy 6 Nigeria 1
USA 4 Greece 1
Sweden 4 Saudi Arabia 1
The Netherlands 3 Equador 1
France 3 R. Macedonia 1
Malaysia 2 Iraq 1
Indonesia 2 UAE 1
Portugal 2 Bulgaria 1
Ireland 2 Austria 1
Spain 2 UK 1 Table 3.
Bangladesh 2 Canada 1 Geographic
Sri Lanka 1 Chile 1 research areas
BIJ Supporting Themes of country-related future research proposals of
29,4 Continent literature references LM

Several continents/ 128 All themes except for waste

countries and multinational
Asia 23 Culture, waste, SMEs/Large companies – sectors, Lean
drivers, emergent economies–developing countries and
1194 developed countries, Lean implementation framework/
model, extent of Lean use/implementation, Lean effects,
human resource-related issues, Lean effects
Europe 10 Other management theories/approaches/practices
integrated with Lean, extent of Lean use/
implementation, emergent economies–developing
countries and developed countries, Lean effects,
research methods
South America 6 Lean drivers, Lean effects, emergent economies–
developing countries and developed countries, extent of
Table 4. Lean use/implementation, other management theories/
The number of the approaches/practices integrated with Lean
supporting references North America 2 Emergent economies–developing countries and
of the future research developed countries
proposals per continent Africa 1 Emergent economies–developing countries and
and the themes per developed countries
continent Australia–New Zealand 1 Human resource-related issues

articles presenting country-related future research proposals of LM is Emerald. In three out of

the four publishers, namely Emerald, Taylor and Francis and Elsevier, few journals have
published the majority of the sample articles of each publisher, which distinguishes them
from the remaining journals of the publisher. This is also observed considering the whole
number of the journals and the whole sample of the articles. These few journals that have
published most of the sample articles can be characterized as journals whose articles are more
oriented towards the “country” characteristic of the LM future research agenda. Previous
SLR studies on LM such as those of Psomas and Antony (2019) and Antony et al. (2021) also
distinguish the few journals publishing the majority of the LM articles of their interest. On the
other hand, Shokri (2017) suggests more journals publish the research studies on LM.
The diachronic evolution of the sample articles presenting country-related future research
proposals of LM shows a small increase in the articles in the first years of the review period of
the present study, while the increase is much higher in the last years of this period. This
means that, with the passing of time, the authors acknowledge more the significant role that a
country and its specific conditions can play in LM implementation and suggest the country
characteristic be an important issue that should be considered in the LM future research.
Previous literature review studies on LM conducted by Narayanamurthy and Gurumurthy
(2016), Psomas and Antony (2019) and Antony et al. (2021) also reveal a diachronic increase in
the published LM articles.
The vast majority of the sample articles of the present SLR present surveys and case
studies, similar to the literature review studies of Psomas and Antony (2019) and Antony et al.
(2021). The wide range of manufacturing sectors participating in these surveys and case
studies is in line with Shokri (2017) who suggests the research publications of LM have a
wider approach towards various manufacturing sectors. Moreover, the many manufacturing
sectors studied confirm the wide applicability of LM across several manufacturing sectors
(Moyano-Fuentes and Sacristan-Diaz, 2012; Jasti and Kodali, 2015). Similarly, several
Themes Future research proposals of LM

Culture Study whether cultural traits hinder Lean in countries such as China (Hofer et al., 2011); how facility culture interacts with national culture to influence Lean (Kull et al., 2014); culture-
independent conclusions with regard to Lean (Jasti and Kodali, 2014a, 2015); how national culture influences the early phases of Lean (Bortolotti et al., 2015); Lean rhetoric and practice in
several countries and the impact of national cultures (Langstrand and Drotz, 2016); barriers to Lean accounting by considering cultural factors (Zahraee, 2016); the degree to which cultural
differences affect Lean managers’ values and behaviors (Dun et al., 2016); the societal cultural effects on Lean (Pakdil and Leonard, 2017); the relationship between Lean shop floor practices
and Lean supply chain management, and their effect on quality and inventory turnover in countries with cultural differences (Marodin et al., 2017); how Lean can be diffused within multi-
cultural plants, understanding the ensuing difficulties and countermeasures (Danese et al., 2017); how Lean is operationalised across different cultural contexts (Pakdil and Leonard, 2017);
the effect of cultural dimensions on various elements of Lean and on its sustainability (Pakdil and Leonard, 2017); whether there is a sort of Western approach for Lean-TPS based on the
same tools and techniques but with different principles more pertinent to culture (Chiarini et al., 2018); how differences in culture are related to Lean success and barriers (DeSanctis et al.,
2018); the impact of national culture on Lean service organisations through a multi-country study (Erthal and Marques, 2018); the national culture dimensions that hinder Lean (Erthal and
Marques, 2018); what national and organizational cultural traits counterbalance the negative impact of high masculinity and high power distance on Lean (Erthal and Marques, 2018); how
successful Lean organisations in Japan can outweigh the cultural traits (high masculinity and high power distance) (Erthal and Marques, 2018); how elements of each culture’s unique
historical, religious and political development conflict with management techniques in LM (Mathew and Taylor, 2019); the LM practices in the West compared with those in the East from
cultural perspectives (Psomas and Antony, 2019); the transfer of Lean knowledge within subsidiaries and the headquarters in companies that originated from different cultures (Demeter
and Losonci, 2019); a combination of Lean technicalities and Western organizational culture (Chiarini and Brunetti, 2019); the differences across cultures regarding Lean innovation
(Solaimani et al., 2019); the effect of national culture on soft Lean practices, job demands and well-being (Beraldin et al., 2019); deviance from baseline cultural facets, particularly after
interaction with modern Lean management in India (Mathew and Taylor, 2019); the cultural differences between West and East while examining the entrepreneurial cognitions behind
Lean startup (Yang et al., 2019); the Indian cultural and societal aspects that hinder and help Lean in India (Rajagopalan and Solaimani, 2019), LM barriers based on socio-cultural aspects of
different contexts, such as Africa, the Middle East, Oceania and Scandinavia (Leite et al., 2020), enablers to encourage positive behaviour towards Lean in different cultures (Leite et al., 2020),
the work intensification and employee involvement in Lean in countries other than Italy with different cultures (Neirotti, 2020)
Culture Why the Lean results have been worse than planned and whether organisations have got their implementation wrong, in different cultural settings (Hines et al., 2020), factors that
influence the success of Lean simulation training, taking into account cultural aspects of countries outside central Europe (Adam et al., 2020), the linkages between knowledge
sharing and Lean and the moderating role of corporate culture, based on industries operating globally (Vlachos et al., 2020), if national culture influences the success of Lean, based
on different countries (Loyd et al., 2020), how cultural differences affect the interdependency between LM and process innovation (Moldner et al., 2020), the effects of organizational
attitude and the moderating effect of firm size on Lean in cultural settings other than those of the UAE as well as the socio-technical aspects of Lean (Malik and Abdallah, 2020)
Emergent economies– Study the impact of Lean on performance in developing countries (Nawanir et al., 2013); how to adjust Lean to succeed in developed countries other than Japan (Dominici and
developing countries and Palumbo, 2013); Lean using samples from developing (like India and China) and undeveloped countries (Jasti and Kodali, 2014a); a methodology for Lean product development in
developed countries developing economies (Mund et al., 2015); SMEs implementing Lean in developed vs developing countries (Hu et al., 2015); the relationships between Lean and contextual factors in
emergent economies such as China and India and in developed countries such as the USA and the European countries (Marodin et al., 2016); the relationship between the Lean shop
floor practices and Lean supply chain management, and their effect on quality and inventory turnover in more mature and developed economies (Marodin et al., 2017); the
integration of Lean with a MRP (material requirement planning) system and the effects on operational effectiveness in emerging economies compared to developed nations (Hong
and Leffakis, 2017); Lean process in developing or emerging countries other than India (Panwar et al., 2017); the effect of LP on aggregate performance in advanced economies
(Abreu-Ledon et al., 2018); the causes of the differences between advanced and developing countries regarding the LP-performance relationship (Abreu-Ledon et al., 2018); the
relationship between the union power and labor laws and the manner in which best practices are effectively adapted in countries of South America, Africa and Asia, by examining
the adaptation of best practices from the developed world (Friela and Villechenon, 2018); the manner in which best Lean practices brought by a multinational corporation from an
emerging market are adapted to countries in the developed world (Friela and Villechenon, 2018); how effectively Lean is implemented in SMEs in developing economies (Sahoo and
Yadav, 2018a); a supplier evaluation method, in the context of LM in a non-developed supplier market in different regions (Aamer, 2018); the relationship between Lean and industry
4.0 in developed countries (Tortorella and Fettermann, 2018)

(continued )
Manufacturing
Lean

1195

of LM
Table 5.
Themes of future
research proposals
 BIJ
29,4

1196

Table 5.
Themes Future research proposals of LM

Emergent economies– Optimized methods for eliminating Lean barriers in developing countries (Goshime et al., 2019); Lean and operational performance in emerging economies such as China and India
developing countries and and in developed countries such as the USA and the European countries, to compare LP maturity and context influence (Marodin et al., 2019); instruments including Lean and
developed countries supply chain relationships in developing countries other than Thailand (Vanichchinchai, 2019); the similarity and differences regarding the role of social and technical factors in
company performance in developing countries other than India (Sahoo, 2019); Lean and its barriers in developing countries (Mohammad and Oduoza, 2019); differences in the level
of LP and I4.0 technologies, among emerging and developed economies (Tortorella et al., 2019a); Leanness in the context of SMEs in developing countries (Yadav et al., 2019b),
internal and external contextual conditions influencing LM in industrial contexts especially in emerging economies (Primo et al., 2020), the relationship between LP and learning
organisation taking into consideration contextual variables such as the unionisation level in different locations (e.g. developed economies) (Tortorella et al., 2020b), the influence of
Lean social practices on SMEs’ performance in emerging economies (Arumugam et al., 2020), the model of innovativeness – Lean and triple bottom line performance in developing
and developed countries (Yu et al., 2020), the framework of LM drivers (shop floor management, manufacturing strategy, quality management, manufacturing process, supplier and
customer management, Workforce management) in developed economies, especially in countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, etc., and consult with
experts within the manufacturing domains of the respective country to obtain the country-specific results (Yadav et al., 2020)
Lean effects Study whether Lean might achieve synergic effects and competitive value in environments other than Japan (Dominici and Palumbo, 2013); the relationships of Lean with
operational responsiveness in European companies (Bevilacqua et al., 2017b); the impact of LM on firm value in several countries (Zhu and Lin, 2017); the role of Lean duration in
Lean implementation and manufacturing performance in countries other than Sri Lanka (Wickramasinghe and Wickramasinghe, 2017); the effect of the implementation level of
Lean on operational characteristics in different nations other than Italy (Bevilacqua et al., 2017a); the relationship among Lean, operational responsiveness and growth performance
in European companies other than Italy (Bevilacqua et al., 2017b); the relationship between LP and business and market performance in countries such as Japan, Korea, Latin
America (Abreu-Ledon et al., 2018); the role of organization ownership structure in shaping the relationship between Lean and performance (business and operations, including
financial and non-financial measures) in countries other than China (Zhu and Lin, 2018); the improvement in productivity using Lean in several countries (Singh et al., 2018); the
direct and indirect two-way relationship between Lean practices and Lean values with organization performance, in countries other than Saudi Arabia (Salhieh and Abdallah, 2019)
Lean effects The Lean manufacturing and productivity changes and the moderating role of R&D in countries other than China (Shi et al., 2019); Lean and operational performance in countries
other than Brazil (Marodin et al., 2019); the impact of social and technical LM factors on performance (Sahoo, 2019), the patterns in the relationship between LM and business
performance addressing the confirmation of the non-linear S-shaped pattern, based on companies from many regions of Brazil and companies from countries other than Brazil
(Negrao et al., 2020), the factors that need to be addressed by Lean Leaders in Indian industry (from companies which are well known for having adopted TQM, BE and Lean for
many years, and which have achieved success in their business) to steeply ramp up a company’s production and productivity and also the relationship between the LM factors and
performance results (Rajagopalan, 2020), the relationship between internal Lean practices and sustainable performance using the triple bottom line framework (i.e. social,
environmental and operational) in several national contexts (Chavez et al., 2020), the influence of Lean bundles including technical and social practices which relate to specific
countries (Arumugam et al., 2020), the impact of Lean and sustainability oriented innovation on sustainability performance in different regions and economies (De et al., 2020), the
influence of Lean on process innovation in certain regions (Moldner et al., 2020), the impact of operational practices of Lean within competitive clusters of cost leadership,
differentiation and focus strategy in different countries (Sahoo, 2021)

(continued )
Themes Future research proposals of LM

Research methods Study Lean through ethnography studies (Chavez et al., 2013, 2015; Henao et al., 2019); Lean through bringing the researchers across the globe to a single platform (Jasti and Kodali,
2014a); Lean through interregional research collaborations among academics and professionals (Jasti and Kodali, 2014a, 2015); Lean practices in different countries, through
multiple case-based studies (Bortolotti et al., 2015); via benchmarking, Lean services and logistics in countries other than Brazil and compare the results (Forno et al., 2016); Lean
through a data set of Lean experts operating worldwide (Paro and Gerolamo, 2017); Lean project barriers in one or more single nations (DeSanctis et al., 2018); Lean through an
international Delphi study (Kregel et al., 2019); LM factors and firm performance, based on multinational respondents (Sahoo, 2019); Lean through the integration of an international
dimension into data collection (Stimec and Grima, 2019); a large number of nations regarding Lean professionals (Kregel et al., 2019), not only English-language papers but German-
language papers in the Lean industry 4.0 literature review studies (Ejsmont et al., 2020), what countries/organizations are represented by the authors, in the Lean industry 4.0
studies conducted so far (Ejsmont et al., 2020), in multiple countries, the development of a Lean maturity Scale, based upon quantifiable observations rather than subjective
evaluation by a Lean expert (Loyd et al., 2020), myths about Lean, by identifying, dispelling and assessing their pervasiveness, based on academics and practitioners from different
geographical locations (Saurin et al., 2020)
Research methods Lean through several academic databases which may lead to the emergence of other authors and/or documents for the literature review study (Barud et al., 2021), the nexus between
Lean and unions in Toyota Australia compared with Toyota’s plants in Canada, using quantitative data (James, 2021); scientific and technological sources regarding Lean and
industry 4.0 in languages other than English (Bittencourt et al., 2021)
SMEs/Large companies Study what aspects of Lean the Asian and the Malaysian SMEs emphasize (Agus and Hajinoor, 2012); how the Malaysian SMEs apply promotional campaigns, training and
– sectors learning of Lean (Agus and Hajinoor, 2012); the status of Lean principles across various Indian organization sectors (Jasti and Kodali, 2016); the features of Lean in export-based
textile and apparel production countries (Wickramasinghe and Wickramasinghe, 2017); LM in small or large companies from regions other than Ecuador (Rodriguez et al., 2017);
Lean in food companies in countries other than Greece (Psomas et al., 2018); Lean awareness and strategies for improving awareness and implementation preparedness for the
Indian coal mining industry (Khaba and Bhar, 2018); the modeling of enablers and barriers to Lean for the Indian coal mining sector (Khaba and Bhar, 2018); Lean in industries in
different countries (Sahoo and Yadav, 2018b); Lean in European pharmaceutical organisations (Garza-Reyes et al., 2018); the influence of location on Lean readiness to further
develop this phenomenon in the pharmaceutical sector (Garza-Reyes et al., 2018); the framework for Lean thinking on the strategic and the operational levels in agricultural farms in
countries other than Sweden (Melin and Barth, 2018); the applicability of LPS framework (top management commitment, human resource management, customer relationship
management, supply chain management, total quality management, continuous improvement, standardization, information technology system, elimination of waste, just-in-time
production, concurrent engineering) in individual sectors within India (Jasti and Kodali, 2019); Lean and the implementation implications in the central India-based manufacturing
industries (Dave and Sohani, 2019); the cultural barriers to LM across foreign subsidiaries operating in the Indian automobile industry (Mathew and Taylor, 2019); companies from
several Portuguese manufacturing sectors to assess the Lean effect on business performance (Valente et al., 2019), the applicability and validation of the PTPCAS/LF model (plan of
Lean action, identifying the Lean tools to implement for operational and product flow performance, performance review aimed at checking the generated performance, continuous
improvement as the loop to join the “act” in the PDCA phase, aerospace specificities and leanness fitting) in the global context (Amrani and Ducq, 2020), the state of implementation
of Lean and a framework for implementing Lean practices (tools and procedures) in the ready-made garments industry in Bangladesh (Hasan et al., 2020), a framework of barriers
affecting Lean in Indian electrical and electronic component manufacturing organizations (Kumar and Vinodh, 2020), predictor and outcome variables in the examination of the
impact of Chinese listed family firms on Lean innovation strategies (Zulfiqar et al., 2020)
SMEs/Large companies Internal and external contextual conditions while studying LM in industrial contexts (such as shipbuilding and the oil and gas industries) (Primo et al., 2020), the contextual
and sectors relationships of Lean enablers in the mines in other areas apart from eastern India (Khaba et al., 2020), a model for Lean barriers in SMEs in different geographic locations (Kumar
and Vinodh, 2020; Signoretti, 2020), how small, family-owned companies can overcome the barriers that hinder Lean in different economic environments (Signoretti, 2020), national
differences in terms of Lean in companies of garment exporting countries and compare Bangladesh to other garment exporting countries where suppliers may have different
conditions and interact differently with their buyers (Hoque et al., 2020), the applicability of the Lean enterprise framework (management commitment and leadership, human
resource management, customer relationship management, total quality management, total productive maintenance, continuous improvement, standardization, elimination of
waste, just-in-time production, knowledge management, concurrent engineering, supply chain management, information technology system) in manufacturing sectors of India and
many countries (Jasti and Kota, 2021)

(continued )
Manufacturing
Lean

1197

Table 5.
 BIJ
29,4

1198

Table 5.
Themes Future research proposals of LM

Extent of Lean use/ Determine the extent to which Lean is in use in each country (Moyano-Fuentes and Sacristan-Diaz, 2012); the status of Lean implementation among European countries (Dora et al.,
implementation 2013); Lean maturity in several countries (Marodin et al., 2016); the relative importance of individual improvement routines at various degrees of Lean implementation in different
countries (Knol et al., 2019); whether the original TPS is implementable as a whole in the traditional European manufacturing context (Chiarini and Brunetti, 2019); the maturity level
of Lean practices: Strategic planning, quality at source, processes and tools, problem-solving, people, supplier integration, continuous improvement, customer focus in Brazilian
states (Bento amd Tontini, 2019)
Factors influencing Lean Study the key determinants (Trigger factors, success factors, control factors) of Lean in geographical contexts other than Spain (Martinez-Jurado and Moyano-Fuentes, 2014); the
contribution of external factors such as socioeconomic, political (like government regulation related to public safety) and environmental factors to successful Lean (Panwar et al.,
2015a, b); the workplace factors affecting Lean performance in a country (Vlachos and Siachou, 2018); the critical success factors in LM in different countries (Knol et al., 2018), how
firms work within national Institutions during their LM journey (Friela and Villechenon, 2018); the dynamic fit between LM and the adopting organisation and how this fit is
influenced by technical, cultural, and political factors (Antony et al., 2021), the influence of process innovation on Lean in certain regions (Moldner et al., 2020), factors such as
government policies, cultural differences and organisational structure of several countries (including those countries with a large population) that affect the relationship amongst
enablers of LM (Prasad et al., 2021), the impact of policy, funding and legislation on Lean and sustainability oriented innovation, in different regions and economies (De et al., 2020)
Lean implementation Develop a conceptual Lean framework to accelerate the Lean process in India (Thanki and Thakkar, 2014); a Lean framework which is more suitable for both the Indian and the
framework/model global manufacturing industries (Jasti and Kodali, 2014b); the applicability of LPS framework (top management commitment, human resource management, customer relationship
management, supply chain management, total quality management, continuous improvement, standardization, information technology system, elimination of waste, just-in-time
production, concurrent engineering) among the global manufacturing players (Jasti and Kodali, 2019); family businesses and groups with internationally spread capital while
studying the impact of implementing continuous improvement upon stress within a Lean framework (Stimec and Grima, 2019), the validity and reliability of the Lean enterprise
framework (management commitment and leadership, human resource management, continuous improvement, total quality management, supply chain management, customer
relationship management, total productive maintenance, Concurrent engineering, knowledge management, standardization, Elimination of wastes, just-in-time, information
technology management) in multiple countries (Jasti et al., 2020), the framework for assessing Lean and performance measurement system maturity in organisations worldwide
(Zanon et al., 2021)
Other management Examine how companies in Europe are implementing both Lean and ISO 9001 as well as new ways of integrating Lean thinking and ISO 9001, ISO 14001, ISO 18001 (Chiarini, 2011;
theories/approaches/ Rebelo et al., 2014); the effectiveness and applicability of the Lean environmental benchmarking method (divided into three stages: Preparation, evaluation and analysis of results,
practices integrated with which are subsequently supported by three different areas, i.e. strategic, technical and logistics planning) in different countries (Tomelero et al., 2017); integrating safety, health and
Lean environmental management systems for achieving Lean enterprise outcomes in geographical locations other than California in the USA (Kruse et al., 2019); the moderating role of
industry 4.0 on the relationship between Lean and operational performance improvement in different countries, regardless of the socioeconomic context (Tortorella et al., 2019b),
why Brazilian warehouses do not use RFID (radio frequency identification, belonging to a group of technologies referred to as Automatic identification and data Capture, AIDC) and
cross Docking techniques in their Lean operations (Pereira et al., 2020), how Lean industry 4.0 is and can be implemented in different continents (not just in Europe) (Ejsmont et al.,
2020), the role of Cloud Computing technology in logistics and its effect on business results in LM in a variety of geographical settings (Novais et al., 2020), the relationships between
the independent variables of LP and I4.0 while examining their impact on operational performance improvement in several regions (Tortorella et al., 2021)
Human resources Study the differences between countries with regard to the competencies relevant to Lean professionals (Kregel et al., 2019); the impact of LM on job satisfaction in different
involved in Lean countries (Minh et al., 2019); the context for LM Leaders in the Indian industry which includes government policies (Rajagopalan and Solaimani, 2019), the applicability and validity
of the respect for people Lean framework (define the people values, identify the people value stream, define customer value, identify the product value stream, create flow in the
people value stream, create flow in the product value stream, pull from the customer, pull people’s capabilities, strive for excellent people, strive for an excellent product) in a specific
country outside of Japan (Coetzee et al., 2019); the significance of human factors and ergonomics in Lean performance and sustainability in different countries (Nagaraj and Jeyapaul,
2020), the nature and detailed role played by the HR function within Toyota Motor corporation Australia (James, 2021)

(continued )
Themes Future research proposals of LM

Geographical Study how the implementation of each Lean practice varies in different countries (Bortolotti et al., 2015); the differences in LM between different geographical regions (Abolhassani
differentiation in Lean et al., 2016); how the location of manufacturing facilities influences the experiences and perceptions of Lean methods (Abolhassani et al., 2016); the degree to which geographic
implementation differences affect Lean managers’ values and behavioral repertoire (Dun et al., 2016); whether Lean transfer projects in various countries (e.g. China, Europe, India, etc.) differ in their
approach (Danese et al., 2017); how operations strategies are handled by different strategic groups in their Lean practices in different geographical regions (Pozo et al., 2017); the
differences across geographies regarding Lean innovation management (Solaimani et al., 2019); whether the positive interaction between layoffs (reductions in the workforce) and
LM strategy may hold in Western countries while the interaction between the two can be rather negative in Japan (Shin and Alam, 2020), the status of LM in terms of Lean adoption,
benefits, motivation, and challenges of implementing LM in different geographic locations within a country and in different countries (Sahoo, 2020b), what various countries and
global regions are doing in the area of rational flow-based resource allocation, planning, and implementation in the context of flow (Lean) management (Schonberger, 2020), whether
companies with domestic and foreign capital are following the same pattern with regard to LM (Minovski et al., 2021)
Leanness Study the Lean warehouse’s global Leanness (Buonamico et al., 2017); the impact of Leanness and innovativeness on environmental and financial performance in different countries
(Shashi et al., 2019); the moderating role of organizational environments on the relationship between inventory Leanness and venture survival in countries other than China (Wang
et al., 2019); whether Lean maturity moderates the relationship between Leanness and financial performance across different regions and countries (Galeazzo, 2021)
Lean knowledge and Study countries other than Sweden to examine the Lean startup and the role of vicarious and experiential learning processes (Mansoori, 2017); the entrepreneurial cognitions behind
training the Lean startup in several provinces and countries (Yang et al., 2019), the outcomes of providing Lean training to strategic suppliers in several countries (Reitsma et al., 2020)
Lean barriers Study the framework of Lean barriers in different countries (Marodin and Saurin, 2015); the effects of corporate and national factors on Lean project barriers (DeSanctis et al., 2018);
Lean barriers in countries other than India (Yadav et al., 2019a)
Multinational Study Lean in multinational corporations and their subsidiaries (Boscari et al., 2016); the different stages of Lean in subsidiaries of multinational corporations having different
corporations strengths of relations with headquarters (Boscari et al., 2016); to what extent international teamwork may be used by medium and large multinational corporations in their Lean
journey (Boscari et al., 2016); the mechanisms of Lean transfer that are more important for medium and large multinational corporations (Boscari et al., 2016); whether ethnocentric
multinational corporations are more successful in adapting LM than geocentric ones (Friela and Villechenon, 2018); the implications of Lean knowledge transfer in foreign sub-units
of multinational corporations (Boscari et al., 2016); the relationships among transformational and sustainable leadership, LM and sustainability performance in international or
multinational corporations (Burawat, 2019)
Lean drivers Examine the drivers for change and Lean adoption in Brazil (Forrester et al., 2010); the model of LM drivers in different parts of India and different countries (Sangwan et al., 2014)
Lean elements/ Study a number of countries to assess the causal relationships among Lean criteria (Sharma et al., 2016); LM constructs in several countries (Nawanir et al., 2018)
constructs
Waste Study how to eliminate wastes from manufacturing systems in India (Chauhan and Singh, 2012)
Manufacturing
Lean

1199

Table 5.
BIJ Supporting literature references/theme
29,4 35
30
30 26
25 22
19 18
20
1200 15 11 10 9
10 6 6 6
4 3 3 3
5 2 2 1
0

Figure 4.
Supporting literature
references per theme of
the country-related
future research
proposals of LM

manufacturing sectors were also the focus of the surveys and case studies reviewed by
Psomas and Antony (2019) and Antony et al. (2021).

5.2 Discussing the country-related future research proposals of LM

The classification of the plethora of the country-related future research proposals of LM based
on the continent of the country of reference reveals where, meaning in which continent, the LM
future research agenda is rich. More specifically, based on the number of the supporting
literature references of the future research proposals per continent, it is obvious that the vast
majority of the country-related future research proposals of LM refer to country-related studies
without specifying the country of research or to multinational studies (Table 4). This means
that there is a primary need to study LM in companies from several countries worldwide or
using multinational samples of companies. This is in line with Shokri (2017) who suggests
research publications for Lean management take a wider approach towards various countries.
Similar to the SLR study of Antony et al. (2021), Asia is the continent with the highest number of
the country-related future research proposals of LM, followed by Europe and South America. It
is worth noting that North America, Africa and Australia–New Zealand are the continents
where very few suggestions for country-related future research of LM have been made
(Table 4). From the above mentioned, the geographical orientation of the suggested future
research on LM is clear. However, this does not mean that continents such as North America,
Africa and Australia–New Zealand constitute environments which cannot attract LM
researchers. Through the experience which can be obtained from studies on LM in Asia, Europe
and South America, researchers can certainly be motivated and direct their interest also to
continents where the suggestions for future LM studies are few.
The themes formulated are unidimensional, given that there is a strong affinity among the
country-related future research proposals of LM which are assigned to each theme. However,
based on the content of these themes, an affinity among some themes is also observed which
makes possible the formulation of two broad categories of themes, namely “themes
concerning the LM approach itself” and “themes concerning factors outside the LM
approach”. The category of “themes concerning the LM approach itself” includes the
following themes: Lean effects, extent of Lean use/implementation, Lean implementation
framework/model, human resources involved in Lean, Leanness, Lean knowledge and
training, Lean barriers, Lean drivers, Lean elements/constructs and waste (Table 6). On the Lean
other hand, the category of “themes concerning factors outside the LM approach” includes Manufacturing
themes such as culture, emergent economies–developing countries and developed countries,
SMEs/large companies – sectors, research methods, geographical differentiation in Lean
implementation, factors influencing Lean, other management theories/approaches/practices
integrated with Lean and multinational corporations (Table 6).
Taking into consideration the literature references supporting the country-related future
research proposals of the two broad categories of themes, it is apparent that the broad 1201
category namely, “themes concerning factors outside the LM approach” is supported by more
references (129) than the broad category, namely “themes concerning the LM approach itself”
(52) (Table 6). Thus, the themes concerning factors outside the LM approach (such as culture,
emergent economies–developing countries and developed countries, SMEs/large companies
– sectors, as is also shown in Figure 4), should be given high priority when designing country-
related future research studies in the field of LM.
The only study found in the literature that formulates a framework including research
proposals, themes and broad categories is the study of Antony et al. (2021) which focuses on
the LM future research agenda in general, while the present SLR focuses on the country-
related future research proposals of LM. Moreover, Psomas and Antony (2019), by reviewing
the literature of 2005–2016, do identify and isolate the LM literature gaps which are country-
related, without however, formulating a comprehensive framework of future research
proposals-themes-categories, as the present SLR does. Contrary to the present study, Bhamu
and Sangwan (2014) and Narayanamurthy and Gurumurthy (2016) made, through their LM
literature review studies, general future research suggestions mostly related to the LM
approach itself, while Jasti and Kodali (2014a), Hu et al. (2015) and Buer et al. (2018) made
general future research suggestions mostly related to factors outside the LM approach.
Similar to the present study, Jasti and Kodali (2015) and Erthal and Marques (2018) made,
through their LM literature review studies, future research suggestions related to both the
LM approach itself and factors outside the LM approach, without, however, these being
exclusively country-related.

Themes Supporting literature references

Themes concerning factors outside the LM approach 129

Culture 30
Emergent economies–developing countries and developed countries 26
SMEs/Large companies – sectors 22
Research methods 18
Geographical differentiation in Lean implementation 11
Factors influencing Lean 10
Other management theories/approaches/practices integrated with Lean 9
Multinational corporations 3
Themes concerning the LM approach itself 52
Lean effects 19
Extent of Lean use/implementation 6
Lean implementation framework/model 6
Human resources involved in Lean 6
Leanness 4
Lean knowledge and training 3 Table 6.
Lean barriers 3 Number of supporting
Lean drivers 2 references of the
Lean elements/constructs 2 themes of LM future
Waste 1 research proposals
BIJ The themes of the country-related future research proposals of LM which correspond to
29,4 each continent, as shown in Table 4, are also worth discussing. In the case of several
continents/countries and multi-nationality of studies, all the themes of country-related future
research proposals of LM are covered (except for waste). Asia is the continent with the most
themes of country-related future research proposals of LM, including more themes
concerning the LM approach itself and fewer themes concerning factors outside the LM
approach. Europe and South America have the second highest number of themes, including
1202 themes concerning factors outside the LM approach and themes concerning the LM approach
itself. Finally, the continents with only two or even one theme of country-related future
research proposals of LM are North America, Africa and Australia–New Zealand. From the
above it is apparent what kind of themes of country-related future research proposals of LM
researchers in each continent should focus on.

6. Conclusions
Although many literature review studies on LM have already been published so far, the fact
that, first, there are still suggestions and a need for further reviewing the Lean literature, and
second, no previous literature review study has focused on the country-related future
research proposals of LM, constituted the main motives for the author of this paper to
systematically review the LM literature and identify these specific future research proposals
and analyze them. The objective of the present study was not only to analytically present the
country-related future research proposals of LM, but to classify them based on, firstly, the
continent of the country, and secondly, some form of natural affinity of these research
proposals thus creating meaningful themes and broad theme categories. The number of the
literature references supporting the country-related future research proposals of each theme,
was the criterion based on which the themes were prioritized. From the above, it is apparent
that the originality of the present study stems not only from the subject reviewed, meaning
the country-related future research proposals of LM, but from the formulation of a structured
framework consisting of research proposals-themes-categories.
More specifically, from the country-related future research proposals of LM identified and
their affinity observed, 18 themes were revealed, which in turn were also classified based on
their affinity into two broad categories, namely “themes concerning the LM approach itself”
and “themes concerning factors outside the LM approach”. The broad category of the
“themes concerning factors outside the LM approach” is supported by more literature
references, while the themes supported by most references are the following: culture,
emergent economies–developing countries and developed countries, SMEs/large companies
– sectors, Lean effects and research methods. The most literature references supporting the
country-related future research proposals of LM and the most themes are observed in the case
of considering not one continent but several continents/countries together. On the other hand,
when considering the continents individually, Asia is the continent with the most literature
references supporting the country-related future research proposals of LM and with the most
respective themes. This continent is followed by Europe and South America.

7. Theoretical and practical implications

Through the analytical and summarized picture of the country-related future research
proposals of LM presented in this paper, significant theoretical and practical implications
arise. By identifying, through the SLR, a plethora of country-related future research
proposals of LM and classifying them, through the affinity diagram, into meaningful themes
and these themes into broad categories, a structured framework is formulated. This
framework consists of three layers, the first one includes the country-related future research
proposals, the second one includes the themes revealed (first order latent constructs) and
finally, the third one includes the broad categories of the themes (second order latent Lean
constructs). Based on the layers of this framework, the country-related future research of LM Manufacturing
is clearly depicted, which will help in the theoretical development of the country-related LM
implementation. Moreover, researchers from specific countries/continents can be guided
through the themes revealed and their respective country-related future research proposals of
LM to design future research studies that are most needed in their countries/continents,
according to the suggestions of several authors. In other words, researchers are enabled to
formulate specific research objectives of high originality and value, without spending a lot of 1203
time tracking down the available literature to identify the existing research gaps.
Moreover, practitioners can also benefit from the present study findings. More specifically, a
short-term benefit for the practitioners of a specific country is that they are informed about
which LM topics have not yet been studied in their country, and these topics can be taken into
consideration in their LM plans. On the other hand, a long-term benefit for the practitioners is
that they can use the results of the suggested studies in their future plans for LM
implementation. Policy makers of a country can also take into consideration the country-related
future research proposals and the respective themes revealed through the present study, to
formulate financially supported LM research programs stimulating the active participation in
the research of not only researchers but also company managers and employees.

8. Limitations and agenda for future studies

The exclusion criteria formulated in the present SLR constitute certain limitations of the
study. More specifically, the limited number of the publishers considered; the journals not
included in the ABS list which were excluded from the study; the exclusion of sources such as
books, online sites, grey literature; not focusing on studies examining an individual Lean
principle or tool/technique, Lean-Six sigma, Lean-Agile manufacturing, Lean-Green
management, the supply chain network, the services sector and the construction industry,
limit the pool of the country-related future research proposals of LM that could be determined.
The subjective criterion of the content affinity among several country-related future research
proposals of LM, based on which they were classified into themes, should be taken into
consideration in the interpretation of the study findings. The above-mentioned limitations
can be used for the design of similar SLR studies in the future.

References
Aamer, A.M. (2018), “Outsourcing in non-developed supplier markets: a lean thinking approach”,
International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 56 No. 18, pp. 6048-6065.
Abolhassani, A., Layfield, K. and Gopalakrishnan, B. (2016), “Lean and US manufacturing industry:
popularity of practices and implementation barriers”, International Journal of Productivity and
Performance Management, Vol. 65 No. 7, pp. 875-897.
Abreu-Ledon, R., Lujan-Garcıa, D.E., Garrido-Vega, P. and Escobar-Perez, B. (2018), “A meta-analytic
study of the impact of Lean Production on business performance”, International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 200, pp. 83-102.
Adam, M., Hofbauer, M. and Stehling, M. (2020), “Effectiveness of a lean simulation training:
challenges, measures and recommendations”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 32 No. 6,
pp. 443-453.
Agus, A. and Hajinoor, M.S. (2012), “Lean production supply chain management as driver towards
enhancing product quality and business performance”, International Journal of Quality and
Reliability Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 92-121.
AL-Najem, M., Dhakal, H., Labib, A. and Bennett, N. (2013), “Lean readiness level within Kuwaiti
manufacturing industries”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 280-320.
BIJ Al-Tahat, M.D. and Jalham, I.S. (2015), “A structural equation model and a statistical investigation of lean-
based quality and productivity improvement”, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Vol. 26,
29,4 pp. 571-583.
Alaskari, O., Ahmad, M.M. and Pinedo-Cuenca, R. (2016), “Development of a methodology to assist
manufacturing SMEs in the selection of appropriate lean tools”, International Journal of Lean
Six Sigma, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 62-84.
Amrani, A. and Ducq, Y. (2020), “Lean practices implementation in aerospace based on sector
1204 characteristics: methodology and case study”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 31 No. 16,
pp. 1313-1335.
Antony, J., Psomas, E., Garza-Reyes, J.A. and Hines, P. (2021), “Practical implications and future
research agenda of lean manufacturing: a systematic literature review”, Production Planning
and Control, Vol. 32 No. 11, pp. 889-925, doi: 10.1080/09537287.2020.1776410.
Arumugam, V., Kannabiran, G. and Vinodh, S. (2020), “Impact of technical and social lean practices on
SMEs’ performance in automobile industry: a structural equation modelling (SEM) analysis”,
Total Quality Management and Business Excellence. doi: 10.1080/14783363.2020.1791067.
Barbosa, G.F., Carvalho, J. and Filho, E.V.G. (2014), “A proper framework for design of aircraft
production system based on lean manufacturing principles focusing to automated processes”,
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 72, pp. 1257-1273.
Barud, N.A., de Oliveira, R.A. and Gomes, C.F.S. (2021), “Lean in information technology departments
or companies: identifying publications on the Scopus and Web of Science databases”,
Scientometrics, Vol. 126, pp. 2437-2457.
Belhadi, A., Shari, Y.B.M., Touriki, F.E. and Fezazi, S.E. (2018), “Lean production in SMEs: literature
review and reflection on future challenges”, Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering,
Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 368-382.
Bento, G.S. and Tontini, G. (2019), “Maturity of lean practices in Brazilian manufacturing companies”,
Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 114-128.
Beraldin, A.R., Danese, P. and Romano, P. (2019), “An investigation of the relationship between lean
and well-being based on the job demands-resources model”, International Journal of Operations
and Production Management, Vol. 39 No. 12, pp. 1295-1322.
Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F.E. and Sanctis, I. (2017a), “Relationships between Italian companies’
operational characteristics and business growth in high and low lean performers”, Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 250-274.
Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F.E. and Sanctis, I. (2017b), “Lean practices implementation and their
relationships with operational responsiveness and company performance: an Italian study”,
International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 55 No. 3, pp. 769-794.
Bhamu, J. and Sangwan, K.S. (2014), “Lean manufacturing: literature review and research issues”,
International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 34 No. 7, pp. 876-940.
Bittencourt, V.L., Alves, A.C. and Leao, C.P. (2021), “Industry 4.0 triggered by Lean Thinking: insights
from a systematic literature review”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 59 No. 5,
pp. 1496-1510.
Bortolotti, T., Danese, P., Flynn, B.B. and Romano, P. (2015), “Leveraging fitness and lean bundles to
build the cumulative performance sand cone model”, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 162, pp. 227-241.
Boscari, S., Danese, P. and Romano, P. (2016), “Implementation of lean production in multinational
corporations: a case study of the transfer process from headquarters to subsidiaries”,
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 176, pp. 53-68.
Buer, S.V., Strandhagen, J.O. and Chan, F.T.S. (2018), “The link between Industry 4.0 and lean
manufacturing: mapping current research and establishing a research agenda”, International
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 56 No. 8, pp. 2924-2940.
Buonamico, N., Muller, L. and Camargo, M. (2017), “A new fuzzy logic-based metric to measure lean Lean
warehousing performance”, Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2,
pp. 96-111. Manufacturing
Burawat, P. (2019), “The relationships among transformational leadership, sustainable leadership,
lean manufacturing and sustainability performance in Thai SMEs manufacturing industry”,
International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 36 No. 6, pp. 1014-1036.
Camacho-Minano, M., Moyano-Fuentes, J. and Sacristan-Diaz, M. (2013), “What can we learn from the
evolution of research on lean management assessment?”, International Journal of Production 1205
Research, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 1098-1116.
Chaplin, L., Heap, J. and O’Rourke, S.T.J. (2016), “Could ‘Lean Lite’ be the cost effective solution to
applying lean manufacturing in developing economies?”, International Journal of Productivity
and Performance Management, Vol. 65 No. 1, pp. 126-136.
Chauhan, G. and Singh, T.P. (2012), “Measuring parameters of lean manufacturing realization”,
Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 57-71.
Chavez, R., Gimenez, C., Fynes, B., Wiengarten, F. and Yu, W. (2013), “Internal lean practices and
operational performance. The contingency perspective of industry clockspeed”, International
Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 562-588.
Chavez, R., Yu, W., Jacobs, M., Fynes, B., Wiengarten, F. and Lecuna, A. (2015), “Internal lean practices
and performance: the role of technological turbulence”, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 160, pp. 157-171.
Chavez, R., Yu, W., Jajja, M.S.S., Song, Y. and Nakara, W. (2020), “The relationship between internal
lean practices and sustainable performance: exploring the mediating role of social
performance”, Production Planning and Control. doi: 10.1080/09537287.2020.1839139.
Chiarini, A. (2011), “Integrating lean thinking into ISO 9001: a first guideline”, International Journal of
Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 2, pp. 96-117.
Chiarini, A. and Brunetti, F. (2019), “What really matters for a successful implementation of Lean
production? A multiple linear regression model based on European manufacturing companies”,
Production Planning and Control, Vol. 30 No. 13, pp. 1091-1101.
Chiarini, A., Baccarani, C. and Mascherpa, V. (2018), “Lean production, Toyota production system and
kaizen philosophy: a conceptual analysis from the perspective of Zen Buddhism”, The Total
Quality Management Journal, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 425-438.
Ciano, M.P., Pozzi, R., Rossi, T. and Strozzi, F. (2019), “How IJPR has addressed ‘lean’: a literature review
using bibliometric tools”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 57 Nos 15-16,
pp. 5284-5317.
Cil, I. and Turkan, Y.S. (2013), “An ANP-based assessment model for lean enterprise transformation”,
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 64, pp. 1113-1130.
Cocca, P., Marciano, F., Alberti, M. and Schiavini, D. (2019), “Leanness measurement methods in
manufacturing organisations: a systematic review”, International Journal of Production
Research, Vol. 57 Nos 15-16, pp. 5103-5118.
Coetzee, R., Dyk, L. and Merwe, K.R. (2019), “Towards addressing respect for people during lean
implementation”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 830-854.
Danese, P., Romano, P. and Boscari, S. (2017), “The transfer process of lean practices in multi-plant
companies”, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 37 No. 4,
pp. 468-488.
Dave, Y. and Sohani, N. (2019), “Improving productivity through Lean practices in central India-based
manufacturing industries”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 601-621.
De, D., Chowdhury, S., Dey, P.K. and Ghosh, S.K. (2020), “Impact of lean and sustainability oriented
innovation on sustainability performance of small and medium sized enterprises: a data
envelopment analysis-based framework”, International Journal of Production Economics,
Vol. 219, pp. 416-430.
BIJ Demeter, K. and Losonci, D. (2019), “Transferring lean knowledge within multinational networks”,
Production Planning and Control, Vol. 30 Nos 2-3, pp. 211-224.
29,4
DeSanctis, I., Mere, J.B.O., Bevilacqua, M. and Ciarapica, F.E. (2018), “The moderating effects of
corporate and national factors on lean projects barriers: a cross-national study”, Production
Planning and Control, Vol. 29 No. 12, pp. 972-991.
Dominici, G. and Palumbo, F. (2013), “Decoding the Japanese lean production system According to a
viable systems perspective”, Systemic Practice and Action Research, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 153-171.
1206
Dora, M., Goubergen, D.V., Kumar, M., Molnar, A. and Gellynck, X. (2013), “Application of lean
practices in small and medium-sized food enterprises”, British Food Journal, Vol. 116 No. 1,
pp. 125-141.
Dun, D.H., Hicks, J.N. and Wilderom, C.P.M. (2016), “Values and behaviors of effective Lean managers:
mixed-methods exploratory research”, European Management Journal, Vol. 35 No. 2,
pp. 174-186.
Ejsmont, K., Gladysz, B., Corti, D., Castano, F., Mohammed, W.M. and Lastra, J.L.M. (2020), “Towards
Lean Industry 4.0 – current trends and future perspectives”, Cogent Business and Management,
Vol. 7 No. 1, p. 1781995.
Erthal, A. and Marques, L. (2018), “National culture and organisational culture in lean organisations: a
systematic review”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 29 No. 8, pp. 668-687.
Filho, M.G., Ganga, G.M.D. and Gunasekaran, A. (2016), “Lean manufacturing in Brazilian small and
medium enterprises: implementation and effect on performance”, International Journal of
Production Research, Vol. 54 No. 24, pp. 7523-7545.
Forno, A.J.D., Forcellini, F.A., Kipper, L.M. and Pereira, F.A. (2016), “Method for evaluation via
benchmarking of the lean product development process”, Benchmarking: An International
Journal, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 792-816.
Forrester, P.L., Shimizu, U.K., Soriano-Meier, H., Garza-Reyes, J.A. and Basso, L.F.C. (2010), “Lean
production, market share and value creation in the agricultural machinery sector in Brazil”,
Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 21 No. 7, pp. 853-871.
Friela, D. and Villechenon, F.P. (2018), “Adapting a lean production program to national institutions in
Latin America: danone in Argentina and Brazil”, Journal of International Management, Vol. 24
No. 3, pp. 284-299.
Fullerton, R.R., Kennedy, F.A. and Widener, S.K. (2014), “Lean manufacturing and firm performance:
the incremental contribution of lean management accounting practices”, Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 32 Nos 7-8, pp. 414-428.
Galeazzo, A. (2021), “Degree of leanness and lean maturity: exploring the effects on financial
performance”, Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, Vol. 32 Nos 7-8, pp. 758-776.
Garza-Reyes, J.A., Betsis, I.E., Kumar, V. and Al-Shboul, M.A.R. (2018), “Lean readiness – the case of
the European pharmaceutical manufacturing industry”, International Journal of Productivity
and Performance Management, Vol. 67 No. 1, pp. 20-44.
Goshime, Y., Kitaw, D. and Jilcha, K. (2019), “Lean manufacturing as a vehicle for improving
productivity and customer satisfaction: a literature review on metals and engineering
industries”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 691-714.
Hasan, S., Khan, G., Hoque, M.R., Hassan, F. and Ahmed, N. (2020), “Lean practices in the Bangladeshi
ready-made garments industry and global significance”, International Journal of Logistics
Research and Applications. doi: 10.1080/13675567.2020.1847262.
Henao, R., Sarache, W. and Gomez, I. (2019), “Lean manufacturing and sustainable performance:
trends and future challenges”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 208, pp. 99-116.
Hines, P., Taylor, D. and Walsh, A. (2020), “The Lean journey: have we got it wrong?”, Total Quality
Management and Business Excellence, Vol. 31 Nos 3-4, pp. 389-406.
Hodge, G.L., Ross, K.G., Joines, J.A. and Thoney, K. (2011), “Adapting lean manufacturing principles to Lean
the textile industry”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 237-247.
Manufacturing
Hofer, A.R., Hofer, C., Eroglu, C. and Waller, M.A. (2011), “An institutional theoretic perspective on
forces driving adoption of lean production globally: China vis-a-vis/IT the USA”, The
International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 148-178.
Hong, P. and Leffakis, Z.M. (2017), “Managing demand variability and operational effectiveness: case
of lean improvement programmes and MRP planning integration”, Production Planning and
Control, Vol. 28 No. 13, pp. 1066-1080. 1207
Hoque, I., Hasle, P. and Maalouf, M.M. (2020), “Lean meeting buyer’s expectations, enhanced supplier
productivity and compliance capabilities in garment industry”, International Journal of
Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 69 No. 7, pp. 1475-1494.
Hu, Q., Mason, R., Williams, S.J. and Found, P. (2015), “Lean implementation within SMEs: a literature
review”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 26 No. 7, pp. 980-1012.
James, R. (2021), “The Toyota Way or the unions’ way?: examining the nexus between lean and unions
in Toyota Australia”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 32 No. 6,
pp. 1273-1311.
Jasti, N.V.K. and Kodali, R. (2014a), “A literature review of empirical research methodology in lean
manufacturing”, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 34 No. 8,
pp. 1080-1122.
Jasti, N.V.K. and Kodali, R. (2014b), “Validity and reliability of lean manufacturing frameworks: an
empirical study in Indian manufacturing industries”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma,
Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 361-391.
Jasti, N.V.K. and Kodali, R. (2015), “Lean production: literature review and trends”, International
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 867-885.
Jasti, N.V.K. and Kodali, R. (2016), “An empirical study for implementation of lean principles in Indian
manufacturing industry”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 183-207.
Jasti, N.V.K. and Kodali, R. (2019), “An empirical investigation on lean production system framework in the
Indian manufacturing industry”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 296-316.
Jasti, N.V.K. and Kota, S. (2021), “Development of lean enterprise implementation methodology: an
ISM approach”, The Total Quality Management Journal, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 315-337.
Jasti, N.V.K., Kota, S. and Kale, S.R. (2020), “Development of a framework for lean enterprise”,
Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 431-459.
Karim, A. and Arif-Uz-Zaman, K. (2013), “A methodology for effective implementation of lean
strategies and its performance evaluation in manufacturing organizations”, Business Process
Management Journal, Vol. 19, pp. 169-196.
Khaba, S. and Bhar, C. (2018), “Lean awareness and potential for lean implementation in the Indian
coal mining industry: an empirical study”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability
Management, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 1215-1231.
Khaba, S., Bhar, C. and Ray, A. (2020), “A study on key lean enablers of the coal mining sector using ISM,
MICMAC and SEM”, The Total Quality Management Journal. doi: 10.1108/TQM-04-2020-0069.
Knol, W.H., Slomp, J., Schouteten, R.L.J. and Lauche, K. (2018), “Implementing lean practices in
manufacturing SMEs: testing ‘critical success factors’ using Necessary Condition Analysis”,
International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 56 No. 11, pp. 3955-3973.
Knol, W.H., Slomp, J., Schouteten, R.L.J. and Lauche, K. (2019), “The relative importance of
improvement routines for implementing lean practices”, International Journal of Operations and
Production Management, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 214-237.
Kregel, I., Ogonek, N. and Matthies, B. (2019), “Competency profiles for lean professionals – an
international perspective”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,
Vol. 68 No. 2, pp. 423-446.
BIJ Kruse, T., Veltri, A. and Branscum, A. (2019), “Integrating safety, health and environmental
management systems: a conceptual framework for achieving lean enterprise outcomes”, Journal
29,4 of Safety Research, Vol. 71, pp. 259-271.
Kull, T.J., Yan, T., Liu, Z. and Wacker, J.G. (2014), “The moderation of lean manufacturing
effectiveness by dimensions of national culture: testing practice-culture congruence
hypotheses”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 153, pp. 1-12.
Kumar, S.D. and Vinodh, S. (2020), “TISM for analysis of barriers affecting the adoption of lean
1208 concepts to electronics component manufacture”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma,
Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 1141-1173.
Langstrand, J. and Drotz, E. (2016), “The rhetoric and reality of Lean: a multiple case study”, Total
Quality Management and Business Excellence, Vol. 27 Nos 3-4, pp. 398-412.
Leite, H., Radnor, Z. and Bateman, N. (2020), “Meaningful inhibitors of the lean journey: a systematic
review and categorisation of over 20 years of literature”, Production Planning and Control. doi:
10.1080/09537287.2020.1823511.
Loyd, N., Harris, G., Gholston, S. and Berkowitz, D. (2020), “Development of a lean assessment tool and
measuring the effect of culture from employee perception”, Journal of Manufacturing
Technology Management, Vol. 31 No. 7, pp. 1439-1456.
Lucato, W.C., Calarge, F.A., Junior, M.L. and Calado, R.D. (2014), “Performance evaluation of lean
manufacturing implementation in Brazil”, International Journal of Productivity and
Performance Management, Vol. 63 No. 5, pp. 529-549.
Malik, M. and Abdallah, S. (2020), “The relationship between organizational attitude and lean
practices: an organizational sense-making perspective”, Industrial Management and Data
Systems, Vol. 120 No. 9, pp. 1715-1731.
Mansoori, Y. (2017), “Enacting the lean startup methodology: the role of vicarious and experiential
learning processes”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, Vol. 23
No. 5, pp. 812-838.
Marodin, G.A. and Saurin, T.A. (2015), “Managing barriers to lean production implementation: context
matters”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 53 No. 13, pp. 3947-3962.
Marodin, G.A., Frank, A.G., Tortorella, G.L. and Saurin, T.A. (2016), “Contextual factors and lean
production implementation in the Brazilian automotive supply chain”, Supply Chain
Management: An International Journal, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 417-432.
Marodin, G.A., Tortorella, G.L., Frank, A.G. and Filho, M.G. (2017), “The moderating effect of Lean
supply chain management on the impact of Lean shop floor practices on quality and
inventory”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 473-485.
Marodin, G.A., Frank, A.G., Tortorella, G.L. and Fetterman, D.C. (2019), “Lean production and
operational performance in the Brazilian automotive supply chain”, Total Quality Management
and Business Excellence, Vol. 30 Nos 3-4, pp. 370-385.
Martinez-Jurado, P.J. and Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2014), “Key determinants of lean production adoption:
evidence from the aerospace sector”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 332-345.
Matawale, C.R., Datta, S. and Mahapatra, S.S. (2014), “Leanness estimation procedural hierarchy using
interval-valued fuzzy sets (IVFS)”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 21 No. 2,
pp. 150-183.
Mathew, S. and Taylor, G. (2019), “Power distance in India: Paternalism, religion and caste: some
issues surrounding the implementation of lean production techniques”, Cross Cultural and
Strategic Management, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 2-23.
Melin, M. and Barth, H. (2018), “Lean in Swedish agriculture: strategic and operational perspectives”,
Production Planning and Control, Vol. 29 No. 10, pp. 845-855.
Minh, K.S., Zailani, S., Iranmanesh, M. and Heidari, S. (2019), “Do lean manufacturing practices have
negative impact on job satisfaction?”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 10 No. 1,
pp. 257-274.
Minovski, R., Jovanoski, B. and Galevski, P. (2021), “Lean implementation and implications: Lean
experiences from Macedonia”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 78-97.
Manufacturing
Moghadam, M.R.S., Safari, H. and Yousefi, N. (2021), “Clustering quality management models and
methods: systematic literature review and text-mining analysis approach”, Total Quality
Management and Business Excellence, Vol. 32 Nos 3-4, pp. 241-264.
Mohammad, I.S. and Oduoza, C.F. (2019), “Lean-excellence business management for manufacturing
SMEs focusing on KRI”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,
Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 711-730. 1209
Moldner, A.K., Garza-Reyes, J.A. and Kumar, V. (2020), “Exploring lean manufacturing practices’
influence on process innovation performance”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 106,
pp. 233-249.
Moyano-Fuentes, J. and Sacristan-Diaz, M. (2012), “Learning on lean: a review of thinking and
research”, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 32 No. 5,
pp. 551-582.
Mund, K., Pieterse, K. and Cameron, S. (2015), “Lean product engineering in the South African
automotive industry”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 26 No. 5,
pp. 703-724.
Nagaraj, T.S. and Jeyapaul, R. (2020). “An empirical investigation on association between human
factors, ergonomics and lean manufacturing”, Production Planning and Control. doi: 10.1080/
09537287.2020.1810815.
Narayanamurthy, G. and Gurumurthy, A. (2016), “Leanness assessment: a literature review”,
International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 36 No. 10, pp. 1115-1160.
Nawanir, G., Teong, L.K. and Othman, S.N. (2013), “Impact of lean practices on operations
performance and business performance”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management,
Vol. 24 No. 7, pp. 1019-1050.
Nawanir, G., Lim, K.T., Othman, S.N. and Adeleke, A.Q. (2018), “Developing and validating lean
manufacturing constructs: an SEM approach”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 25
No. 5, pp. 1382-1405.
Negrao, L.L.L., Filho, M.G. and Marodin, G. (2017), “Lean practices and their effect on performance: a
literature review”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 33-56.
Negrao, L.L.L., Jabbour, L.S., Latan, H., Filho, M.G., Jabbour, C.J.C. and Ganga, G.M.D. (2020), “Lean
manufacturing and business performance: testing the S-curve theory”, Production Planning and
Control, Vol. 31 No. 10, pp. 771-785.
Neirotti, P. (2020), “Work intensification and employee involvement in lean production: new light on a
classic dilemma”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 31 No. 15,
pp. 1958-1983.
Novais, L., Maqueira Marın, J.M. and Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2020), “Lean production implementation,
cloud-supported logistics and supply chain integration: interrelationships and effects on
business performance”, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 31 No. 3,
pp. 629-663.
Pakdil, F. and Leonard, K.M. (2017), “Implementing and sustaining lean processes: the dilemma of
societal culture effects”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 55 No. 3, pp. 700-717.
Panwar, A., Jain, R. and Rathore, A.P.S. (2015a), “Lean implementation in Indian process industries –
some empirical evidence”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 26 No. 1,
pp. 131-160.
Panwar, A., Nepal, B.P., Jain, R. and Rathore, A.P.S. (2015b), “On the adoption of lean manufacturing
principles in process industries”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 26 No. 7, pp. 564-587.
Panwar, A., Nepal, B., Jain, R., Rathore, A.P.S. and Lyons, A. (2017), “Understanding the linkages
between lean practices and performance improvements in Indian process industries”, Industrial
Management and Data Systems, Vol. 117 No. 2, pp. 346-364.
BIJ Paro, P.E.P. and Gerolamo, M.C. (2017), “Organizational culture for lean programs”, Journal of
Organizational Change Management, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 584-598.
29,4
Peralta, C.B.L., Echeveste, M.E., Lermen, F.H., Marcon, A. and Tortorella, G. (2020), “A framework
proposition to identify customer value through lean practices”, Journal of Manufacturing
Technology Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 725-747.
Pereira, C.M., Anholon, R., Rampasso, I.S., Quelhas, O.L.G., Leal Filho, W. and Santa-Eulalia, L.A.
(2020), “Evaluation of lean practices in warehouses: an analysis of Brazilian reality”,
1210 International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 1-20.
Pinho, C. and Mendes, L. (2017), “IT in lean-based manufacturing industries: systematic literature
review and research issues”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 55 No. 24,
pp. 7524-7540.
Pozo, H., Silva, O.R. and Tachizawa, T. (2017), “The influence of performance objectives on the
implementation of lean manufacturing practices: an analysis based on strategic groups”, Cogent
Business and Management, Vol. 4, p. 1405718.
Prasad, S., Baltov, M., Rao, A.N. and Lanka, K. (2021), “Interdependency analysis of lean
manufacturing practices in case of Bulgarian SMEs: interpretive structural modelling and
interpretive ranking modelling approach”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 12
No. 3, pp. 503-535, doi: 10.1108/IJLSS-09-2019-0100.
Primo, M.A.M., DuBois, F.L., Oliveira, M.L.M.C., Amaro, E.S.D.M. and Moser, D.D.N. (2020), “Lean
manufacturing implementation in time of crisis: the case of Estaleiro Atl^antico Sul”, Production
Planning and Control, Vol. 32 No. 8, pp. 623-640.
Psomas, E. (2020), “The originality of the Lean manufacturing studies. A systematic literature
review”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 254-284.
Psomas, E. (2021), “Future research methodologies of lean manufacturing: a systematic literature
review”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma. doi: 10.1108/IJLSS-06-2020-0082.
Psomas, E. and Antony, J. (2019), “Research gaps in Lean manufacturing. A systematic literature
review”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 815-839.
Psomas, E., Antony, J. and Bouranta, N. (2018), “Assessing lean adoption in food SMEs: evidence from
Greece”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 64-81.
Rachman, A. and Ratnayake, R.M.C. (2019), “Adoption and implementation potential of the lean
concept in the petroleum industry: state-of-the-art”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma,
Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 311-338.
Rajagopalan, J. (2020), “An empirical longitudinal study of adoption of lean management in India”,
The Total Quality Management Journal, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 1285-1306.
Rajagopalan, J. and Solaimani, S. (2019), “Lean management in Indian industry: an exploratory
research study using a longitudinal survey”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 11
No. 3, pp. 515-542.
Rebelo, M., Santos, G. and Silva, R. (2014), “Conception of a flexible integrator and lean model for
integrated management systems”, Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, Vol. 25
Nos 5-6, pp. 683-701.
Reitsma, E., Manfredsson, P., Hilletofth, P. and Andersson, R. (2020), “The outcomes of providing lean
training to strategic suppliers: a Swedish case study”, The Total Quality Management Journal.
doi: 10.1108/TQM-04-2020-0085.
Rodriguez, D., Van Landeghem, H., Lasio, V. and Buyens, D. (2017), “Determinants of job satisfaction
in a lean environment”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 134-152.
Rymaszewska, A.D. (2014), “The challenges of lean manufacturing implementation in SMEs”,
Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 987-1002.
Sahoo, S. (2019), “Lean manufacturing practices and performance: the role of social and technical
factors”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 732-754.
Sahoo, S. (2020b), “Assessing lean implementation and benefits within Indian automotive component Lean
manufacturing SMEs”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 1042-1084.
Manufacturing
Sahoo, S. (2021), “Aligning operational practices to competitive strategies to enhance the performance of
Indian manufacturing firms”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 131-165.
Sahoo, S. and Yadav, S. (2018a), “Lean implementation in small- and medium-sized enterprises: an
empirical study of Indian manufacturing firms”, Benchmarking: An International Journal,
Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 1121-1147.
1211
Sahoo, S. and Yadav, S. (2018b), “Lean production practices and bundles: a comparative analysis”,
International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 374-398.
Salhieh, L. and Abdallah, A.A. (2019), “A two-way causal chain between lean management practices
and lean values”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 68
No. 5, pp. 997-1016.
Samuel, D., Found, P. and Williams, S.J. (2015), “How did the publication of the book The Machine
That Changed The World change management thinking? Exploring 25 years of lean literature”,
International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 35 No. 10, pp. 1386-1407.
Sangwan, K.S., Bhamu, J. and Mehta, D. (2014), “Development of lean manufacturing implementation
drivers for Indian ceramic industry”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, Vol. 63 No. 5, pp. 569-587.
Saurin, T.A., Luz Tortorella, G., Soliman, M. and Garza-Reyes, J.A. (2020), “Lean production myths: an
exploratory study”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 1-19.
Schonberger, R.J. (2020), “Extending the pursuit of flow (lean) management to encompass sales,
general and administrative functions”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 31 No. 13,
pp. 1098-1109.
Shah, R. and Ward, P.T. (2007), “Defining and developing measures of Lean production”, Journal of
Operations Management, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 785-805.
Sharma, V., Dixit, A.R. and Qadri, M.A. (2016), “Empirical assessment of the causal relationships
among lean criteria using DEMATEL method”, Benchmarking: An International Journal,
Vol. 23 No. 7, pp. 1834-1859.
Shashi, Centobelli, P., Cerchione, R. and Singh, R. (2019), “The impact of leanness and innovativeness
on environmental and financial performance: insights from Indian SMEs”, International Journal
of Production Economics, Vol. 212, pp. 111-124.
Shi, Y., Wang, X. and Zhu, X. (2019), “Lean manufacturing and productivity changes: the moderating
role of R&D”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 69 No. 1,
pp. 169-191.
Shin, D. and Alam, M.S. (2020), “Lean management strategy and innovation: moderation effects of
collective voluntary turnover and layoffs”, Total Quality Management and Business Excellence.
doi: 10.1080/14783363.2020.1826923.
Shokri, A. (2017), “Quantitative analysis of six sigma, lean and lean six sigma research publications in last
two decades”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 598-625.
Signoretti, A. (2020), “Overcoming the barriers to the implementation of more efficient productive
strategies in small enterprises”, Employee Relations, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 149-165.
Singh, J., Singh, H. and Singh, G. (2018), “Productivity improvement using lean manufacturing in
manufacturing industry of Northern India: a case study”, International Journal of Productivity
and Performance Management, Vol. 67 No. 8, pp. 1394-1415.
Solaimani, S., Talab, A.H. and Rhee, B. (2019), “An integrative view on Lean innovation management”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 105, pp. 109-120.
Staedele, A.E., Ensslin, S.R. and Forcellini, F.A. (2019), “Knowledge building about performance
evaluation in lean production: an investigation on international scientific research”, Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 798-820.
BIJ Stimec, A. and Grima, F. (2019), “The impact of implementing continuous improvement upon stress
within a Lean production framework”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 57
29,4 No. 5, pp. 1590-1605.
Taylor, A., Taylor, M. and McSweeney, A. (2013), “Towards greater understanding of success and
survival of lean systems”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 51 No. 22,
pp. 6607-6630.
Thanki, S.J. and Thakkar, J. (2014), “Status of lean manufacturing practices in Indian industries and
1212 government initiatives”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 25 No. 5,
pp. 655-675.
Tomasevic, I., Stojanovic, D., Slovic, D., Simeunovic, B. and Jovanovic, I. (2020), “Lean in High-Mix/
Low-Volume industry: a systematic literature review”, Production Planning and Control. doi: 10.
1080/09537287.2020.1782094.
Tomelero, R.L., Ferreira, J.C.E., Kumar, V. and Garza-Reyes, J.A. (2017), “A lean environmental
benchmarking (LEB) method for the management of cutting tools”, International Journal of
Production Research, Vol. 55 No. 13, pp. 3788-3807.
Tortorella, G. and Fettermann, D. (2018), “Help chain in companies undergoing a lean implementation:
the impact of critical success factors on quality and efficiency performance”, International
Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 113-132.
Tortorella, G.L., Rossini, M., Costa, F., Staudacher, P.A. and Sawhney, R. (2019a), “A comparison on
Industry 4.0 and Lean Production between manufacturers from emerging and developed
economies”, Total Quality Management and Business Excellence. doi: 10.1080/14783363.2019.
1696184.
Tortorella, G.L., Giglio, R. and van Dun, D.H. (2019b), “Industry 4.0 adoption as a moderator of the
impact of lean production practices on operational performance improvement”, International
Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 39 Nos 6/7/8, pp. 860-886.
Tortorella, G.L., Fettermann, D., Miguel, P.A.C. and Sawhney, R. (2020b), “Learning organisation and
lean production: an empirical research on their relationship”, International Journal of Production
Research, Vol. 58 No. 12, pp. 3650-3666.
Tortorella, G., Sawhney, R., Jurburg, D., de Paula, I.C., Tlapa, D. and Thurer, M. (2021), “Towards the
proposition of a lean automation framework: integrating industry 4.0 into lean production”,
Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 593-620.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. and Smart, P. (2003), “Towards a methodology for developing evidence-
informed management knowledge by means of systematic review”, British Journal of
Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 207-222.
Uriarte, A.G., Ng, A.H.C. and Moris, M.U. (2020), “Bringing together Lean and simulation: a
comprehensive review”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 87-117.
Valente, C.M., Sousa, P.S.A. and Moreira, M.R.A. (2019), “Assessment of the Lean effect on business
performance: the case of manufacturing SMEs”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology
Management, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 501-523.
Vanichchinchai, A. (2019), “Exploring organizational contexts on lean manufacturing and supply chain
relationship”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 236-259.
Vlachos, I. and Siachou, E. (2018), “An empirical investigation of workplace factors affecting lean
performance”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 67
No. 2, pp. 278-296.
Vlachos, I., Siachou, E. and Langwallner, E. (2020), “A perspective on knowledge sharing and lean
management: an empirical investigation”, Knowledge Management Research and Practice,
Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 131-146.
Wang, X., Lin, Y. and Shi, Y. (2019), “The moderating role of organizational environments on the
relationship between inventory leanness and venture survival in Chinese manufacturing”,
Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 413-440.
Wickramasinghe, V. and Wickramasinghe, G.L.D. (2017), “Effects of HRM practices, lean production Lean
practices and lean duration on performance”, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 31 No. 11, pp. 1467-1512. Manufacturing
Womack, J.P. and Jones, D.T. (1996), “Beyond Toyota: how to root out waste and pursue perfection”,
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 74 No. 5, pp. 140-158.
Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T. and Roos, D. (1990), The Machine that Changed the World, Free Press, New
York, NY.
1213
Yadav, V., Jain, R., Mittal, M.L., Panwar, A. and Sharma, M.K. (2019a), “An appraisal on barriers to
implement lean in SMEs”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 30 No. 1,
pp. 195-212.
Yadav, V., Khandelwal, G., Jain, R. and Mittal, M.L. (2019b), “Development of leanness index for
SMEs”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 397-410.
Yadav, G., Luthra, S., Huisingh, D., Mangl, S.K., Narkhede, B.E. and Liu, Y. (2020), “Development of a
lean manufacturing framework to enhance its adoption within manufacturing companies in
developing economies”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 245, p. 18726.
Yang, X., Sun, S.L. and Zhao, X. (2019), “Search and execution: examining the entrepreneurial
cognitions behind the lean startup model”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 52, pp. 667-679.
Yu, W., Chavez, R., Jacobs, M. and Wong, C.Y. (2020), “Innovativeness and lean practices for triple
bottom line: testing of fit-as-mediation versus fit-as-moderation models”, International Journal
of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 40 No. 10, pp. 1623-164.
Zahraee, S.M. (2016), “A survey on lean manufacturing implementation in a selected manufacturing
industry in Iran”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 136-148.
Zanon, L.G., Ulhoa, T.F. and Esposto, K.F. (2021), “Performance measurement and lean maturity:
congruence for improvement”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 32 No. 9, pp. 760-774.
Zhu, X. and Lin, Y. (2017), “Does lean manufacturing improve firm value?”, Journal of Manufacturing
Technology Management, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 422-437.
Zhu, X. and Lin, Y. (2018), “A revisit of lean production on performance based on heterogeneity”,
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 67 No. 3, pp. 487-501.
Zulfiqar, M., Hussain, K., Yousaf, M.U., Sohail, N. and Ghafoor, S. (2020), “Moderating role of CEO
compensation in lean innovation strategies of Chinese listed family firms”, Corporate
Governance, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 887-902.

Corresponding author
Evangelos Psomas can be contacted at: epsomas@upatras.gr

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com