Literature review
Lean Management, a technique whose became known thanks to Womack et al. (1990) work “The Machine That Changed the World” was born from Just-In-Time and the Toyota Production System (TPS), deriving their main characteristics (Schonberger, 2007; Olhager and Prajogo, 2012). In the literature, Lean Management is considered via either a strategic/philosophical (e.g., Womack and Jones, 1996; Upton, 1998) or operational/technical lens (e.g., Shah and Ward, 2003, 2007). These perspectives are closely linked. One literature flow believes Lean Management a philosophy that adheres to the five principles (value, value stream, flow, pull, and perfection) to remove all sources of waste (or Muda) starting with the production processes (Womack and Jones, 1996), whilst a second flow translates the Lean philosophy using a more specific term. From this viewpoint, Lean Management is treated as a managerial system that brings together specific activities and methods to reduce inner and outer process variability, also called Mura, accepted as the primary source of production problems from a Lean position (Shah and Ward, 2007). The second approach is shared by scholars Seth and Gupta (2005), who claimed that the aim of Lean manufacturing is to decrease waste in human effort, implements, time to market and production areas to become highly responsive to client demand whereas making quality products in the most efficient and economical way. This approach aimed at the waste removal. Waste took many different shapes and can be found at any time and in any place. It might be found hidden in policies, procedures, product and process designs, and in operations. Waste disburses resources but does not add any value to the product.
For many years, this Lean Management explanation has led to many investigations on Lean Management operationalization. Among the most relevant and complete is the work by Flynn et al. (1995), Cua et al. (2001), Shah and Ward (2003, 2007). Shah and Ward (2003) determined the appropriate internal Lean Management practices and separated them into JIT, total quality management (TQM), HRM, and total preventive maintenance (TPM) bunches. The same authors then expanded their model by incorporating inside related actions (statistical process control, continuous flow, setup time reduction, TPM, Kanban and employee involvement) and supplier- and customer-related practices, such as JIT deliveries and supplier and customer involvement (Shah and Ward, 2007). Flynn et al. (1995) and Cua et al. (2001) stressed the importance of human-related practices in carrying out uninterrupted improvement programs, like senior management leadership for quality, small group problem solving, and staff training.
Cua et al. (2001) emphasized the importance of using such tools as JIT, TQM, and TPM together when implementing Lean Management. TPM techniques play a strategic role not only in directly gaining better performance but also in preparing the right environment for efficient adoption of JIT and TQM techniques (McKone et al., 2001; Mackelprang and Nair, 2010). The importance of these so-called hard practices is emphasized in Taylor and Wright’s (2006) study. The authors empirically showed that the hard part of the TQM methodology is a strong predictor of manufacturing performance improvements. The efficacy of hard practices is especially magnified when they are coherently accompanied by intangible and soft practices, linked to HRM (Matsui, 2007), management leadership and support (Samson and Terziovski, 1999; Matsui, 2007), and customer and supplier involvement (Rahman and Bullock, 2005; Matsui, 2007; Romano and Formentini, 2012). The effectiveness of implementing joint hard and soft Lean Management practices was also supported by the results of Shah and Ward’s (2007) study, in which the authors depicted Lean Management success as the result of a complex system of interrelated socio-technical practices.
Most empirical researches support the overall positive effect of Lean Management on a firm’s operational performance (Moyano-Fuentes and Sacristán-Díaz, 2012). The major advantages consist of reducing process variability, tatters, and rework time, which in turn lower production costs and lead times and raise process flexibility and quality compliance.
However, in the literature there are also examples of Lean Management failures. The lack of significant performance gains is typically blamed on the complexity of implementing Lean Management due to possible negative synergies between JIT tools and techniques (Mackelprang and Nair, 2010), implementing JIT without adequately considering other OM practices and a coherent long-term manufacturing strategy (Matsui, 2007; Agarwal et al., 2013), or difficulties adapting JIT to particular contexts (e.g., non-repetitive contexts, Lander and Liker, 2007). However, JIT is not the only source of Lean Management failure. As pointed out by Liker and Rother (2011), several lean programs fail because of a company’s superficial approach. Many firms focus on implementing lean tools and techniques (i.e., hard practices) but pay little attention to human-related practices (i.e., soft practices) (Hines et al., 2004; Liker and Rother, 2011). Evidence also points to the OC as a key determinant of Lean Management success or failure (Liker, 2004; Sim and Rogers, 2009; Atkinson, 2010; Liker and Rother, 2011).
Despite the fact, that many types of ‘muda’ or waste relate directly to manufacturing processes, others can be also associated with the general supply of goods.
Taking into account all of the above, for improving the company's competitiveness as well as improving the company's overall profitability, It should be carefully considered each process in the supply chain and identify areas that are using unnecessary resources, which can be measured in dollars, time, or raw materials.
A Lean supply chain is one that produces or provides only what is needed, when it is needed and where it is needed. This typically has a number of key advantages over traditional supply chain management, including:
● Supply more tightly linked with demand
● Lower inventory risk
● Processes that focus specifically on activities that add value for the customer
● A greater focus on mistake-proof processes.
This leads to improved availability and customer service at a lower cost. And even if the payoff from anyone Lean initiative might be modest, like the single pound you lose the first week you give up desserts. But pounds add up, and so do the benefits you gain as you find new ways to trim fat from the supply chain. With a devotion to Lean principles and continuous improvement, a logistics operation can grow slender, powerful, and fast.
Thereby it can be concluded that the Lean Management and sustainability topic has received and continues to receive widespread attention from investigators. Despite the fact that it arose prior to the Supply Chain Management and sustainability topic, it has continued to be the subject of an increasing number of contributions over time in the literature. This has meant that the gap in the interest that the two topics attract has widened since 1998. With regard to the present time, it can be seen that there has been a significant growth in the interest shown in the Lean Management and sustainability topic since 2009 and that this is on the rise, whereas there has only been more moderate growth in the interest shown in the Supply Chain Management and sustainability topic.