Abstract

PurposeAs a problem-solving tool, the kaizen event (KE) is underutilised in practice. Assuming this is due to a lack of group process quality during those events, the authors aimed to grasp what is needed during high-quality KE meetings. Guided by the phased approach for structured problem-solving, the authors built and explored a measure for enriching future KE research.Design/methodology/approachSix phases were used to code all verbal contributions (N = 5,442) in 21 diverse, videotaped KE meetings. Resembling state space grids, the authors visualised the course of each meeting with line graphs which were shown to ten individual kaizen experts as well as to the filmed kaizen groups.FindingsFrom their reactions to the graphs the authors extracted high-quality KE process characteristics. At the end of each phase, that should be enacted sequentially, explicit group consensus appeared to be crucial. Some of the groups spent too little time on a group-shared understanding of the problem and its root causes. Surprisingly, the mixed-methods data suggested that small and infrequent deviations (“jumps”) to another phase might be necessary for a high-quality process. According to the newly developed quantitative process measure, when groups often jump from one phase to a distant, previous or next phase, this relates to low KE process quality.Originality/valueA refined conceptual model and research agenda are offered for generating better solutions during KEs, and the authors urge examinations of the effects of well-crafted KE training.

Highlights

  • Over the last few decades, many organisations have adopted continuous improvement strategies such as lean, agile, six sigma or total quality management (TQM)

  • Below we first report the characteristics of high-quality kaizen event (KE), based on the views of the kaizen experts

  • We present and explore the possible quantitative indicators of KE process quality

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Over the last few decades, many organisations have adopted continuous improvement strategies such as lean, agile, six sigma or total quality management (TQM). To sustain such improvements, many organisations aim to become full “learning organisations” (Bateman, 2005; Hines et al, 2004; Netland, 2016; Tortorella et al, 2020) in which it is the norm to pool knowledge to solve persistent (operational) problems effectively (Argote and Hora, 2017). To better learn how to reap the potential benefits of taking a multidisciplinary groupbased problem-solving approach, we explored the characteristics of the quality of the process

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call