See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/321187003

Combining lean tools application in kaizen: a field study on the printing

industry

Article  in  International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management · November 2017

DOI: 10.1108/IJPPM-09-2016-0197

CITATIONS READS

32 1,476

2 authors, including:

Huay Ling Tay

Singapore University of Social Sciences
18 PUBLICATIONS   119 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Adapting Lean for process redesign in senior day care services View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Huay Ling Tay on 10 May 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1741-0401.htm

Combining
Combining lean tools application lean tools
in kaizen: a field study on the application in
kaizen
printing industry
Chi On Chan 45
Department of Business Administration, Hong Kong Shue Yan University,
Received 5 September 2016
Hong Kong, Hong Kong, and Revised 30 October 2016
Huay Ling Tay Accepted 16 November 2016

School of Business, Singapore University of Social Sciences, Singapore,

Singapore, Singapore

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to highlight the lessons learned from two kaizen events for
productivity improvement in a printing company. The paper suggests how to organize lean tools to improve
productivity through the use of organized kaizen events in the printing industry to meet defined targets.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper is based on a field study involving participant observations.
The relationships among the three specific tools, line balancing, standardized work and standardized layout
that are used in a kaizen event of a printing factory, are examined.
Findings – Application of a mix of lean tools resulted in significant productivity improvements of 10-30 percent
in the assembly area of the printing company. Based on the outcomes of the lean tools that are applied in various
work areas, the best combinations of lean tools are identified and several key considerations are discussed.
Practical implications – This paper shows that a combined set of lean tools such as line balancing,
standardized work and standardized layout can be applied to improve productivity in the printing operations,
which is identifiable with a mix of processes that are both labor intensive and equipment flexible.
Originality/value – The paper fills the literature gap on the use of specific lean tools: line balancing,
standardized work and standardized layout in the printing industry. The findings from this research can be
applied to other assembly systems that are similar to the printing industry.
Keywords Line balancing, Printing industry, Kaizen, Lean tools, Field study, Standardized layout,
Standardized work
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The printing industry in China is growing rapidly. In 2010, there were nearly 106,400 printing
enterprises with 4.46 million employees in China, and the gross industrial output value reached
92 billion US dollars, ranking third in the world (Research and Markets, 2011). According to Ding,
in 2014, the profits in China’s printing industry increased 9.3 percent year on year and it was
ranked second worldwide. In 2014, the official statistics showed that China’s printing industry
output exceeded 160 billion US dollars. Along with this growth of industry, competition among
printing companies has also intensified. Like most manufacturing industries, improving quality
and productivity to gain a competitive advantage has always been a major focus for the printing
industry (Lyu, 1996; Xu et al., 2008). To remain competitive, printing companies have to improve
their present production process to be efficient and lean in their internal operations.
Lean is a management philosophy focused on identifying and eliminating waste
throughout a product’s entire value stream (De Treville and Antonakis, 2006; Narasimhan
and Swink, 2006; Shah and Ward, 2003, 2007). One lean manufacturing mechanism used to International Journal of
improve organizational performance is the kaizen event (Bradley and Willett, 2004; Productivity and Performance
Management
Melnyk and Calantone, 1998; Vasilash, 1997). A kaizen event is a focused and structured Vol. 67 No. 1, 2018
pp. 45-65
continuous improvement project, using a dedicated cross-functional team to address a © Emerald Publishing Limited
1741-0401
targeted work area, to achieve specific goals in an accelerated timeframe (usually one week DOI 10.1108/IJPPM-09-2016-0197
IJPPM or shorter). The use of kaizen appears to have increased significantly in recent years
67,1 (Bane, 2002; Melnyk and Calantone, 1998).
However, the concept of kaizen has rarely been applied in printing industry for
improving productivity and few published papers show how kaizen fits into the
operational practices in printing industry (Tay, 2008). There is little literature that links
the principles of kaizen to the printing industry. In particular, the use of lean tools to the
46 printing industry is sparsely studied. Despite the potentially promising benefits of kaizen,
the current literature lacks an understanding on the application of lean tools that would
suit the printing operations. On the whole, it is unclear from existing empirical research
and the practitioner literature whether the use of kaizen would be beneficial to the printing
environment, and whether it can lead to a positive change in human resource outcomes or
increased knowledge and skills in continuous improvement (Bicheno, 2001; Melnyk and
Calantone, 1998).
This paper seeks to fill this gap by evoking the following research question:
RQ1. How can lean tools be used in kaizen events to improve productivity in the
printing operations?
We address this question by focusing our study on three specific lean tools – line balancing,
standardized work and standardized layout that are applied in combination for improving
the productivity of the printing industry. The rest of this paper is organized as follows. First,
we provide the background of case company in Section 2. This is followed by literature
review on lean and kaizen. In particular, three specific lean tools, line balancing,
standardized layout and standardized workflow, are reviewed to provide the background
and justification of their application in the later sections of the paper. Section 4 presents the
data collection procedure at the field study, our data analyses and results. At the end,
we present the conclusions and opportunities for future research.

2. Field study context

In this paper, the studied field is a printing company based in China. In 2001, it increased
its product offerings and became a regional player. Its diverse products include both
hard-covered and soft-covered books, educational books, magazines, novelty and pop-up
book manufacturing. The huge production scale involves many highly skilled laborers for
supporting hand assembly process. The company incurred a loss of approximately
4.3 million US dollars (6.99 percent of sales) in 2009.
The company has 11 departments and the number of workers varies between 960 and
1,312, depending upon the season. In this study, we focus on two departments – the
handicrafts and packaging departments. There are approximately 174-526 workers in these
two departments. The specific number of workers varies across the year. Peak season is
around January and low season is around July.
A total of 12 kaizen events have been implemented in this printing company.
Various lean tools are used to tackle problems such as line balancing, SMED, standardized
layout, standardized work, 5S, visual management, etc. In this paper, we present two kaizen
events involving line balancing, standardized work and standardized layout. These tools
were selected by one of the authors, who was a consultant to this printing company.
As Spear (1999) states, any improvement must be made in accordance with the scientific
method, under the guidance of a teacher, at the lowest possible level in the organization.
The printing process can be divided into three major steps: pre-press, press and
post-press. Pre-press operations encompass a series of steps during which the idea for a
printed image is converted into an image carrier such as a plate, cylinder or screen.
Pre-press operations include composition and typesetting, graphic arts photography, image
assembly and image carrier preparation. Press refers to actual printing operations.
Post-press primarily involves the assembly of printed materials and consists of binding and Combining
finishing operations. It generally involves the basic procedures as shown in Figure 1. In this lean tools
paper, we focus on improving the handwork procedure in post-press operations, which application in
include cutting, folding, assembly, blinding and finishing operations.
In handicrafts department, the manual work includes stitching, sequencing, pressing, kaizen
checking and settlement, gluing, mounting, pressing and checking, as shown in Figure 1.
These processes involve both labor and machinery support, and the details are discussed in 47
the results part. In packaging department, the working procedure includes packing, taping
and settlement, which also involve labor and machinery support.
One of the researchers acted as the consultant for the case company during the period of
study from July 2010 to May 2011. The three specific lean tools that are selected for the
improving operations productivity were based on the researcher’s field experience
and knowledge through his close and rampant interactions with the management and
operations of the company. The selected lean tools for operations improvements were
shared with the key relevant persons at the field and feedback were gathered from the
management and operations personnel to aid the researcher to identify suitable lean tools
that can potentially be applied to the field. Based on feedback obtained from the field,
the researcher selected three lean tools – line balancing, standardized work and
standardized layout that are subsequently applied to two departments (handicraft and
packaging departments) of the printing company. In the next section, we will review
relevant literature on the lean tools that are applied to the case contexts.

3. Literature review
3.1 Lean manufacturing
Lean manufacturing has been described by Womack et al. (1990) as a philosophy focused on
using less of everything – less material, less labor, less time and less space than traditional
mass production. Lean manufacturing originated as a philosophy of continuously simplifying
processes and eliminating waste (Radnor, 2010). Lean encourages incremental improvement of
an activity to eliminate waste, variation, and over-burden (called muda, mura and muri in
Japanese) and create more value (Ohno, 1988; Womack and Jones, 1996). Extant research and
literature suggest that lean manufacturing is associated with operational performance
such as improvement in productivity measures (Hopp and Spearman, 2004; Laughlin and
Skrabec, 1995; MacDuffie and Sethuraman, 1996; Abolassani et al., 2016).
Though extant empirical research indicates that lean practices are used in a variety of
contemporary organizations (Boyer, 1996; Forza, 1996; James-Moore and Gibbons, 1997;
Sohal, 1996; Wright and Lund, 2006), research on the application of lean tools in the printing

Pre-press
Composition and Post-press
typesetting, graphic Press Cutting, folding,
arts photography, Actual printing assembly, blinding
image assembly, operations and finishing
and image carrier operations
preparation

Stitching Sequencing Pressing Checking and 1

1 Gluing Mounting Pressing and 2

Figure 1.
Process mapping in
2 Packing Taping Settlement printing industry
IJPPM industry remains sparse. So far, to the knowledge of the authors, there is little research and
67,1 literature that report the use of a combination of lean tools in the printing industry.
An article by McKinsey & Company published in June 2013 reports that significant
potential in Lean and Six Sigma remains, as most of the application are mainly in
automotive assembly and manufacturing contexts, with outcomes that fall short of the
efficiency targets (Eloot et al., 2013). The article suggests two key reasons for this
48 phenomenon – a lack of necessary softer skills – including leadership – that would have
made the changes stick, and the cultural difference that make employees, particularly
frontline worker uncomfortable and resistant of the more transparent and inclusive way of
working that is advocated by Lean and Sigma philosophy. Thus, this study fills this gap in
the literature and responds to scholars’ calls for more field research to understand the
implications of lean manufacturing practices in the printing operations context
(Benders and van Bijsterveld, 2000; Cua et al., 2001; Sakakibara et al., 1997; Shah and
Ward, 2007; White and Prybutok, 2001).

3.2 Kaizen
Kaizen was first defined by Imai in his book, Kaizen – The Key to Japan’s Competitive
Success, published in 1986 (Imai, 1986). Later, another definition of kaizen was put forth,
based on its use in companies for fostering staff involvement in process improvement
(Elgar and Smith, 1994). Bateman and Rich (2003) defined kaizen as a continuous
improvement concept that stresses the need to enhance the operations environment in the
company and epitomizes the mobilization of the workforce. Kaizen event provides a
major channel for employees to contribute to their company’s development. In a kaizen
event, operators are not only expected to strictly follow the methods decided by the
management but also actively participate in making improvement suggestions to
the management (Aoki, 2008).
Kaizen, a continuous improvement strategy, has long been recognized as a key factor in the
success of well-known Japanese companies (Aoki, 2008; Anon, 2004). Kaizen brings qualitative
and quantitative benefits for company, including time and money saving with reduced
inventory cost which also helps to improve work processes. Many studies use lean tools as a
standalone tool, for examples, layout, line balancing, value stream map (VSM), spaghetti
diagram; they are seldom combined and used as a set in a same context (Ren et al., 2015;
Pujo et al., 2015; Chiarini, 2013).
Taichi Ohno, the founder of the Toyota Production System, pointed out that
improvement is both eternal and infinite. The concept of kaizen in Toyota is a kind of
corporate culture that supports continual organizational learning. Kaizen event is able to
provide a competitive advantage if used properly; it can improve quality, employee morale,
creativity, problem-solving skills, work safety environment and reduce cost and inventory
(Gao and Low, 2013). In the rapidly changing environment, the objective of kaizen event is to
attain sustainable competitive advantage by creating innovative organizational capabilities
that are not easy to imitate for others (Aoki, 2008).
Moreover, there are three types of organizational capabilities that play significant roles
in Japanese kaizen activities which influence the readiness of a company to implement
kaizen. The first organizational capability is to encourage workers’ self-initiative to learn
and improve the work process independently. Workers must effectively make use of the
principles and tools of work and process improvement before the entire workforce can
strive toward continuous improvement (Zarbo, 2012). Second is the ability to facilitate
cross-functional communications that allow Japanese companies to implement
incremental organization-wide innovation. Third, the capability to discipline workers
such that they conform to the company’s ways also plays a certain role in Japanese kaizen
activities (Aoki, 2008).
3.3 Line balancing Combining
Ongkunaruk and Wongsatit (2014) stated that originally the line-balancing problem was lean tools
developed for cost-efficient mass production of standardized products. Line-balancing tool application in
attempts to allocate an equal amount of time for workers in each process so that the
production flows can be smooth and without long waiting times. However, in a real situation kaizen
of labor-intensive production process, the task time is uncertain as it depends on other factors
including the skill of workers, the work environment, fatigue, etc. As a result, the task time is 49
often varied in labor-intensive manufacturing processes (Betts and Mahmoud, 1992;
Ongkunaruk and Wongsatit, 2014). Therefore, the actual time for completion of each task
varies between different operatives and such variations also exist in the same task repeatedly
performed by the same operative. Time variation between each task is significant for
assembly line balancing (Hui and Ng, 1999). Line balancing is a useful tool for assembly-based
industries such as apparel industry and automotive industry (Betts and Mahmoud, 1992;
Chan et al., 1998; Hui and Ng, 1999). Currently, there are only a limited number of papers that
have studied the application of line balancing in printing industry.
An assembly line is defined as a flow-oriented production system which consists of a
sequence of stations performing a specific set of tasks repeatedly along the product line at
constant speed. The order in which the tasks can be performed is restricted by a set of
precedence relationships. Assembly line is important in cost-efficient mass production
of standardized products (Sabuncuoglu et al., 2000). According to Boysen et al. (2006),
its configuration planning includes rationalization of the number of stations, task
assignment and sequence before the actual assembly. It is significant for implementing a
cost-efficient production system which comprises all tasks and decisions that are related to
equipping and aligning the productive units in a specific production process.

3.4 Facility layout

Koopmans and Beckmann (1957) defined the layout problems as an ordinary industrial
problem with the aim of minimizing the cost of transporting materials between different
workstations. An effective facility layout not only minimizes material handling cost, but can
also help to reduce the work in progress (WIP) and the throughput time. According to a study
by Tay (2008), it showed that layout and handling, adopting a team approach and setups are
the weak areas in the printing industry. As the facility layout is often based on “departmental
type layout” (Chase et al., 2006), the emphasis is on having similar machines in one area which
is commonly practiced in the printing industry especially in the pre-press process. In contrast,
in the post-press process, labor work is lesser and the machines used are smaller and
moveable, compared to the large printing machines in the printing process. In China, as space
is mostly not a constraint, each operation is usually allocated a designated area that is
separate from one another. As a result, the distance between process operations is long.
Kaizen, a concept that focuses on continuous improvement, is a way to achieve Lean’s goal.
The major objective of Lean is to reduce waste. Ohno (1988) identified seven types of waste
called Seven Muda in Japanese, people used TIMWOOD in short form for ease of memory:
(1) transportation;
(2) inventory;
(3) movement;
(4) waiting;
(5) over-processing;
(6) over-production; and
(7) defect.
IJPPM Other studies have compared different layout designs for low-volume batch production line,
67,1 namely, empirical approach, systematic layout planning and lean approach. The results
from these prior studies have shown that lean approach is the best in terms of cost saving
through removing waste such as transportation reduction (Carlo et al., 2013). In this paper,
we suggest that the appropriate configuration of facility layout has to be used in conjunction
with other tools to effectively reduce the muda such as transportation, movement, inventory
50 and waiting.

3.5 Standardized work

The principles of lean do not work well when everyone is allowed to choose own work
method or the work sequence in which he/she performs a job. This is because the outcomes
would be unpredictable and it would be difficult to achieve flow and pull in the processes
(Whitmore, 2008). Shang and Low (2013) highlighted that standardization is another key
tool of kaizen, since an improvement typically involves a problem that is solved and
standardization is to consolidate the new level of awareness. Lillrank et al. (2001) supported
this view by suggesting that continuous improvement at the organizational level is largely
dependent on the level of standardization. Thus, in a working environment, where both
products and processes are highly standardized, the critical role of continuous improvement
is to ensure that processes stay within prescribed tolerances and closely follow the standard
operating procedures (Gao and Low, 2013).
One of the key elements of standardized work is takt time. It is a heartbeat of a system.
Takt time indicates the rate of customer demand for a product or a service in terms of time
within which it needs to be finished; it is determined by dividing the net available time by
the quantity. Another element is the work sequence. The last one is the standard WIP; once
the level of WIP is developed, the problem becomes visible (Whitmore, 2008).
In this paper, we illustrate how these three tools, line balancing, standardized work and
standardized layout, are combined to gain improvement in printing industry.

4. Methodology
To address the research question, an exploratory field study of kaizen events was conducted
to understand the implications of applying a combined set of lean tools to the productivity
performance of the printing operations. Field studies are often employed to investigate
phenomena within real-world settings when the distinction between the phenomena and the
overall context is not obvious (Yin, 1994). Field studies may combine both qualitative and
quantitative data and assessment methods. While qualitative data collection methods may
be impacted by a researcher’s perspective or biases, systematic, documented approaches to
the data collection process, as well as triangulation, increase the robustness of these
methodologies (Patton, 1990). When multiple sources from different data collection methods
support the same conclusion, triangulation has occurred (Miles and Huberman, 1994).
We collected multiple sources of data throughout the course of our study at the field.
We have chosen this research approach as one of the authors leaded the project for
almost a year. Rapport was gradually developed between the author and the participants so
that the participants feel secure in sharing information from their heart, the collected data
will be more accurate and dependable. Rapport has been referred to as “the only basis on
which really reliable information can be obtained.”
During the course of the field research, the researcher collected field data and
measurements in order to assess the productivity performance of the studied processes to
provide an overall assessment of the impact of kaizen to studied areas and interviews with
key organizational participants and various organizational documents were used to
understand the experiences of operations staff during the course of transforming the work
and process through the application of the set of lean tools.
4.1 Participant observation Combining
Participant observation combines the processes of participation and observation in which lean tools
researcher participates in and observes the action or the activity or the phenomenon in the application in
field (Quinlan and Zikmund, 2015). Participant observation has been successfully employed
by many researchers engaged in business research (Sekaran and Bougie, 2013). In this kaizen
study, the author adopted participant observations in the course of the field research.
This approach enabled a more detailed and accurate information about the actual layout 51
and handwork practices through an intensive involvement with people in the factory over
an extended period of time.
In addition, participant observation can help to unveil, explore and describe new
behaviors as no prior study on kaizen application in printing industry is available.
Observable details, like materials flow and some hidden details, such as bottlenecks and
movement of workers, are more easily observed and understand over a longer period of
time. Another core advantage of participant observation is that it helps the researcher to
learn about the level of workers’ involvement in kaizen activities and the effort put in
to participate in continuous improvement.
One of the authors acted as a consultant leading the implementation. When doing the
observation of the action or the activity or the phenomenon, the researcher would record the
observation and gather the data during and after the kaizen event. Each kaizen event
organized in this company is usually four days. Before kicking off the kaizen event,
the current VSM was developed with the involvement of line leaders and management.
The kaizen projects were highlighted by the author after completing the current and future
VSM. All identified kaizen event will be discussed with senior management to align the
corporate strategy. After all, the team for each kaizen will be formed. Basically, the team
members come from the area which the kaizen applied for. In the morning of the first day,
training will be provided to the team members. Those training contents are related to the
kaizen. The current performance was measured by the team. The author acted as a
consultant to facilitate them to generate solution but not provide the solution to them
directly. The team will implement the solution and evaluate the result. The solution not only
improves the productivity but also the workers will find convenience to their work.
The result will be presented at the end of the kaizen event. If outstanding issues cannot be
finished in four days, it can be allowed to carry on within a short period of time.
The presentation will involve management.
The research protocol of the field study was as follows. First, the production process was
observed before the implementation of lean tools. During this stage, layout design, walking
distance and cycle time were recorded, which is of great significance in providing evidence
for subsequent analysis. This documentation included layout and material flow chart, cycle
time study worksheet, standardized work combination table and bottleneck diagram. After
the kaizen events, a similar set of data was collected so as to measure the effectiveness of the
lean tools. Finally, the results recorded before and after were compared.

5. Results and findings

We examined two cases where similar sets of lean tools were applied, namely the handicraft
department and the packaging department. Both departments that we have examined are
highly labor-intensive operations. The equipment used in these departments is movable.
In this section, the findings and insights from our case analyses are discussed.

5.1 Kaizen event 1: handicrafts department

These kaizen events illustrates how the principles of lean can be successfully applied in a
printing company in China for making gradual improvements, and optimize the production
and business process. The objective of the company to implement lean is to improve
IJPPM productivity such as cycle time reduction and WIP reduction. Such target can be achieved
67,1 by reducing moving distance and reducing the bottleneck. Besides, the management also
wants to develop a continuous improvement culture in the company.
Several tools are used in the handicrafts department to improve the working process;
three of them are discussed in the following: facility layout, standardized work and line
balancing. All these tools are correlated and the results can be obtained effectively if all the
52 tools are used together. The paragraphs that follow show how this works. The series of
improvement initiatives begin with the change of the layout at the handicrafts department
to rearrange and combine the tasks so as to shorten the transportation distance. Next,
the working procedures were optimized according to the layout, and the working
procedures were standardized to a new worksheet. The productivity of the production line
was then continuously optimized by performing line balancing while minimizing the
bottlenecks. Finally, we compared the previous performance with overall results after
implementation of kaizen in production line. The measurement is based on a few factors
including distance of material flow, worker’s walking time, number of workers, productivity
and balancing rate.
5.1.1 Facility layout. In the handicrafts department, the design of layout significantly
affects the distance and idle time between every work step and in turn, the efficiency of
production. Therefore, the company had to design a more efficient layout.
Before kaizen. The layout and work procedures in handicraft department are illustrated
in Figure 2. The original layout of the company was process type layout. It is very common
practice for mass production in China. Machines with a similar function are grouped
together, the product is moved from one operation to the next, and for example, the printers
are grouped in printing departments in ground floor. As the printer is large, it is not flexible
to move. But the machines in both handcrafts and packaging department are small and
comparatively light in weight; therefore, these machines are located in the second floor
and can be moved easily by the team. Before applying kaizen, the production line was
composed of seven steps: stitching, sequencing, pressing, checking and settlement, gluing,
mounting, pressing and checking. All these machines are grouped; however, the material
flow is not streamlined enough.
The sequence of material flow is as follows:
• the production line begins with stitching;
• WIP is sequenced;
• worker transfers WIP to pressing machine for pressing;
• settles the WIP onto pallets;

5 5 5 5 Procedures:
Gluing Gluing 1. Stitching
machine machine 2. Sequencing
1 1 3. Pressing
Pressing 6 6 6 6 4. Checking and
Table 4 settlement
Figure 2. machine
Kaizen event 1: Table Table 5. Gluing
2 2 2
layout and material 3 6. Mounting
flow in handicrafts 7 7 7. Pressing and
department checking
before kaizen Flat-pressing machine
 • next worker transports WIP from a pallet to gluing machine for gluing; Combining
• mounts the WIP; lean tools
• precedes the WIP for pressing and checking; and application in
kaizen
• transports finishing products to the flat-pressing machine.
The current material flow is not well designed because of the following reasons:
53
• the distances of transportation are very long;
• many buffers in the process; and
• large WIP cumulated in the pallet.
The total transportation distance of semi-finished products was very long, 29.8 meters in
total. The transportation time is a non-value-added activity and it is also regarded as one of
the elements in Seven Muda, which is discussed later. In addition, walking time in steps
3, 4 and 7 took 18.5 seconds (Figure 5). A total of 17 workers are needed to produce
275 copies per hour. The average production rate is 16.3 copies per person per hour.
The results show that there was room for improvement. To reduce the resistance from the
workers during the change, minimizing the extra measurement loading is crucial. Therefore,
some of the data such as WIP and buffer stock were not collected.
After kaizen. In order to increase the productivity, kaizen was implemented to improve
cycle time, material transportation, worker movement and worker loading. Minimization of
transportation distance contributes to higher efficiency. It can be done by arranging the
tasks in an appropriate sequence. The WIP and lead time can be reduced by re-designing the
layout in the department. The improved layout and work sequence after kaizen is shown in
Figure 3. The settings of the machineries and the work tables were changed to keep the
material flow smoothly in production line, which helped to reduce the travel distance
between some procedures. In addition, pressing and checking are combined as one work
task in step 3. After pressing, the WIP is transferred to gluing machine directly since
settlement is placed at the last step and hence the need for a worker who was responsible for
settlement in step 4 can be eliminated. At the same time, the WIP is reduced. Our analysis
shows that the transportation distance was shortened by 11.1-18.7 meters. Total walking
time was shortened by 15.3-2.9 seconds. In effect, the overall production efficiency increased.
Originally, 17 workers produce 275 copies per hour. With the improved layout and process
flow, the handicrafts department is able to produce 320 copies per hour with 15 workers.
The productivity increased from an average production rate of 16.3 to 21.3 copies per person
per hour, i.e. 30 percent increased, as shown in Table I. This is a large advancement in
production efficiency under kaizen.

4 Procedures:
machine

5
Gluing

1. Stitching
1 1 2. Sequencing
4 5
3. Pressing and Figure 3.
Table

Pressing Flat-
Table 6
machine pressing checking Kaizen event 1:
5 machine 4. Gluing improved layout
4
machine

2 2 2
Gluing

3 5.Mounting and material

flow in handicrafts
5 6. Pressing, checking
4 department
and settlement after kaizen
IJPPM 5.1.2 Standardized work. The second tool used in handcrafts department is standardized
67,1 work. Standardization of work procedure is crucial as it can establish precise procedures for
each worker in a production process. In fact, standardized work procedures can eliminate
the decision time for workers and managers and can also eliminate product variation. It is
based on three elements: takt time, work sequence and standard WIP, and also, the precise
work sequences in which workers perform tasks within takt time. The standard WIP
54 indicates the number of WIP allowed within that particular process.
Before kaizen. In order to standardize the working procedures, a work document that
describes standard procedures is used. In the first document, “Cycle time study worksheet”
is as shown in Figure 4. The number of sample (hard-covered book) is ten as a rule of thumb.
The average cycle time was calculated and the corresponding number of workers was
recorded. We assumed that the cycle time was normally distributed, and therefore,
the average time is used for the following analysis. In this worksheet, the aim is to
standardize the cycle time of operation and the number of workers needed in each operation.
The total time for the production is 192.5 seconds.
In the second document, “Standardized work combination table” is as shown in Figure 5
and the time for each operation is categorized into manual, auto and walking time. The table
shows the time per work sequence and the interactions during operation time.
After kaizen. After completing these two documents, we found that it is unnecessary to
have two workers for checking, pressing the book and placing them on a pallet. Therefore,
the team decided to redesign the layout and only kept one worker for the last procedure.
Later, the procedures were standardized to reduce the number of total steps from seven to
six. Therefore, the walking time which is viewed as non-value-added activity between work
steps is greatly decreased.

Before After % change

Distance of material flow 29.8 m 18.7 m −37.2

Walking time 18.5 sec 2.9 sec −84.3
Table I. No. of worker 17 15 −6.3
Overall results of Productivity 16.3 pcs/hour/people 21.3 pcs/hour/people 30.7
kaizen event 1 Balancing rate 86.3% 90% 4.3

Process: Date:
Work Sequence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total Avg. Workers
1 Stitching 23.6 21.5 16.3 16.7 21.6 22.5 16.8 16.8 15.0 17.9 188.7 18.9 2
2 Sequencing 40.0 48.0 38.0 39.0 40.0 40.0 36.0 37.0 40.0 38.0 396.0 39.6 3
3 Pressing 12.8 11.0 14.5 14.2 13.0 12.0 10.6 12.3 19.0 11.1 130.6 13.1 1
Checking,
4 9.6 11.1 13.8 12.1 11.8 12.5 13.2 12.3 10.8 13.5 120.6 12.1 1
settlement
5 Gluing 46.0 46.0 46.0 42.0 44.0 43.0 46.0 49.0 45.0 45.0 452.0 45.2 4
6 Mounting 46.0 46.0 46.0 43.0 44.0 43.0 46.0 49.0 45.0 45.0 453.0 45.3 4
Pressing and
Figure 4. 7 20.7 21.5 16.5 18.3 19.5 20.8 14.8 16.5 18.0 17.0 183.5 18.3 2
checking
Kaizen event 1: cycle
time study worksheet Total 17 workers
before kaizen Total time: 192.5 seconds
In addition, other benefits of standardization and documentation of the working procedures Combining
include reduction in variability of products. The process stability can also be maintained lean tools
since clear end-to-end points for each process are listed. The results after improvement are application in
shown in Figure 6. The total time for the production is reduced to 157.4 seconds as shown in
Figure 6. Its standardized work combination table after kaizen is as shown in Figure 7. kaizen

55
Manual
Process: Date:
Auto
Time (second/copy) Operation time (second) Walking
Work Sequence
Manual Auto Walking Total 40 80 120 160 200
1 Stitching 18.9 18.9
2 Sequencing 39.6 39.6
3 Pressing 5.0 5.0 3.1 13.1
4 Checking and settlement 4.0 8.1 12.1
5 Gluing 45.2 45.2
Figure 5.
6 Mounting 45.3 45.3
Kaizen event 1:
Checking, pressing and
7
settlement
6.0 5.0 7.3 18.3 standardized work
combination table
before kaizen
Total 118.8 55.2 18.5 192.5

Process: Date:
Work Sequence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total Avg. Workers
1 Stitching 23.6 21.5 16.3 16.7 21.6 22.5 16.8 16.8 15.0 17.9 188.7 18.9 2
2 Sequencing 27.9 30.0 38.0 30.0 31.0 33.0 27.0 30.0 37.0 28.5 312.4 31.2 3
Pressing and
3 12.0 11.5 10.0 10.5 9.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 8.0 9.0 99.0 9.9 1
checking

4 Gluing 46.0 45.0 46.0 42.0 44.0 46.0 46.0 48.0 45.0 45.0 453.0 45.3 4

5 Mounting 46.0 45.0 46.0 42.0 44.0 46.0 46.0 49.0 45.0 45.0 454.0 45.4 4
Checking,
6 pressing and 9.4 9.4 10.1 10.1 9.6 9.6 10.5 9.8 9.7 11.1 99.2 9.9 1 Figure 6.
settlement
Kaizen event 1: cycle
Total 15 workers time study worksheet
after kaizen
Total time: 160.6 seconds

Manual
Process: Date:
Auto
Time (second/copy) Operation time (second) Walking
Work Sequence
Manual Auto Walking Total 40 80 120 160 200
1 Stitching 18.9 18.9
2 Sequencing 31.2 31.2
3 Pressing and checking 3.9 6.0 9.9
4 Gluing 45.3 45.3
5 Mounting 45.4 45.4
Figure 7.
6
Pressing, checking and
4.0 3.0 2.9 9.9 Standardized work
settlement
combination table
after kaizen
Total 103.4 54.3 2.9 160.6
IJPPM 5.1.3 Line balancing. Line balancing is useful and a common applicable tool for this printing
67,1 company. It is used to calculate the number of workers or machines needed in each
procedure. Otherwise, idle machines or workers may exist if the balancing rate is low.
This concept is easy for workers to understand.
Generally, the balancing rate and productivity are correlated. Balancing rate is
influenced by standard time and number of workers, which, in turn, influences the
56 productivity of the company. A higher balancing rate represents a better performance.
Therefore, in order to boost the productivity further, promoting the line balancing is a good
way to do so.
Before kaizen. Before kaizen event, the time required for every procedure was unevenly
distributed. The average working hours were recorded in cycle time study in previous
section. The differences among operations time for different working procedures were quite
large. The loading of workers was uneven. Some workers may slow down if their standard
time is shorter than the standard time in downstream operations. Therefore, the overall
efficiency is reduced. Before applying the lean tools, the decisions on line loading is purely
based on the experience of line leader. After using the line balancing, the line leader
calculates the required number of worker that would enable a balance rate so as to maximize
productivity and smoothen material flow. As shown in Figure 8, the shaded area is the
operation time used in that process, a lot of waiting and the excess capacity emerged.
The idle time is the longest at the first step and the final step. The bottleneck operation in
the production process was step 2 which adversely affect the balancing rate hence the
productivity. They are 86.3 percent and 16.3 copies per hour per person, respectively, before
kaizen as shown in Figure 8.
After kaizen. After kaizen, the balancing rate and productivity increased to 90 percent
and 21.3 copies per hour per person as the working procedures and workers were reduced
(Figure 9). The operation time differences among different working procedures became
smaller. The loading of workers is more even. For example, steps 2 and 3 share workload
from other processes. Therefore, the idle time during process is significantly reduced.
In kaizen event, the workers’ participation is crucial; once the solution was developed by
them, they will accept the change easily. The new instructions were developed for new
worker training.
5.1.4 Overall results after kaizen. In this case, layout, standardized work and line
balancing are used together as useful tools to improve the productivity. The result is shown
in Table I. The performance before and after improvements was compared. The most
obvious change is the walking time since the layout of the work place is better designed.

14 Takt
Time
Operation time

12
10
(second)

8
6 13.2 13.1 12.1
9.5 11.3 11.3
4 9.2
2
0
Stitching Sequencing Pressing Checking, Gluing Mounting Pressing and
settlement checking

Standard working 18.9 39.6 13.1 12.1 45.2 45.3 18.3

hours (sec):

Figure 8. No. of workers 2 3 1 1 4 4 2

Kaizen event 1: (person):
loading balancing Average working 9.5 13.2 13.1 12.1 11.3 11.3 9.2
diagram before kaizen hours (sec)
Total: 17 workers
 Operation time 14
12
Takt
Time
Combining
10 lean tools
(second)

8
6
application in
11.3 11.4
4 9.5 10.4 9.9 9.9
kaizen
2
0
Stitching Sequencing Pressing and
checking
Gluing Mounting Checking,
pressing and
57
settlement
Standard working 18.9 31.2 9.9 45.3 45.4 9.9
hours (sec):
No. of workers 2 3 1 4 4 1
Figure 9.
(person):
Kaizen event 1:
Average working 9.5 10.4 9.9 11.3 11.4 9.9 loading balancing
hours (sec) diagram after kaizen
Total: 15 workers

Also, after changing the layout, the distance of material flow reduced which helps to reduce
the walking time and increase the productivity as well. Since the department that is involved
in this kaizen event is more labor intensive, the overall capacity is determined by the
productivity of the worker instead of equipment. The number of workers was reduced from
17 to 15 as a result of the improvement from the kaizen event. The material flow is faster
that leads to shorter consumption periods and defects are detected in almost real time as a
result of quality improvement. The balancing rate is increased as a result of variation
reduction (mura) among the processes. The increase in productivity is beneficial to
company. On the other hand, improving the loading in some steps can alleviate the
workload of some workers who perform highly repetitive motions.

5.2 Kaizen event 2: packaging department

Similarly, the second kaizen event examined the packaging department and the results
illustrate how the principles of lean were successfully applied in the same printing company.
It makes improvements gradually obtained by the worker’s ideas.
The same tools are used in packaging department to improve the work process,
including standardized layout, standardized work and line balancing. This time, we focused
on changing the design of layout that could be applied efficiently in packaging department
due to two reasons. First, the facilities and machines involved are small and can be easily
moved around. Second, the cost of machines like taping machine is relatively low. Therefore,
it is easy for them to rearrange the layout.
We found that the existing layout is insufficient and thus was negatively influencing the
movement and the productivity of the workers. We first rearranged the layout of packaging
department so as to minimize the transportation distance and movement of workers.
As kaizen stresses continuous improvement, we had improved the layout for two times in
the layout section. The most obvious change is reducing the dependence on workers by
adding a conveyor in the production process which greatly speeds up the production.
The procedures in the packaging department are simple, so the existing procedures did not
change. Similar to the first case, we then standardized the working procedures into a new
worksheet. This is followed by a series of continuous improvement of the productivity by
line balancing. Finally, we compared the previous performance with the overall results
after kaizen implementation at the production line. The measurement is similarly based on
distance of material flow, worker’s walking time, number of workers, productivity and
balancing rate.
IJPPM 5.2.1 Facility layout. The packaging process was composed of three procedures
67,1 including packing, taping and settlement, as shown in Figure 10.
Before kaizen. Before kaizen, first, the workers (no. 1) put the finished products into
paper boxes. Next, a worker (no. 2) was responsible for transferring the paper boxes onto the
taping machine. At last, another worker (no. 3) delivered the taped paper boxes to the last
station for settlement.
58 Figure 10 shows that the design of layout is inefficient. There are six workers working on
the same table where the space is extremely limited and one worker may easily disturb the
adjacent workers. The working speeds vary. Once a box is done, the worker has to transfer
it from the table to the taping machine and so on. The distance between the table and the
taping machine is not very long but the workers have to carry these heavy boxes repeatedly
many times daily. It causes not only low productivity but also leads to physical fatigue.
The total walking distance for the worker to transfer 10,500 books is 2.1 kilometers daily.
Also, the poor setting of a long table leads to an unequal transferring distance; the worker
may need to walk far away to collect the box. After that, another worker had to transfer the
taped boxes on the pallet repeatedly. Therefore, the workers in procedures 2 and 3 may
suffer repetitive strain or even injury by repeating this motion. The productivity at the
packaging process is 22 copies per hour per worker.
After kaizen. After kaizen, the first version of layout and material flow is shown
in Figure 11(a). A conveyor belt is set up in the center and each working table is placed next
to it. Once the boxes are packed, the worker just needs to transfer them onto the conveyor
belt, which replaces manual handling and brings the boxes onto the taping machine
automatically, accelerating the process and shortening the walking time and distance.
The total walking distance for the worker to transfer 10,500 books is 1.05 kilometers, which
is a decrease of 50 percent.
However, we found that this setting was not acceptable as the workers in procedure 1 had
to repeat the motion of lifting up the boxes which may cause them repetitive strain injury.

1 1 1 1 1 1

Table Procedures:
1. Packing
2 2. Taping
Figure 10. 3. Settlement
Taping
Kaizen event 2: layout
and material flow in machine
packaging department 3
before kaizen
Pallet

(a) (b) (c)

Table Table Table
Table Table Table

1
Table Table Table

Table Table Table

1
1
1

1
1
Conveyor belt

Conveyor belt

Table Table
Conveyor belt

1 1 Procedures:
1

1
1

Table Table 1. Packing

1 1 2. Taping
Figure 11.
1

Table Table
1
1

Kaizen event 2: 3. Settlement

improved layout and Taping Taping
2

Taping
2

machine machine
2

material flow in machine

packaging department 3 Pallet 3 Pallet 3 Pallet
after kaizen
Notes: (a) 1st version; (b) 2nd version; (c) 3rd version
This problem cannot be neglected. The second version tackles this problem by turning the Combining
position of table as shown in Figure 11(b). The workers could easily push the boxes directly lean tools
onto the conveyor belt, which reduces movement (muda). Most importantly, the problem is application in
resolved as the workers no longer need to lift the box. Subsequently, the tables are further
modified based on the worker’s idea to reduce the movement of workers (Figure 11(c)). kaizen
Notably, the company leadership played an important role in this continuous
improvement process. The leader kept encouraging the workers to suggest their points of 59
view. Therefore, the distance between table and conveyor belt is shortened, which allows the
workers to push the boxes onto the conveyor belt easily under this design. This aptly
illustrates how the workers participate continuously in improving the process. It echoes the
findings from Burke (2008); 95 percent of organizational changes that are evolutionary
consist of incremental improvements and steps to fix a problem or change a part of the
larger system. It is also found by Robinson (2009) that frontline idea is a crucial input for
any kaizen event.
5.2.2 Standardized work. The “Standardized work combination table” clearly lists the
stop and start points for each process. Manual operation is highly involved in the working
procedures. The walking time, which was deemed as muda, is 4 seconds. The total time for
production is 34 seconds per box as shown in Figure 12.
After kaizen. After kaizen, we found that it is possible to replace the manual handling by
a conveyor belt that directly transfers the boxes from the table to the taping machine.
Machines reduce process variations compared to manual operations. Therefore, process
stability can be ensured. The walking time which is viewed as non-value-added activity
between work steps was also reduced to 0 as shown in Figure 13.
5.2.3 Line balancing. Before kaizen. Before implementation of kaizen, the time required
for every procedure was evenly distributed. The operation time differences among every
working procedure were quite small. The balancing rate and productivity were 85.4 percent
and 22 boxes per hour per person, respectively, before kaizen as shown in Figure 14.
After kaizen, the balance rate declined 80 percent and productivity increased to 25 boxes
per hour per person (Figure 15(a)). The walking time and time for transferring semi-finished
products were greatly reduced; hence, the idle time in the process is significantly reduced.
The effect of this improvement is significant because of the higher productivity. Productivity
is a direct indicator of the production yield, which is based on the output volume, while the
balancing rate only reflects how well the machine or people have been utilized.

Manual
Process:
Auto
Time (second/box) Operation time (second) Walking
Work Sequence
Manual Auto Walking Total 25 50 75 100 125
Figure 12.
79.8
Kaizen event 2:
1 Packing 79.8
standardized work
2 Taping 3.0 4.3 4.0 11.3
combination table
3 Settlement 9.4 9.4 before kaizen
Total 92.2 4.3 4.0 100.5

Manual
Process:
Auto
Time (second/box) Operation time (second) Walking
Work Sequence
Manual Auto Walking Total 25 50 75 100 125
Figure 13.
Kaizen event 2:
1 Packing 51.1 51.1
standardized work
2 Taping 2.5 2.5 5.0
combination table
3 Settlement 9.7 9.7
after kaizen
Total 63.3 2.5 0.0 65.8
IJPPM 14 Takt

Operation time
12
67,1 Time

(second)
10
8
6 13.3
11.3 9.4
4
2
60 0
Packing Taping Settlement
Standard working 79.8 11.3 9.4
hours (sec):
No. of workers 6 1 1
Figure 14. (person):
Kaizen event 2:
loading balancing Average working 13.3 11.3 9.4
diagram before kaizen hours (sec):
Total: 8 workers

(a) (b)
14 Takt 14 Takt

Operation time
Operation time

12 Time 12 Time

(second)
10 10
(second)

8 8
6 9.7 6
4 8.5 4 8.5 7.3 7.4
2 5.0 2
0 0
Packing Taping Settlement Packing Taping Settlement
Standard working 51.1 5.0 9.7 Standard working 51.1 7.3 7.4
hours (sec): hours (sec):
No. of workers 6 1 1 No. of workers 6 1 1
(person): (person):
Average working 8.5 5.0 9.7 Average working 8.5 7.3 7.4
Figure 15. hours (sec): hours (sec):
Loading balancing Total: 8 workers Total: 8 workers
diagram after kaizen
Notes: (a) 1st version; (b) 2nd version

Again, the essence of kaizen is to make small improvements gradually. We found that the
balancing can be improved such that worker (no. 2) could share the workload of worker
(no. 3), the operation time of taping and settlement was modified from 5 and 9.7 seconds to
7.3 and 7.4 seconds, respectively. Hence, the new balancing rate is 91 percent. As shown in
Figure 15(b), the bottleneck in the production process is greatly reduced.
5.2.4 Overall results after kaizen. In this case, the three lean tools, layout, standardized
work and line balancing are used together to improve productivity. The results are shown in
Table II. The performance before and after improvements was compared. The most obvious
change is the walking time since the layout of the work place was better designed so that the

Before After % change

Distance of material flow 2.1 km 1.05 km −50

Walking time 4 sec 0 sec −100
Table II. No. of worker 8 8 0
Overall results of Productivity 22 boxes/hour/people 25 boxes/hour/people 13.6
kaizen event 2 Balancing rate 85% 91% 6
walking time became 0 and the distance of material flow is reduced, thus increasing Combining
productivity. Furthermore, the improved layout design and addition of the conveyor belt lean tools
alleviated the workload of some workers who performed highly repetitive motions and application in
eliminated the manual operations, which resulted in improved process stability.
After the investigation of the two cases, we found a remarkable improvement in kaizen
productivity and workload balance. Our findings show that these outcomes have resulted
from the application of the lean tools with the ideas generated by the workers in the two 61
cases. As shown in Figure 16, the common characteristics in the two cases support theory
building as the findings based on the two cases are sufficient to prove the results that can be
obtained by using a set of tools. This study highlights that the set of lean tools applied for
kaizen implementation is favorable to the production environment in printing industry.

6. Discussion
Based on our case findings, productivity can be improved through the use of the earlier
suggested lean tools that can improve the use of manpower and equipment by:
(1) an appropriate use of workforce to achieve the optimal work balance rate;
(2) standardization of workflow to reduce cycle time; and
(3) minimization of walking and moving distance by optimizing space utilization in the
layout design.
We formulate the relationship between the productivity and the set of suggested lean tools,
improved layout, standardized work and line balancing, in the following equation:
nP o
l
max k¼1 T k
Productivity : nP P P   o nP P Pm o (1)
l m n j j m n j
i¼1 t mi þt wi xij min i¼1 d i þ
k
min k¼1 j¼1 j¼1 j¼1 D j

where:
m X
X n
Tk ¼ xkij t ij
j¼1 i¼1

where d ji is the distance moving from work element i to next work element in station j; Dj the
distance moving from station j to next station j+1; k the number of operator; m the number
of station; n the number of work element; tij the standard time of work element i in station j;
j
Tk the total cycle time of work element allocated to operator k; t mi the manual working time
j
required in work element i in station j; t wi the walking time required in work element i to
next work element in station j; xkij the decision variable of element i in station j which is
assigned to operator k.

Context
People
1. Small equipment
2. Movable equipment 1. Team-based approach
Tools 3. Segmentatized work with leading by team
1. Layout 4. Small product size leader
2. Standardized work 5. Adjustable material 2. Frontline idea Figure 16.
3. Line balancing movement generation The common
6. Highly repeatable 3. Understanding of characteristics in the
process lean principle two cases
IJPPM Maximization of output can be achieved by optimizing the work balance rate in the
67,1 numerator of Equation (1). As some of the work sequences may be a bottleneck and obstruct
the continuous flow of material flow, waiting time will be longer and the whole process will
slow down. Line balancing ensures that the working time for workers can be evenly
allocated. With the reduction of the waiting time, the entire production flow will be
smoothened, thus improving the number of output per hour per worker.
62 In Equation (1), the two variables in the denominator relate to layout and standardized work.
Standardization of work will standardize the number of required workers and the cycle time of
operation. Before kaizen, some of the work sequences were duplicated. After streamlining the
workflow by eliminating redundant steps and combining some of the work procedures,
the number of required workers is reduced. With the reduced number of work procedures and
standardized processing time for every procedure, the resultant production time can be shortened.
In re-designing the layout, we aim to reduce the unnecessary transport time and material
or workers’ movement among the workstations. After re-designing the layout, the transport
time required for movement among the workstations are shortened as the workstations are
placed closer to each other. As a result, the moving distance of material in between
workstation is reduced. The material flow is faster and leads to short cycle time.
As inventory is reduced, the safety and space are also improved.
The findings and insights from this study are not unique to the printing industry.
The findings on the combined use of lean tools from this study can be extended to other
industries where the operations attributes involving people, process and equipment are
similar. In particular, the insights gained from this study can be applied to similar contexts
where the production operations involve a mix of processes that are identifiable as labor
intensive and processes that required the use of equipment that can be shifted easily.

7. Conclusion
The findings from the two case studies offer evidence of the benefits from applying a set of
combined lean tools for productivity improvement in kaizen events in the printing industry.
On the whole, this study has showed that proper implementation of kaizen can lead to quality
improvement, reductions in cycle time and WIP and productivity advancement. The results of
this study illustrate the use of specified lean tools such as line balancing, standardized work
and standardized layout together in contexts that possess specific characteristics so as to speed
up the kaizen implementation process, reduce waste and increase throughput in the process of
printing industry. In addition, we formulate a mathematical expression to succinctly represent
the implications of the three specific lean tools on productivity.
As we have mentioned in the literature review, lean tools are now frequently applied
in manufacturing industry. Extant studies have shown that kaizen is not limited to
manufacturing industry; it has been applied in the service industry as well. Few studies
have addressed the application of a combination of lean tools to gain effective results in
kaizen events. This study advances the lean literature by showing that lean tools can be
applied in contexts that possess characteristics that are similar to the printing industry.
While this study makes a significant contribution both in terms of application and
providing empirical evidence for the use of a combined set of lean tools in kaizen event
results within a printing organization, further research is needed. In particular, further
studies can be conducted to investigate which industries are suitable for utilizing these tools
in kaizen application. Additionally, future studies can be carried out to develop a general
framework that is useful in understanding the relationship between these. Further research
can also focus on issues relating to ideas generation from frontline people so that a
continuous improvement culture can be developed within the organization. Finally,
we believe that the findings from this study can generally be extended to other industries
that possess similar operating conditions.
References Combining
Abolassani, A., Layfield, K. and Gopalakrishnan, B. (2016), “Lean and US manufacturing industry: lean tools
popularity of practices and implementation barriers”, International Journal of Productivity and application in
Performance, Vol. 66 No. 7, pp. 875-897.
kaizen
Anon (2004), “Kaizen at Nippon: behind the theory: new research offers insights into how a
fundamental Japanese concept functions as a working practice”, Strategic Direction, Vol. 20
No. 5, pp. 23-25. 63
Aoki, K. (2008), “Transferring Japanese Kaizen activities to overseas plants in China”, International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 518-539.
Bane, R. (2002), “Leading edge quality approaches in non-manufacturing organizations”, ASQ World
Conference on Quality and Improvement Proceedings, Milwaukee, WI, p. 245.
Bateman, N. and Rich, N. (2003), “Companies’ perceptions of inhibitors and enablers for process
improvement activities”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 22
No. 5, pp. 185-199.
Benders, J. and van Bijsterveld, M. (2000), “Leaning on lean: the reception of a management fashion in
Germany”, New Technology, Work and Employment, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 50-64.
Betts, J. and Mahmoud, K.I. (1992), “Assembly line balancing in the clothing industry allowing for
varying skills of operatives”, International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 4
No. 4, pp. 28-33.
Bicheno, J. (2001), “Kaizen and kaikaku”, Manufacturing Operations and Supply Chain Management:
The Lean Approach, Cengage Learning EMEA, pp. 175-184.
Boyer, K.K. (1996), “An assessment of managerial commitment to lean production”, International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 16 No. 9, pp. 48-59.
Boysen, N., Fliedner, M. and Scholl, A. (2006), “A classification of assembly line balancing problems”,
European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 183 No. 2, pp. 674-693.
Bradley, J. and Willett, J. (2004), “Cornell students participate in lord corporation’s Kaizen projects”,
Interface, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 451-459.
Burke, M.J. (2008), “On the skilled aspect of employee engagement”, Industrial and Organizational
Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 70-71.
Carlo, F.D., Arleo, M.A., Borgia, O. and Tucci, M. (2013), “Layout design for a low capacity
manufacturing line: a case study”, International Journal of Engineering Business Management:
Special Issue Innovations in Fashion Industry, Vol. 5, pp. 1-10.
Chan, K.C.C., Hui, P., Yeung, K.W. and Ng, F.S.F. (1998), “Handling the assembly line balancing
problem in the clothing industry using a genetic algorithm”, International Journal of Clothing
Science and Technology, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 21-37.
Chase, R.B., Jacobs, F.R. and Qquilano, N.J. (2006), Operations Management for Competitive Advantage,
11th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Chiarini, A. (2013), “Waste savings in patient transportation inside large hospitals using lean thinking
tools and logistic solutions”, Leadership in Health Services, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 356-367.
Cua, K.O., McKone, K.E. and Schroeder, R.G. (2001), “Relationships between implementation of TQM,
JIT, and TPM and manufacturing performance”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 19
No. 6, pp. 675-694.
De Treville, S. and Antonakis, J. (2006), “Could lean production job design be intrinsically motivating?
Contextual, configurational, and levels-of-analysis issues”, Journal of Operations Management,
Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 99-123.
Elgar, T. and Smith, C. (1994), Global Japanization: The Transnational Transformation for the Labour
Process, Routledge, London.
Eloot, K., Huang, A. and Lehnich, M. (2013), “McKinsey Quarterly: a new era for manufacturing
in China”, available at: www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/
a-new-era-for-manufacturing-in-china (accessed October 20, 2016).
IJPPM Forza, C. (1996), “Work organization in lean production and traditional plants: what are the
67,1 differences?”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 16 No. 2,
pp. 42-62.
Gao, S. and Low, S.P. (2013), “Understanding the application of Kaizen methods in construction firms in
China”, Journal of Technology Management in China, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 18-33.
Hopp, W. and Spearman, M. (2004), “To pull or not to pull: what is the question?”, Manufacturing &
64 Service Operations Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 133-148.
Hui, C. and Ng, S. (1999), “A study of the effect of time variations for assembly line balancing in the
clothing industry”, International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 11 No. 4,
pp. 181-188.
Imai, M. (1986), Kaizen: The Key to Japan’s Competitive Success, Random House, New York, NY.
James-Moore, S. and Gibbons, A. (1997), “Is lean manufacture universally relevant? An investigative
methodology”, International Journal of Operations & Production, Vol. 17 No. 9, pp. 889-911.
Koopmans, T. and Beckmann, M. (1957), “Assignment problems and the location of economic
activities”, Econometrica, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 53-76.
Laughlin, K.K. and Skrabec, J.Q. (1995), “Increasing competitiveness with a simplified cellular process”,
Industrial Engineering, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 30-37.
Lillrank, P., Shani, A.B. and Lindberg, P. (2001), “Continuous improvement: exploring alternative
organizational designs”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 41-55.
Lyu, J. (1996), “Applying Kaizen and automation to process reengineering”, Journal of Manufacturing
Systems, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 125-132.
MacDuffie, J. and Sethuraman, K. (1996), “Product variety and manufacturing performance:
evidence from the international automotive assembly plant study”, Management Science, Vol. 42
No. 3, pp. 350-369.
Melnyk, S.A. and Calantone, R.J. (1998), “Short-term action in pursuit of long-term improvements:
introducing Kaizen events”, Production and Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 9 No. 4,
pp. 39-69.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, Sage,
London.
Narasimhan, R. and Swink, M. (2006), “Disentangling leanness and agility: an empirical investigation”,
Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 440-457.
Ohno, T. (1988), Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production, Productivity Press, Toyko.
Ongkunaruk, P. and Wongsatit, W. (2014), “An ECRS-based line balancing concept: a case study of a
frozen chicken producer”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 678-692.
Patton, M.Q. (1990), Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, Sage, London.
Pujo, P., Khabous, L.E. and Ounnar, F. (2015), “Experimental assessment of the productivity
improvement when using U-shaped production cells with variable takt time”, International
Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 17-38.
Quinlan, C. and Zikmund, W.G. (2015), Business Research Methods, 1st ed., Cengage Learning.
Radnor, Z. (2010), “Transferring lean into government”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology
Management, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 411-428.
Ren, C., Cohen, Y., Frangipane, B., Garofalo, M., Metz, C., Barlotti, C. and Cozzari, G. (2015), “Re-layout
of an assembly area: a case study at Bosch Rexroth Oil Control”, Assembly Automation, Vol. 35
No. 1, pp. 94-103.
Research and Markets (2011), “China’s Printing Industry Report, 2010-2012 – the country expects to
become the world’s second largest printing power by 2015”, Business Wire, Vol. 20 No. 9.
Robinson, A.G. and Schroeder, D.M. (2009), “The role of front-line idea in Lean performance
improvement”, The Quality Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 27-40.
Sabuncuoglu, I., Erel, E. and Tanyer, M. (2000), “Assembly line balancing using genetic algorithms”, Combining
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 295-310. lean tools
Sakakibara, S., FlynnB, B., Schroeder, R.G. and Morris, W.T. (1997), “The impact of just-in-time application in
manufacturing and its infrastructure on manufacturing performance”, Management Science,
Vol. 43 No. 9, pp. 1246-1257. kaizen
Sekaran, U. and Bougie, R. (2013), Research Methods for Business, Wiley, West Sussex.
Shah, R. and Ward, P.T. (2003), “Lean manufacturing: context, practice bundles, and performance”, 65
Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 129-149.
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.
Shang, G. and Low, S.P. (2013), “Understanding the application of Kaizen methods in construction
firms in China”, Journal of Technology Management in China, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 18-33.
Sohal, A.S. (1996), “Developing a lean production organization: an Australian case study”, International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 91-102.
Spear, S. and Bowen, H.K. (1999), “Decoding the DNA of the Toyota Production System”, Harvard
Business Review, September-October, pp. 97-106.
Tay, S. (2008), “Lean manufacturing performance in China: assessment of 65 manufacturing plants”,
Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 217-234.
Vasilash, G.S. (1997), “Getting better-fast”, Automotive Design & Production, Vol. 109 No. 19, pp. 66-68.
White, R.E. and Prybutok, V. (2001), “The relationship between JIT practices and type of production
system”, Omega: The International Journal of Management Science, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 113-124.
Whitmore, T. (2008), “Standardized work”, Manufacturing Engineering, Vol. 140 No. 5, pp. 171-179.
Womack, J. and Jones, D. (1996), Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation,
Simon and Schuster, London.
Womack, J., Jones, D.T. and Roos, D. (1990), The Machine that Changed the World: Based on
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 5-Million Dollar 5-Year Study on the Future of the
Automobile, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Wright, C. and Lund, J. (2006), “Variations on a lean theme: work restructuring in retail distribution”,
New Technology, Work and Employment, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 59-74.
Xu, Z., Lin, J. and Lin, D. (2008), “Networking and innovation in SMEs: evidence from
Guangdong province, China”, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 15
No. 4, pp. 788-801.
Yin, R.K. (1994), “Case study research”, Design and Methods, Sage, London.
Zarbo, R.J. (2012), “Creating and sustaining a lean culture of continuous process improvement”,
American Society for Clinical Pathology, Vol. 138 No. 3, pp. 321-326.

Further reading
Anon (n.d), “Print process descriptions: printing industry overview”, available at: www.pneac.org/
printprocesses/general/ (accessed April 7, 2016).
Maalouf, M. and Gammelgaard, B. (2016), “Managing paradoxical tensions during the implementation
of lean capabilities for improvement”, International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, Vol. 36 No. 6, pp. 687-709.

Corresponding author
Chi On Chan can be contacted at: cochan@hksyu.edu

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

View publication stats