The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 79 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Longitudinal effects of Lean production on employee outcomes and the mediating role of work characteristics
Abstract
The author discusses results from a 3 year quasi-experimental field study (N = 368), which suggest negative effects on employee outcomes after the implementation of 3 lean production practices: lean teams, assembly lines, and workflow formalization. Employees in all lean production groups were negatively affected, but those in assembly lines fared the worst, with reduced organizational commitment and role breadth self-efficacy and increased job depression. A nonequivalent control group had no negative changes in outcomes. Mediational analyses showed that the negative effects of lean production were at least partly attributable to declines in perceived work characteristics (job autonomy, skill utilization, and participation in decision making). The study also shows the longitudinal effects of these work characteristics on psychological outcomes. Implications for lean production, work design, and employee well-being are discussed.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“By transforming work structures and processes, Lean also affects the employees responsible for carrying out the work, as studies of Lean outside of healthcare demonstrate [32–36].”
From Lean Thinking in Emergency Departments: A Critical Review (2011) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
““Lean production is … not a single unitary production concept, either in its design or in its implementation” [33].”
From Lean Thinking in Emergency Departments: A Critical Review (2011) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“This has led researchers to propose that the effects of Lean are contingent on how and where Lean is implemented [33, 37, 41].”
From Lean Thinking in Emergency Departments: A Critical Review (2011) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“Lean implementers and researchers should be aware that Lean can increase workload, threaten autonomy, and bring about anxiety.”
From Lean Thinking in Emergency Departments: A Critical Review (2011) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“Lean implementers and researchers should be aware that Lean can increase workload, threaten autonomy, and bring about anxiety.”
From Lean Thinking in Emergency Departments: A Critical Review (2011) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“Lean implementers and researchers should be aware that Lean can increase workload, threaten autonomy, and bring about anxiety.”
From Lean Thinking in Emergency Departments: A Critical Review (2011) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“These undesirable employee effects are well documented in the broader Lean literature [32–39, 94–97] but may not show up in reports on Lean in health care either because of how Lean is implemented in health care or because studies in health care simply do not measure employee effects.”
From Lean Thinking in Emergency Departments: A Critical Review (2011) · cites this paper as [33]
Citations
Cites
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1983) · Cited by 79,882
Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 · Cited by 25,266
Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588 · Cited by 20,015
Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920638601200408 · Cited by 17,102
(1963) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 15,085
Research in Organizational Behavior.
Grimes, A. J., Cummings, L. L., & Staw, B. M. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392975 · Cited by 11,303
Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7 · Cited by 8,962
Well-being : the foundations of hedonic psychology
Kahneman, D. J., Diener, E. F., & Schwarz, N. (1999) · Cited by 7,472
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Adler, 1993, The 'learning bureaucracy': New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc., Vol. 15, 111
- Berggren, 1994, NUMMI vs. Uddvella., Sloan Management Review, 35, 37
- Jöreskog, 1993, L1SREL VIII: User's reference and guide.
- MacDuffie, 1996, Changes in auto industry employment practices: An international overview.
- 10.1023/A:1016992403973 · DOI
- 10.1037/1076-8998.1.1.9 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Meaning of Employee Engagement
Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008) · Industrial and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.0002.x · Cited by 3,675
The dynamics of proactivity at work
Grant, A. M., & Ashford, S. J. (2008) · Research in Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.riob.2008.04.002 · Cited by 2,057
7 Redesigning Work Design Theories: The Rise of Relational and Proactive Perspectives
Grant, A. M., & Parker, S. K. (2009) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.1080/19416520903047327 · Cited by 1,555
Self-citationTaking Stock: Integrating and Differentiating Multiple Proactive Behaviors
Parker, S. K., & Collins, C. G. (2008) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206308321554 · Cited by 1,474
Self-citationWork Motivation Theory and Research at the Dawn of the Twenty-First Century
Latham, G. P., & Pinder, C. C. (2004) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142105 · Cited by 1,490
Metadata
- Authors
- Parker, S. K.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Parker, Sharon K.
- ORCID
- Parker, Sharon K.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 2003
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 620-634
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W2041482123
- Cited by
- 438
- References
- 79
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 33
- FWCI
- 14.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Applied Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Workplace Health and Well-being
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Quality and Supply Management
- Keywords
- lean manufacturing, assembly line, employee outcomes, organizational commitment, role breadth self-efficacy, job characteristics, employee autonomy, skill utilization, employee participation, job design, employee well-being, mediating effect
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Employee Performance Appraisal, Employment, Female, Humans, Job Description, Job Satisfaction, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Time Factors, Workload
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
