Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
IFAC PapersOnLine 54-1 (2021) 504–509
Algorithm-Use in the Field of Lean Management Principles:
Algorithm-Use
Algorithm-Use in the Field of Lean Management Principles:
Statein
Algorithm-Use
Algorithm-Use ofthe
in
in theField
the
the Field
of
Art and
Field of
of
Lean
NeedManagement
Lean
Lean for ResearchPrinciples:
Management
Management Principles:
Principles:
State
Algorithm-Use
State of
in
of the
the
the Art
Field
Art and
of
and Need
Lean
Need for Research
Management
for ResearchPrinciples:
State
State of the Art and Need for Research
State of
of the Art
Laura
the Art and
and Need
Baumann. for
for Research
Julia Arlinghaus
Need Research
Laura Baumann. Julia Arlinghaus
Laura
Laura Baumann.
Baumann. Julia Julia Arlinghaus
Arlinghaus
Otto von Guericke Laura
Laura Baumann.
University
Baumann. Julia
Julia Arlinghaus
Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
Arlinghaus
Otto von Guericke
(e-mail: University Magdeburg,
laura.baumann@ovgu.de; Magdeburg, Germany
julia.arlinghaus@ovgu.de).
Otto
Otto von
von Guericke
Guericke University
University Magdeburg,
Magdeburg, Magdeburg,
Magdeburg, Germany
Germany
(e-mail:
Otto von laura.baumann@ovgu.de;
Guericke University julia.arlinghaus@ovgu.de).
Magdeburg, Magdeburg,
(e-mail:
Otto laura.baumann@ovgu.de;
von Guericke
(e-mail: University Magdeburg,
laura.baumann@ovgu.de; Magdeburg, Germany
julia.arlinghaus@ovgu.de).
julia.arlinghaus@ovgu.de). Germany
(e-mail:
(e-mail: laura.baumann@ovgu.de;
laura.baumann@ovgu.de; julia.arlinghaus@ovgu.de).
julia.arlinghaus@ovgu.de).
Abstract: Automated approaches that harness digitalization’s capabilities could provide a solution for
Abstract:
companies Automated
struggling approaches
with the still thatcomplicated
harness digitalization’s capabilitiesleaner.
process of becoming could This provide a solution
literature reviewfor
Abstract:
Abstract: Automated
Automated approaches
approaches that
that harness
harness digitalization’s
digitalization’s capabilities
capabilities could
could provide
provide aa solution
solution for
for
companies
Abstract:
analyzes struggling
Automated
algorithm-like with the
approaches
methods still
that complicated
developedharness to process
digitalization’s
introduce of
lean becoming
capabilities
management leaner.
could
methods This
provide literature
in a solution
companies, reviewfor
to
companies
Abstract:
companies struggling
Automated
struggling with
with the
approaches
the still
that
still complicated
harness
complicated process
digitalization’s
process of
of becoming
capabilities
becoming leaner.
could
leaner. This
provide
This literature
a solution
literature review
reviewfor
analyzes
companies
assess or algorithm-like
struggling
optimize their methods
with the
performance developed
still complicated
or to to introduce
modify process
them lean
for of management
becoming
this specific leaner.methods
environment, This in companies,
literature
thus review
providing toa
analyzes
companies
analyzes algorithm-like
struggling methods
with the developed
still complicated to introduce
process lean
of management
becoming leaner.methods This in companies,
literature review to
assess
analyzes or algorithm-like
comprehensive optimize
algorithm-likeoverview
methods
their performance
methods
of the current
developed
or to
developed state
to
modify
to introduce
them for
introduce lean
inthis
lean management
specific
management methods
environment,
methods in
inthuscompanies,
providing
companies, to
to a
assess
analyzes
assess or
or
comprehensive
optimize
algorithm-like
optimize their
their
overview
performance
methods
performance
of the current
or
developed
or to
to toof
modify
modify
state of
research
them
introduce
them
research
for
lean
for
in
this
this
this
this
field. Our
specific
management
specific
field. Our
analysis
methods reveals
environment,
environment,
analysis inthus
thus
reveals
that these
providing
companies,
providing
that toaa
these
assess
algorithms or
or optimize
comprehensive
assess fail to
optimize their
take
overview performance
theirfull ofadvantage
the
performance current or
of to
or the modify
state
to of
modify them
capabilities
them of
research for
forin this
this
this specific
digitalization.
field.
specific Ourenvironment,
We identify need
analysis
environment, thus
thusfor
reveals providing
research,
that
providing these aa
comprehensive
algorithms
comprehensive failtheto overview
take
overview full of
of the
advantage
the current
current of state
the
state of research
capabilities
of researchof in this field.
digitalization.
in this field. Our
OurWe analysis
identify
analysis reveals
need
reveals for that these
research,
that these
especially
algorithms
comprehensive infail to measurement
take
overview full of
ofadvantage performance
theofcurrent of the improvements
statecapabilities
of researchof achieved
digitalization.
in this with
field. with
OurWe the algorithms,
identify
analysis need
reveals the
for level
research,
that of
these
algorithms
especially infail to take full advantage of the capabilities of digitalization. We identify need for research,
algorithms
automation
especially
algorithms ininthe
fail the
the
fail to
to
measurement
take full
algorithms,
measurement
take full advantage
andof
advantage
performance
the of
performance
of the
adherence
the
improvements
capabilities of
to lean principles
improvements
capabilities of
achieved
digitalization. We the
in the algorithm-like
achieved
digitalization. withWe the
algorithms,
identify
identify need
methods.
algorithms,
need
the
for
the
for
level
research,
level
research,
of
of
especially
automation
especially in
inin the
the
the measurement
algorithms,
measurement andof
of performance
the adherence
performance improvements
to lean
improvementsprinciplesachieved
in
achieved the with the
algorithm-like
with the algorithms,
methods.
algorithms, the
the level
level of
of
Copyright
automation
especially
automation ©
inin
in 2021
the
the
the The Authors.
algorithms,
measurement
algorithms, and
andThis
of the is an
performance
the open
adherence
adherence access
to article
lean
improvements
to lean under
principles
principles the
in
achieved
in CC
the
the BY-NC-ND
algorithm-like
with the
algorithm-like license
methods.
algorithms,
methods. the level of
Keywords: Lean management, lean manufacturing, process automation, algorithms, mathematical
(http://creativecommons.org/
automation
automation
Keywords: in
in
Leanthe
the algorithms,
algorithms,
management, licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
and
and the
the
lean adherence
adherence
manufacturing, to
to lean
lean principles
principles
process in
in the
the algorithm-like
algorithm-like
automation, algorithms, methods.
methods.mathematical
approach,
Keywords: structured
Lean procedure, literature
management, lean review
manufacturing, process automation, algorithms, mathematical
Keywords:
approach,
Keywords: Lean
structured
Lean management,
procedure, literature
management, lean
lean manufacturing,
review
manufacturing, process
process automation,
automation, algorithms,
algorithms, mathematical
mathematical
approach,
Keywords:
approach, structured
structured procedure,
Lean management,
procedure, literature review
lean manufacturing,
literature review process automation, algorithms, mathematical
approach, structured procedure,
approach, structured procedure, literature review literature review
algorithmizing lean management. We systematically review
1. INTRODUCTION algorithmizing lean management. We systematically review
1. INTRODUCTION literature on mathematical
algorithmizing lean management. approaches We in the field of
systematically lean
review
1. INTRODUCTION algorithmizing
literature
algorithmizing on lean
lean management.
mathematical
management. approaches We
We systematically
in the
systematicallyfield review
of lean
review
The lean concept became 1. INTRODUCTION
a popular research field at the latest literature management,
literature
algorithmizing on posing
mathematical the
lean management. research
approaches question,
in
We question, the
systematicallyfield“How of are
lean
review
The lean concept 1.
1.
became INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
a popular research field at the latest management, on mathematical
posing the approaches
research in the field“How of lean
are
when
The Womack
lean concept et al.
became published
aa popular their book
research in
field1990at and
the has
latest literature
algorithm-like
management,
literature on mathematical
methods
posing
on mathematical the approaches
used
research
approaches to in
improvethe
question,
in the fieldfield of lean
production
“How are
of lean
The
when lean concept
Womack et became
al. published populartheirresearch
book field
in 1990at the
and latest
has management,
algorithm-like
management, posing
methods
posing the
the research
used
research to question,
improve
question, “How
production
“How are
are
The
when lean
retained concept
its
Womack became
relevance
et al. ever aa popular
published sincetheirresearch
(Torkabadi
book field
in andat
1990 the latest
Mayorga
and has performance
algorithm-like
management, in a lean
methods
posing the manufacturing
used
research to improve
question, environment?”
production
“How are
The
when lean
retained concept
Womack et
its relevance became
al. published
ever popular
sincetheirresearch
book
(Torkabadi field
in 1990at the
and
and Mayorga latest
has algorithm-like
performance
algorithm-like methods
inmethods
a lean used
used to
manufacturing
to improve
improve production
environment?”
production
when
2018).
retainedWomack
Confronted
its et
relevance al.
with published
current
ever their
challenges
since book
(Torkabadi ofin 1990
and and
manufacturing,
Mayorga has Specifically,
performance
algorithm-like wein analyze
a
methods leanthe lean
used principles
manufacturing
to improve applied, examine
environment?”
production
when
retained
2018). Womack
its et
relevance
Confronted al. published
ever
withsizes current sincetheir book
(Torkabadi in 1990
and and has performance
Specifically,
Mayorga Specifically, wein a
analyze leanthe manufacturing
lean principles environment?”
applied, examine
retained
such its
2018).asConfronted
retained relevance
varying
Confronted
its relevance withever
lot current
ever andchallenges
since
since (Torkabadi
growing
challenges
(Torkabadi
ofproduct
manufacturing,
and
and Mayorga
of manufacturing, variety, the
manufacturing,
Mayorga
performance
organizational
performance
Specifically, we
we
in a
a lean
levels
inanalyze
analyze lean targeted
the
the
manufacturing
lean with the methods,
principles
manufacturing
lean principles
environment?”
applied,
environment?”
applied,
identify
examine
examine
2018).
such as varying with
lot current
sizes andchallenges
growing of product variety, the organizational
Specifically,
the kinds of we levels
analyze
algorithms targeted
the
used, lean
and with
principles
evaluatethe methods,
applied,
the identify
examine
measurement
2018).
such
2018). Confronted
manufacturers
as varying
Confronted needlotwith
with current
efficient
sizes
current andchallenges
production
growing
challenges of
of manufacturing,
strategies
product now more the
variety,
manufacturing, organizational
Specifically,
organizational levels
we analyze
levels targeted
the lean
targeted with
principles
with the
the methods,
applied,
methods, identify
examine
identify
such as
manufacturersvarying needlotlot sizes
efficient and growing
production product
strategies now variety,
more the kinds
the kinds of
organizational algorithms
orderlevels used,
targeted and
needwith evaluatethe the measurement
such
than
such as
ever
manufacturers
as
manufacturers
varying
(Chan
varying needlot
need
et sizes
al. 2009).
efficient
sizes
efficient
and growing
production
and Leanstrategies
growing
production
product
management
product
strategies now
now
and the
variety,
more
variety,
more
parameters
the kinds
parameters
of
of
inalgorithms
organizational
in algorithms
order
to identify
levels
to
used,
targeted
used,
identify
and
and
need
evaluate
with
evaluate
for the methods,
for research. the
the
research.
measurement
methods,
measurement
identify
identify
than ever
manufacturers
combinations (Chan
need
of leanet al.
efficient
management 2009).
productionLean
with management
strategies
different now and
more
production the kinds
parameters ofin algorithms
order to used,
identify and
need evaluate
for the
research. measurement
than ever
manufacturers
than ever (Chan
need
(Chan et al.
efficient
et al. 2009).
production
2009). Lean
Lean management
strategies
management now more and
and the
We kinds
parameters
structureofin algorithms
order to
the remainder used,
identify need and
of this evaluate
for the
research.
paper measurement
as follows: In
combinations of lean management with different etproduction parameters in
than ever
strategies
eversuch
combinations
than
combinations
(Chan
ofaslean
(Chan
of leanet
agile al.
al. 2009).
manufacturing
management
et management 2009). with Lean
with
Lean management
(Maharaja
different
management
different production
production
and
al. 2018),
and We parameters
We structure
Section 2, wein order
order to
to identify
identify
the remainder
present
need
need
the theoreticalof this for research.
forbackground.
research.
paper as follows:
In Section In
strategies
combinations
green such
production as
of agile
lean manufacturing
management
(Carvalho et al. with(Maharaja
different
2017) et al. 2018),
oretproduction
integrated We structure
structure the
the remainder
remainder of
of this
this paper
paper as
as follows:
follows: In
In
strategies
combinations
strategies such
such as
of
as agile
lean
agile manufacturing
management
manufacturing with(Maharaja
different
(Maharaja al. 2018),
production Section
We
3, 2,
westructure we
introduce present
the the
theremainder theoretical
methodology of this background.
paper
applied. In as In Section
follows:
Section 4, we In
green production
strategies
resilience such as
engineering (Carvalho
agile manufacturing
(Azadeh et al.al.2017)
et 2017)
(Maharajaare oret
in et
wide
al.
al. 2018),
integrated
2018),
use to Section
We
Section 2,
structure
2, we
we present
the
present the
remainder
the theoretical
of
theoretical this background.
paper
background. as In
In Section
follows:
Section In
green
green production
strategies such
production as agile(Carvalho
manufacturing
(Carvalho al.
al. 2017)
(Maharaja
2017) or
or integrated
etwide
al. 2018),
integrated 3, we introduce
Section
outline 2,
and we the methodology
present
discuss thethe theoretical
results applied.
obtained. In Section
background.
In Section In 4, we
Section
5, we
resilience
green
improve engineering
production
operational (Azadeh
(Carvalho et
et
performanceal.
al.2017)
2017)
andare in
orhave use
integrated
been to 3,
3, we
Section
we introduce
2, we
introduce the
present
the methodology
the theoretical
methodology applied. In
background.
applied. In Section
Section In 4,
Section
4, we
we
resilience
green engineering
production (Azadeh
(Carvalho et al.
al.2017)
2017) are in wide
orhave use
integrated to outline
3, we andour discuss theinresults obtained. In Section 5,
resilience
improve
resilience
implemented
improve
engineering
operational
engineering
in many
operational
(Azadeh
(Azadeh et
performance
et
performance
al.
al. 2017)
2017)
manufacturing and
and
are
are in
in wide
wide
have
use
been
use
organizations been
to
to we introduce
summarize
outline
3,
outline
summarize
and
introduce
and
the
the methodology
findings
discuss
discuss
our findings
the a conclusion.
results
methodology
the in results
a
applied.
obtained.
applied. In
obtained.
conclusion.
In
In
Section
In Section
Section 5,
Section
4,
4, we
5,
we
we
resilience engineering (Azadeh et al. 2017) are in wide use to outline and discuss the results obtained.
improve
implemented
improve
(Stichhauerova
implemented
operational
operational
and
in
manyperformance
in Pelloneova
many
manufacturing
performance
2018).
manufacturing
and
and have
organizations
have
organizations
been
been summarize
outline
summarize andour
our findings
discuss
findings theinin results obtained. In Section 5, we
aa conclusion.
conclusion.
In Section 5, we
improve
implemented
(Stichhauerova operational
in
and many
Pelloneova performance
manufacturing
2018). and organizations
have been summarize our findings
2. THEORETICAL in aa conclusion.
BACKGROUND
implemented
(Stichhauerova in
and many
Pelloneova manufacturing
2018). organizations summarize our findings in
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND conclusion.
implemented
(Stichhauerova
The road to and inlean many
Pelloneova manufacturing
manufacturing2018). remainsorganizations
long and 2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
(Stichhauerova
(Stichhauerova
The road toThe and
andleanPelloneova
Pelloneova
manufacturing2018).
2018). remains longusually and Lean thinking 2. THEORETICAL
has its origin in the BACKGROUND
Toyota Production System
complicated.
The road to introduction
lean manufacturing of lean management
remains long and Lean thinking 2.
2. THEORETICAL
THEORETICAL
has its origin in BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
the Toyota Production System
The road
complicated. to lean
Thelean manufacturing
introduction remains
of leanprocesses
management long and
usually (Ohno 1988) and aims to eliminate waste and generate an
The
ends road
in failure
complicated.
The road to
The
to or manufacturing
even
introduction
lean disrupts
manufacturing of lean remains
management
remains long
instead
long and
usually
andof LeanLean
(Ohno
thinking
thinking
1988)
has
has
and
its
its
aims
origin
origin
to
in
in the
the
eliminate
Toyota
Toyota
waste
Production
Production
and generate
System
System an
complicated.
ends in The
failure introduction
or even of
disrupts lean management
processes usually
instead of Lean
(Ohno
Lean thinking
efficient and
1988)
thinking has
and its
streamlined
aims
has its origin
to
origin in
processthe
eliminate Toyota
in the Toyotaflowwaste Production
that promises
and
Production generateSystem
cost-
System an
complicated.
improving
ends in
complicated. The
them.
failure
The introduction
Digitalization
or even
introduction of
holds
disrupts
of lean
lean management
great potential
processes
management usually
for
instead lean
usually of (Ohno
efficient 1988)
and and aims
streamlined to eliminate
process flowwastethat and generate
promises cost-an
ends in
improving failure
them. or even
Digitalization disrupts
holds greatprocesses
potential instead
for lean of (Ohno
effective,
efficient
(Ohno 1988)
and
1988) and
and aims
high-quality
streamlined to
aimsmanufacturingeliminate
to process
eliminate flowwaste
(Liker
wastethat and
1996). generate
promises
and Tocost-
generate an
this
an
ends in
management.
improving
ends in failure
them.
failure or
Mathematical even
Digitalization
or even disrupts
description
holds
disrupts processes
great of potential
processes instead
the fundamentalfor
instead leanof
of efficient
effective, and streamlined
high-quality process
manufacturing flow that
(Liker promises
1996). To cost-
this
improving
management. them. Digitalization
Mathematical holds
description great of potential
the for
fundamental lean efficient
end, Womack
effective,
efficient and streamlined
et
high-quality
and al.
streamlined (2003) process
recommend
manufacturing
process flow
flow that
(Liker
that promises
following
1996).
promises the
To cost-
five
this
cost-
improving
lean
management. them.
principles Digitalization
could
Mathematical be the holds
basis
description great
of potential
simplification
of potential
the for lean
and effective, high-quality manufacturing (Liker 1996). To this
improving
management.
lean them.
principles
management.
Digitalization
Mathematical
could
Mathematical be the holds
description
basis
description
great
of ofof the fundamentalfor lean
fundamental
simplification and end,
end,
lean Womack
effective,
principles:
Womack
effective,
et Specify
high-quality
et
high-quality
al. (2003)
al. (2003)
recommend
manufacturing
therecommend
manufacturing value of following
(Liker 1996).
production
following
(Liker 1996). the
the
To
To
five
this
for five
the
this
structuring
lean
management. of factory
principles could
Mathematical organization
be the basisas well
description of asthe thefundamental
automation
simplification
of the fundamental and end,
lean Womack
principles: et al. (2003)
Specify the recommend
value of following
production the
for five
the
lean principles
structuring of could
factory be the
organization basisas of
well simplification
as the automation and end,
lean Womack
customer,
principles: et al.
identify/map (2003)
Specify the the recommend
value
value streamof following
(set of
production all the
for five
actions
the
lean
and principles
thus
structuring
lean expedition
of
principles could
factory
could of be the
principle
organization
be the basis
basisas of
well
of simplification
implementation.
as the Lu etand
automation
simplification al. end,
and lean Womack
principles:
customer, et Specify
al. (2003)
identify/map thethe recommend
value
value streamof following
production
(set of all the
for five
the
actions
structuring
and of
thushowever, factory
expedition organization
of principle as well as
implementation. the automation
Lupoorly
et al. lean lean
requiredprinciples:
customer, to generateSpecify
identify/map
principles: Specifycustomer
thethethe value
value value),
value streamof production
create
(set of
of create of all
production for
flow-oriented
all for the
actions
the
structuring
(2011),
and thus
structuring of factory
expedition
of factoryclaim organization
of that
principle
organization suitableas well as
procedures
implementation.
as well as the
the automation
are
Lu
automationet al. customer,
required toidentify/map
generate the
customer value stream
value), (set flow-orientedactions
and thus
(2011), expedition
however, claimof principle
that implementation.
suitable procedures Lu
are et
poorly al. customer,
production,
required
customer, toidentify/map
establish
generate
identify/map the
pull
customer
the asvalue
the
value stream
control
value),
stream (set
create
(set of
mechanism, all
flow-oriented
of all actions
and
actions
and thus
structured
(2011),
and expedition
or lacking
thushowever,
expedition claimof principle
ofentirely.
that
principle implementation.
Cannas
suitable et al. (2018),
procedures
implementation. Lu
Luon
are et
poorly al.
et the required
al. production, to generate
establish customer
pullcompany.
as the value),
control create flow-oriented
mechanism, and
(2011),
structured however,
or lacking claim that
entirely. suitable
Cannas procedures
et al.to(2018), are poorly
on the required
pursue to
to generate
perfection in thecustomer value), Lean create flow-oriented
thinking mustand be
(2011),
other hand,
structured
(2011), however,
or
however, argue
lacking claim
claimthat that
entirely.
that suitable
companies
Cannas
suitable procedures
fail
et al.
procedures (2018), are
employ
are poorly
on
poorlythe production,
the required
production,
pursue
establish
generate
establish
perfection in
pull
customer
pull
the
as
as
company.
the
the control
value),
control
Lean create mechanism,
flow-oriented
mechanism,
thinking must and
be
structured
other hand, or lacking
argue entirely.
that Cannas
companies et
fail al. to(2018),
employ on the production,
viewed as establish
an overarchingpull as the control
manufacturing mechanism,
philosophy and
structured
mathematical
other hand,
structured or
or lacking
approaches
argue
lacking entirely.
that
entirely. Cannas
developed
companies
Cannas et
infail
et al.
lean
al. to(2018),
management.
employ
(2018), on
on the pursue
the production,
pursue
viewed
perfection
establish
perfection
as an
in
in the
pullcompany.
the
overarching asmanufacturing
company. the controlLean
Lean thinking
mechanism,
thinking
philosophy
must
must be
and
be
and
other hand,
mathematical argue
approaches that companies
developed infaillean to employ
management. the pursue
should
viewed
pursue perfection
not
as be reduced
an
perfection in
in the
theto
overarching company.
company.strategyLean
amanufacturing Lean thinking
to improve
philosophy
thinking must
financial
mustand be
be
other
Moreover,
other hand,
mathematical
hand, argue
methods for
approaches
argue that
that companies
assessing systems’
developed
companies infail
faillean to
leanness
to employ are often
management.
employ the
the viewed
should as
not an
be overarching
reduced to a manufacturing
strategy to philosophy
improve financialand
mathematical
Moreover, approaches
methods for developed
assessing systems’ in lean
leanness management.
are often viewed
performance,
should
viewed as
not
as an
be
an asoverarching
in
reduced
overarching Boyd
to a manufacturing
et
strategyal.
manufacturing (2006).
to philosophy
improve Furthermore,
philosophy financialand
and
mathematical
unsystematic
Moreover,
mathematical approaches
or
methods only
for
approaches developed
applicable
assessing to
systems’
developed in lean
certain
leanness management.
parts of
are often an should not
performance, be asreduced to
inimplement
Boyd a strategy
etlean to
al. principles
(2006).improve financial
Furthermore,
Moreover,
unsystematic
Moreover,
organization.
methods
or
methods for
only
for assessing
applicable
assessing to incertain
systems’
systems’
lean
leanness
leanness
management.
partsare
areofoften
often
should
an performance,
should not
not be
manufacturers
performance, be as
as
reduced
can in
reduced
in
to
to aa et
Boyd
Boyd
strategy
strategy
et al.
al.
to
to improve
(2006).
(2006).improve on financial
different
Furthermore,
financial
Furthermore,
unsystematic
Moreover,
unsystematic or
methods
or only
for
only applicable
assessing
applicable to
systems’
to certain
leanness
certain parts
parts areof
ofoftenan
an manufacturers
performance,
organizationalas can
as inimplement
levels, Boyd
such et et lean
aslean al. principles
(2006).
manufacturing oncells different
Furthermore, (see
organization.
unsystematic or only applicable to certain parts of an manufacturers
performance,
manufacturers can
can inimplement
Boyd
implement lean al. principles
(2006).
principles on
on different
Furthermore,
different
organization.
unsystematic
organization. or only applicable to certain parts of an organizational
manufacturers
Karoum and levels,
can
Elbenani suchoras
implement
2019) lean
supplymanufacturing
principles
chains (seeon cells (see
different
Alinezhad
In this study,
organization. we aim to help close this research gap and pave organizational
manufacturers
organizational levels,
can such
implement
levels, such as
aslean manufacturing
principles
manufacturing on cells (see
different
cells (see
organization.
In this study, we aim tomore
help efficient
close thisimplementation
research gap and pave Karoum and
organizational
et al. 2019 Elbenani
or levels,
Lou 2019)
et2019)such
al. or as
2020). supply chains
manufacturing
Thechains (see
introduction Alinezhad
cells (see
of lean
thethis
In waystudy,
to easier
we andto
aim help close this research gap andof pave
lean Karoum and
organizational
Karoum and Elbenani
levels,
Elbenani 2019)such or
or assupply
supplymanufacturing
chains (see
(see Alinezhad
cells
Alinezhad(see
In
thethis
way study,
to we
easier aim
and to help
more close this
efficient research
implementation gap andof pave
lean et al.
Karoum 2019
principles and
on or Lou
Elbenani
higher et al.
2019) 2020).
organizational or supply The
levels introduction
chains
can (see
be of lean
Alinezhad
assumed to
In
the
In this
way
this study,
management to
study, we
easier aim
principles
and
weprinciples
aim to help
more
tomore
helpby byclose this
exploring
efficient
close research the
implementation
thisimplementation
research gap and
basisof pave
for
lean et al.
Karoum 2019and or Lou
Elbenani et al.
2019) 2020).
or supply The introduction
chains (see of lean
Alinezhad
the way
management
the way to
to easier
easier and
and more efficient
exploring
efficient thegapbasis
implementation
andof
of
pave
lean et al.
for principles
lean et al. 2019
principles
2019 onoror Lou
higher
Lou et
et al.
al. 2020).
organizational
2020). The
levelsintroduction
The can be assumed
introduction of
of lean
leanto
management
the way to easier principles
and moreby exploring
efficient the
implementation basisof leanfor et al. 2019on
principles orhigher
Lou organizational
et al. 2020). The levels can be
introduction assumed
of lean to
management
management principles by exploring the basis for principles on higher organizational levels can be assumed to
on higher organizational levels can be assumed to
management principlesprinciples by by exploring
exploring the the basis basis for for principles on higher organizational levels can be assumed to
2405-8963 Copyright © 2021 The Authors. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license.
Peer review under responsibility of International Federation of Automatic Control.
10.1016/j.ifacol.2021.08.197
 Laura Baumann et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 54-1 (2021) 504–509
be an approach better suited to the overarching lean
philosophy.
Such attempts usually strive to improve system performance,
which needs to be assessable to make it automatable.
Womack et al. (1990) use productivity, percentage of
delivered defects, percentage of late deliveries and an hourly
equivalent of inventory as key performance indicators (KPIs)
to do this. These KPIs are not always the only or the best way
to measure performance improvement in certain situations.
Hwang and Katayama (2010), for instance, optimize the
number of workstations in their assembly lines, while
Neubert et al. (2010) focus on shortening queues in their
manufacturing system.
Since algorithms are finite, executable operating instructions
of defined steps, which are designed to solve universally
formulated problems (Knuth 1997), they do not have to be
computer-based or iterative, as in Cunha et al. 2015.
Sufficiently structured approaches or linear programming are
algorithm-like too. Although the number of algorithms used
in conjunction with the lean philosophy is large, the number
of potentially pursued objectives is small: Some of the
algorithms aim to introduce lean methods (Lu et al. 2011),
others to assess (Wu et al. 2016) or optimize (Qattawi and
Chalil Madathil 2019) lean systems.
3. METHODS
We conduct a structured literature review in this study. This
method is particularly well suited for compiling a
comprehensive overview of a research field, something
needed to open opportunities for digitalization. First, we
create search strings that identify relevant articles in the
Scopus abstract database and all Web of Science databases
(see appendix A, Table 4). The strings only search pertinent
research areas and journal articles published in English
without a restriction on the publication period. We combine
the search result of seventy-seven unique articles and sixteen
additional articles found by a forward and backward search.
We exclude articles that do not include an algorithm-like
method or are written for fields other than manufacturing
(e.g., airport operation, retail) from our sample.
We structure the remaining forty-six articles according to the
aim pursued with the algorithms used and the research
method employed. The latter can reveal gaps in the field’s
research structure, e.g. scant primary data or a strong focus
on individual cases. Taking this theoretical foundation as our
starting point, we analyze all articles based on the questions:
1. Which lean principles does the study examine?
2. On which organizational level of the production
system is performance improved?
3. What kind of algorithm-like method is employed?
4. How is performance improvement measured?
We limit the range of valid answers per question to a
reasonable minimum, varying from question to question, in
order to be able to cluster the articles. Since we also use
several possible answers per question to characterize articles
whenever necessary to prevent skewing, the count of the
individual answers per question per paper is normalized.
505
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The majority of the forty-six articles clearly match the aims
defined in Section 2. Although eight articles employ
algorithms in a lean environment, these algorithms do not
have any specific impact on the leanness of their
environments. Examples are the installation of manufacturing
cells, as in Logendran et al. (2006), or flow shop scheduling,
as in Li et al. (2018). We include these articles in our analysis
nonetheless, designating them “lean environment” instead of
forcing them into another category. Figure 1 shows the
resulting distribution. Chronological ordering of the articles
by publication date (Figure 1, left) reveals the relative
youngness of this research field. While the annual number of
articles was quite stable up until 2017, it has risen since then.
This increase in annual publications may be indicative of
researchers’ growing interest in the subject.
10 100
Cumulated Share of Publications [%]
9
Number of Publications per Year
8 80
7
Optimization of Assessment of
6 60
Lean; 11; 24% Lean; 11; 24%
5
4 40
Lean
3 Environment;
2 20
Introduction of
8; 17%
1 Lean; 16; 35%
0 0
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
Cumulated Share (Secondary Axis) Σ=46
Figure 1: Chronological and cumulative distribution of
research foci among the forty-six articles analyzed
We specify the articles’ research methods by analyzing three
factors that help identify each method’s orientation: sample
size of the data used, source of the data used, and type of
method employed to analyze the data. We examine three
groups of data analysis methods: (1) structuring, i.e. methods
that structure data and steps without relying on mathematical
descriptions, as in de Felice et al. (2019) or Sims and Wan
(2017); (2) mathematical modeling, i.e. methods heavily
based on mathematical descriptions, as in Li (2013) or Hou
and Hu (2011); and (3) simulation, i.e. all kinds of computer
simulation, such as discrete event simulation, as in Ben
Moussa et al. (2019) or Koulouriotis et al. (2010).
The research method employed most frequently is a single
case study with a primary data source, i.e. a standard single
case study (41% of the total sample, see Figure 2, left).
Secondary data sources (benchmark cases, as in
Eswaramoorthi et al. 2012, or other cases described in the
literature, as in Shashikumar et al. 2019) are not present
among the single-case studies but artificial data sometimes
are. Gurumurthy and Kodali (2008) formulate numerical
examples for their approach, while Chan and Kumar (2009)
examine a “problem scenario commonly faced in
manufacturing industries”. Secondary data account for half of
the data sources in the articles based on multiple cases. Two
articles in the sample are non-case-based studies, i.e.
literature reviews or meta-analysis (Jadhav et al. 2014,
Matawale et al. (2013)). We categorized these articles as “no
506 Laura Baumann et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 54-1 (2021) 504–509

case” along with studies that develop mathematical models smallest group of articles (9% of articles with identifiable
without specifying their test data (orange in Figure 2). lean principles), e.g. Atieh et al. (2016).

STR
We analyze the number of lean principles examined per
Simulation (SI)
article. Two articles, Jadhav et al. (2014) and Karim and Arif-
Mathematical Modelling Uz-Zaman (2013) examine all lean principles, whereas 40%
(MM)
of the articles focus on just one principle (Figure 3, left). The
Structuring
(STR)
number of principles examined per research focus varies.
0% 20% 40% 60%
While articles dealing with assessment either do not specify
the principles they examine or claim to assess the lean
No Data
philosophy as a whole (see Azadeh et al. 2015), articles on
Artifical Data Source (AD) the introduction and optimization of lean principles often
Secondary Data Source (SDS)
focus on just one. This suggests that algorithms are only used
to introduce or optimize a part of the lean philosophy and
Primary Data Source (PDS) more complex analysis of the lean principles is being
neglected despite the theoretical possibilities provided by
digitalization.
Figure 2: Analyzed structure of research methods

Researchers intent on boosting a system’s performance with 4.2 Organizational levels targeted in the articles
lean methods usually analyze single cases, whereas study
designs with greater potential for generalization (multi-case The second question concentrates on the organizational level
studies) are employed less frequently. Studies providing on which the studies desire to improve performance. Since
overviews of research in this field (i.e. literature reviews, the lean philosophy strives to change the entire system
meta-analyses) are even rarer. Given its young age, this (Womack et al. 1990), selecting a higher level of
research field appears to be geared somewhat too heavily implementation seems more advisable. This clustering is
toward single-case studies. Moreover, an absence of evident in Table 1: The group of studies aimed at
aggregated and generalized research is not only discernible in introduction focus on the organizational level of a company
the research gap addressed here but also in the research field as a whole and its manufacturing system (as in Putri and
of lean manufacturing as a whole: Jasti and Kodali (2015) Dona’s (2019) redesign of the manufacturing layout). The
note something similar in their literature review of 546 lean research focus on assessment reflects this orientation toward
research articles. high organizational levels. Lean systems are optimized on
slightly lower organizational levels, something attributable to
the need for higher detail when searching for flawed
4.1 Analysis of the lean principles referenced in the articles processes. Fathi et al. (2019), for instance, seek to solve the
assembly line balancing problem, while Kant et al. (2020)
We analyze which lean principles are touched on in the optimize the integration of reconfigurable machine cells in
articles to answer our first question. We designate 32% of the assembly lines.
articles with descriptions that do not permit any definite
identification of targeted principles (e.g. Braglia et al. 2019) Table 1: Organizational level targeted per research focus
as “general lean” (Figure 3). Manufacturing
Manufacturing

Assembly line
Three principles

Supply chain
Four principles
Two principles

Five principles
One principle

Warehouse
General lean

Company

system

cell

Introduction 3% 9%
11% 4% 3% 4%
Introduction 17% 4% 4% 4% 5% Assessment 3% 7% 14%
Assessment 3% 2% 2% 2% 14% Optimization 4% 16% 3%
Optimization 14% 4% 2% 3% Environment 5% 3% 2% 2% 4%
Environment 5% 2% 10% Total 12% 23% 25% 23% 5% 12%
Total 40% 12% 9% 2% 4% 32%

Figure 3: Number of lean principles examined per research An analysis of the collective distribution of the organizational
stream and total distribution of the principles analyzed levels in the complete sample also reveals a tendency to
select higher levels. Current articles have effectively
examined the companies under study as wholes. In a next
The “create flow” principle appears most frequently in
step, researchers could consider expanding their studies
articles referencing lean principles (39%, see Figure 3 right),
beyond the bounds of single companies end examine supply
e.g. Nourmohammadi and Zandieh’s (2011) attempt to
chain networks with the aid of automated data processing and
generate a “flow-oriented production system”. The “map
handling.
value stream” principle (Map VS in Figure 3) is cited in the
 Laura Baumann et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 54-1 (2021) 504–509 507

4.3 Algorithm-like methods used in conjunction with lean (designated “No KPI” in Table 3). Whereas structured
principles procedures constitute a large percentage (22%) of this group
of algorithms (darkest gray cell), 6% of the studies
Table 2 presents the distribution of types of algorithms employing linear programming do not discuss how they
among the research foci, based von Rimscha’s (2017) measure performance improvement (e.g. Wan and Chen
categorization of algorithms and augmented by the algorithm- 2008). The group of KPIs used to measure some sort of
like methods of linear programming, artificial neural workload improvement (variation of workload, as in Dong et
networks and structured procedures identified in the sample. al. 2014, work in progress, as in Kilic and Durmusoglu 2012,
The latter constitute the majority of all algorithm-like or production rate, as in Pujo et al. 2015) make up 21% of the
methods and should be understood as detailed step-by-step entire sample and thus the largest percentage use of KPIs in
instructions not yet designated as algorithms by their authors the articles. The studies deal with a slightly lower
(e.g. Duran et al. 2017 or Beauregard et al. 2008). These organizational level than the studies without KPIs. This
structured process models appear especially well-suited for might indicate that the selection of suitable KPIs becomes
the introduction or assessment of lean methods, while more difficult on high organizational levels but this must be
researchers more frequently choose genetic algorithms for verified first: The use of KPIs is key to automated
optimization tasks (e.g., Hwang and Katayama 2009). mathematical approaches without which researchers cannot
Heuristic algorithms are evidently usable in every research take full advantage of the capabilities of digitalization.
focus, albeit researchers appear to prefer linear programming
for the assessment of lean methods. Table 3: Analysis of the performance measuring for the
different algorithms and organizational levels
Table 2: Use of algorithm-like methods in the different

Rand.-Contr. Algorithm
research foci

Probabilistic Algorithm
Artifi. Neural Network

Manufacturing System
Structured Procedure
Linear Programming

Heuristic Algorithm

Manufacturing Cell
Iterative Algorithm
Artificial neural network

Genetic Algorithm
Probabilistic algorithm
Randomly controlled

Assembly Line
Structured procedure
Linear programming

Supply Chain
Heuristic algorithm
Iterative algorithm

Genetic algorithm

Warehouse
Company
Total
algorithm

No KPI · · · · 33% · · · · ·
Workload · · · · · 21% · · · · ·
Introduction 2% 1% 9% 2% 4% 16% Time · · · · 15% · · · · ·
Assessment 8% 2% 1% 13% Cost · · · · 11% · · · · ·
Optimization 5% 2% 10% 2% 4% System structure · · · · · 11% · · ·
Environment 2% 5% 3% 7% Restraints · · · · 6% · · · ·
Total 12% 1% 22% 4% 17% 2% 1% 40% Robustness · · 2% · ·
Organization · · 2% ·
Instead of consistent use of the different types of algorithms,
a clear preference for the usually nonautomated method of 5. CONCLUSION
the structured procedure is recognizable, especially in the
studies focused on introduction. In the future, researchers In this study, we answer the question, “How are algorithm-
ought to pay more attention to artificial neural networks or like methods used to improve production performance in a
other methods that enable automated data processing to take lean manufacturing environment?” Our structured literature
better advantage of the opportunities of digitalization. review of forty-six relevant articles enables us to establish
that researchers especially use structured procedures and
heuristic algorithms to introduce and to assess or optimize
4.4 Measuring performance improvement lean manufacturing systems on higher organizational levels.
All the same, these methods pay too little regard to lean
We answer the fourth question by factoring in two factors: principles to do justice to lean thinking as a comprehensive
the algorithm (Table 3, left) and the targeted organizational manufacturing philosophy or fail to address lean principles at
level (Table 3, right). The articles in the sample contain all. The KPIs in the rare studies that use them to measure
thirty-five different KPIs, which we group to facilitate performance improvement are throughput, work in progress
analysis. For instance, we classify all time-based KPIs, such or similar metrics.
as lead time, cycle time or production delivery time, as
“time” KPIs. As in the preceding tables, we shade the cells in Altogether, we identify the following research needs: the
Table 3 according to the percentage of articles’ use of a development of approaches that not only factor in whole
certain algorithm-like method or study of an organizational companies but also all lean principles, the identification or
level with the corresponding KPI. design of KPIs suitable for measuring performance
improvement on high organizational levels, and the
Most of the articles (33%) either do not identify their KPIs or development of automatable algorithms capable of
only measure their performance improvement qualitatively incorporating and synthesizing all of this.
508 Laura Baumann et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 54-1 (2021) 504–509

REFERENCES Sequence. International Journal of Production Research,

53 (19), p. 5948-5961
Alinezhad, A., Kazemi, A., and Khorasani, M. (2019).
De Felice, F., Petrillo, L., Ranieri, L., and Petrillo, A. (2019).
Presenting a Model in Decoupling Points in Supply
Previous Studies and Differences Between Lean
Chain Networks. International Journal of Logistics
Management and World Class Manufacturing.
Systems and Management., 33(3), p. 383-403
International Journal of Information Technology &
Atieh, A.M., Kaylani, H., Almuhtady, A., and Al-Tamimi, O.
Decision Making, 18 (6), p. 1941-1966
(2016). A Value Stream Mapping and Simulation Hybrid
Dong, J., Zhang, L., Xiao T., and Mao, H. (2014). Balancing
Approach: Application to Glass Industry. International
and Sequencing of stochastic mixed-model Assembly U-
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 84, p.
lines to minimise the Expectation of Work Overload
1573-1586
Time. International Journal of Production Research, 52
Azadeh, A., Yazdanparast, R., Zadeh, S.A., and Zadeh A.E.
(24), p. 7529-7548
(2017). Performance Optimization of Integrated
Duran, O, Capaldo, A., and Acevedo, P.A.D. (2017). Lean
Resilience Engineering and Lean Production Principles.
Maintenance applied to improve Mainteneance
Expert Systems with Applications, 84, p. 155-170
Efficiency in Thermoelectric Power Plants. Energies, 10
Azadeh, A., Zarrin, M., Abdollahi, M., Noury, S., and
Eswaramoorthi, M., Kathiresan, G.R., Jayasudhan, T.J.,
Farahmand, S. (2015). Leanness Assessment and
Prasad, P.S.S., and Mohanram, P.V. (2012). Flow Index
Optimization by Fuzzy Cognitive Map and Multivariate
based Line Balancing: A Tool to improve the Leanness
Analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, 42, p. 6050-
of Assembly Line Design. International Journal of
6064
Production Research, 50 (12), p. 3345-3358
Beauregard, Y., Thomson, V., and Bhuiyan, N. (2008). Lean
Fathi, M., Nourmohammadi, A., H.C. Ng, A., Syberfeldt, A.,
Engineering Logistics: Load Leveling of Design Jobs
and Eskandari, H.(2019). An improved Genetic
with Capacity Considerations. Canadian Aeronautics
Algorithm with variable Neighborhood Search to solve
and Space Journal, 54 (2), p. 19-30
the Assembly Line Balancing Problem. Engineering
Ben Moussa, F.Z., de Guio, R., Dubois, S., Rasovska, I., and
Computations, 37 (2), p. 501-521
Benmussa, R. (2019). Study of an Innovative Method
Gurumurthy, A. and Kodali, R. (2008). A multi-criteria
based on Complementarity between ARIZ, Lean
decision-making Model for the Justification of Lean
Management and Discrete Event Simulation for solving
Manufacturing Systems. International Journal of
Warehousing Problems. Computers and Industrial
Management Science and Engineering Management, 3
Engineering, 132, p. 124-140
(2), p. 100-118
Boyd, D.T., Kronk, L.A., and Boyd, S.C. (2006). Measurig
Hou, T.-H. and Hu, W.-C. (2011). An integrated MOGA
the Effects of Lean Manufacturing Systems on financial
Approach to determine the pareto-optimal Kanban
Accounting Metrics using Data Envelopment Analysis.
Number and Size for a JIT System. Expert Systems with
Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 3
Applications. 38 (5), p. 5912-5918
(4), p. 40-54
Hwang, R. and Katayama, H. (2009). A multi-decision
Braglia, M., Castellano, D., Gallo, M., and Romagnoli, G.
genetic Approach for Workload Balancing of mixed-
(2019). A visual Planning Soluction to steamline the
model U-shaped Assembly Line Systems. International
Processes of hybrid Cross-Dockings. Production
Journal of Production Research, 47 (14), p. 3797-3822
Planning & Control, 30(1), p. 33-47
Hwang, R. and Katayama, H. (2010). Integrated Procedure of
Cannas, V.G., Pero, M., Pozzi, R., and Rossi, T. (2018).
Balancing and Sequencing for mixed-model Assembly
Complexity Reduction and Kaizen Events to balance
Lines: A multi-objective evolutionary Approach.
manual Assembly Lines: An Application in the Field.
International Journal of Production Research, 48 (21),
International Journal of Production Research, 56 (11),
p. 6417-6441
p. 3914-3931
Jadhav, J.R., Mantha, S.S. and Rane, S.B. (2014).
Carvalho, H., Govindan, K., Azevedo, S.G., and Cruz-
Development of Framework for sustainable lean
Machado, V. (2017). Modelling green and lean Supply
Implementation: An ISM Approach. Journal of
Chains: An eco-efficency Perspective. Resources
Industrial Engineering International, 10 (3)
Conservation and Recycling, 120, p. 75-87
Jasti, N. V. K. and Kodali, R. (2015). Lean Production:
Chan, F.T.S., Kumar, V., and Tiwari, M.K. (2009). The
Literature Review and Trends. International Journal of
Relevance of Outsourcing and leagile Strategies in
Production Research, 53 (3), p. 867-885
Performance Optimization of an integrated Process
Kant, R., Pattanaik, L.N., and Pandey, V. (2020). Sequential
Planning and Scheduling Model. International Journal
Optimisation of reconfigurable Machine Cell Feeders
of Production Research, 47 (1), p. 119-142
and Production Sequence during lean Assambly.
Chan, F.T.S. and Kumar, V. (2009). Performance
International Journal of Computer Integerated
Optimization of a Leagility inspired Supply Chain
Manufacturing, 33 (1), p. 62-78
Model: A CFGTSA Algorithm based Approach.
Karim, A. and Arif-Uz-Zaman, K. (2013). A Methodology
International Journal of Production Research, 47 (3), p.
for effective Implementation of Lean Strategies and its
777-799
Performance Evaluation in Manufacturing
Cunha Neto, E.,Ferreira Filho, V.J.M., and Arruda, E.F.
Organizations. Business Process Management Journal,
(2015). Stochastic Economic Lot Sizing and Scheduling
19 (1), p. 169-196
Problem with Pitch Interval, Reorder Points and flexible
 Laura Baumann et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 54-1 (2021) 504–509
Karoum, B. and Elbenani, Y.B. (2019). Optimization of the
Material Handling Costs and the Machine Reliability in
cellular Manufacturing System using Cuckoo Search
Algorithm. Neural Computing & Application, 31 (8), p.
3143-3737
Kilic, H.S. and Durmusoglu, M.B. (2012). Design of Kitting
System in lean-based Assembly Lines. Assembly
Automation, 32 (3), p. 226-234
Knuth, D.E. (1997). Fundamental Algorithms. Addison-
Wesley, Reading (Massachusets)
Koulouriotis, D.E., Xanthopoulos, A.S. and Tourasis, V.D.
(2010). Simulation Optimisation of Pull Control Policies
for serial Manufacturing Lines and Assembly
Manufacturing Systems using Genetic Algorithms.
International Journal of Production Research, 48 (10),
p. 2887-2912
Li, J. (2013). Continuous Improvement at Toyota
Manufacturing Plant: Applications of Production
Systems Engineering Methods. International Journal of
Production Research, 51, p. 7235-7249
Li, G., Li, N, Sambandam, N., Sethi, S.P., and Zhang, F.
(2018). Flow Shop Scheduling with Jobs arriving at
different Times. International Journal of Production
Economics, 206, p. 250-260
Liker, J.K. (1996). Becoming Lean. Free Press, New York
Logendran, R., Salmasi, N. and Sriskandarajah, C. (2006).
Two-Machine Group Scheduling Problems in discrete
Parts Manufacturing with sequence-dependent Setups.
Computers & Operations Research, 33 (81), p. 158-180
Lou, P., Chen, Y., and Yan, J.(2020). Memetic Algorithm
with Local Neighborhood Search for Bottleneck Supplier
Identification in Supply Networks. IEEE Access, 8, p.
148827-148840
Lu, J.-C., Yang, T. and Wang, C.-Y. (2011). A lean pull
System Design analysed by Value Stream Mapping and
Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Method under
Demand Uncertainty. International Journal of Computer
Integrated Manufacturing, 24 (3), p. 211-228
Matawale, C.R., Datta, S., and Mahapatra, S.S. (2013).
Interrelationship of Capabilites/Enablers for lean, agile
and leagile Manufacturing: An ISM Approach.
International Journal of Process Management and
Benchmarking, 3 (3), p. 290-313
Maharaja, R., Devadasan, S.R., Sakthivel, M., and Murugesh,
R. (2018). Performance Measurement of the leagile
Supply Chain. International Journal of Services and
Operations Management, 31 (3), p. 396-414
Neubert, G., Savino, M.M., and Pedicini, C. (2010).
Simulation Approach to optimize Production Costs
through Value Stream Mapping. International Journal of
Operations and Quantitative Management, 16(1), p.1-21
Nourmohammadi, A. and Zandieh, M. (2011). Assembly
Line Balancing by a new multi-objective differential
Evolution Algorithm based on TOPSIS. International
Journal of Production Research, 49 (10), p. 2833-2855
Ohno, T. (1988). Toyota Production System. Productivity
Press, New York
Pujo, P., El Khabous, I. and Ounnar, F. (2015). Experimental
Assessment of the Productivity Improvement when using
509
U-shaped Production Cells with variable Takt Time.
International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 6 (1), p. 17-38
Putri, N.T. and Dona L.S. (2019). Application of Lean
Manufacturing Concept for Redesigning Facilities
Layout in indonesian Home-Food Industry: A Case
Study. TQM Journal, 31 (5), p. 815-830
Qarrawi, A. and Chalil Madathil, S. (2019). Assembly Line
Design using a hybrid Approach of Lean Manufacturing
and Balancing Models. Production and Manufacturing
Research, 7 (1), p. 125-142
Shashikumar, S., Raut, R.D., Narwane, V.S., Garday, B.B.,
Narkhede, B.E., and Awasthi, A. (2019). A novel
Approach to determine the Cell Formation using
heuristic Approach. OPSEARCH, 56 (3), p. 628-656
Sims, T. and Wan, H.-D. (2017). Constraint Identification
Techniques for Lean Manufacturing Systems. Robotics
and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 43, p. 50-58
Stichhauerova, E. and Pelloneova, N. (2018). Evaluating the
Efficiency of Lean Management Projects using Data
Envelopment Analysis. MM Science Journal, 2018
(March), p. 2306-2312
Torkabadi, A. M. and Mayorga, R. V. (2018). Evaluation of
Pull Production Control Strategies under Uncertainty: An
integrated fuzzy AHP-Topsis Approach. Journal of
Industrial Engineering and Management. 11 (1), p. 161-
184
Von Rimscha, M. (2017). Algorithmen kompakt und
verständlich, p. 3-72. Springer Vieweg, Wiesbaden
Wan, H.-D. and Chen, F. (2008). A Leanness Measure of
Manufacturing Systems for Quantifying Impacts of lean
Initiatives. International Journal of Production
Research, 46 (23), p. 6567-6584
Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T. (2003). Lean Thinking – Banish
Waste and create Wealth in your Corporation, p. 15-26.
Free Press, New York
Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., and Roos, D. (1990). The
Machine that changed the World. Rawson Associates,
New York
Wu, Z., Xu J. and Xu, Z. (2016). A multiple Attribute Group
Decision Making Framework for the Evaluation of Lean
Practices at Logistics Distribution Centers. Annals of
Operations Research, 247 (2), p. 735-757
APPENDIX A
Table 4: Search strings for the database search
Scopus Web of Science
( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "lean management" TOPIC: ("lean management" or "lean
OR "lean manufacturing" OR "lean manufacturing" or "lean production" or
production" OR "lean supply chain" ) "lean supply chain") AND TOPIC:
AND TITLE-ABS-KEY ( algorithm* OR (algorithm* or "mathematical approach"
"mathematical approach" OR "structured or "structured method*" or "linear
method*" OR "linear programming" ) programming") AND TOPIC:
AND TITLE-ABS-KEY ( performance ) (performance) NOT TOPIC: ("health
AND NOT TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "health care" or healthcare) Refined By:
care" OR healthcare ) ) AND ( LIMIT- DOCUMENT TYPES: (ARTICLE) AND
TO ( SUBJAREA , "ENGI" ) OR LIMIT- RESEARCH AREAS: (ENGINEERING OR
TO ( SUBJAREA , "BUSI" ) OR LIMIT- COMPUTER SCIENCE OR BUSINESS
TO ( SUBJAREA , "DECI" ) ) AND ECONOMICS OR MATHEMATICS OR
( LIMIT-TO ( DOCTYPE , "ar" ) ) OPERATIONS RESEARCH
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE OR SCIENCE
TECHNOLOGY OTHER TOPICS OR
AUTOMATION CONTROL SYSTEMS)