The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The complementary effect of lean manufacturing and digitalisation on operational performance
Open accessAbstract
The most recent trend manufacturers have embraced to seek operational performance improvements is the use of a wide range of digital technologies typically associated with Industry 4.0. However, few studies have investigated the relationship between such technologies and the long-established lean manufacturing domain, and how they, together, influence operational performance. Based on data from a cross-sectional survey of manufacturing companies, this study investigates the relationships between the use of lean manufacturing, factory digitalisation, and operational performance using hierarchical multiple regression analysis. While simultaneously controlling for the effects of production repetitiveness, company size, and length of lean manufacturing implementation, the findings show that both lean manufacturing and factory digitalisation individually contribute to improved operational performance. Furthermore, it is found that when used together, they have a complementary (or synergistic) effect that is greater than their individual effects combined. These research findings provide both theoretical and practical insights into how lean manufacturing and factory digitalisation affect the operational performance of manufacturing firms. In light of the upcoming fourth industrial revolution, these findings suggest that lean manufacturing is not obsolete but rather is more important than ever in order to reap the benefits from emerging technologies and translate them into improved operational performance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334
null (2016) · Philosophy Study · doi:10.17265/2159-5313/2016.09.003 · Cited by 28,317
Reliability and Validity Assessment
Carmines, E., & Zeller, R. (1979) · doi:10.4135/9781412985642 · Cited by 5,884 · cited 1×
“Following the recommendations of Carmines and Zeller (1979), the items for each of the constructs were analysed separately.”
MethodBharadwaj, A. S. (2000) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250983 · Cited by 5,042
Lasi, H., Fettke, P., Kemper, H.-G., Feld, T., & Hoffmann, M. (2014) · Business & Information Systems Engineering · doi:10.1007/s12599-014-0334-4 · Cited by 4,276 · cited 5×
“Together with increasing global competition, this puts pressure both on manufacturing companies’ flexibility and on resource efficiency tomeet customer demand and stay competitive (Lasi et al. 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialLean manufacturing: context, practice bundles, and performance
Shah, R., & Ward, P. T. (2003) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/s0272-6963(02)00108-0 · Cited by 2,897
The productivity paradox of information technology
Brynjolfsson, E. (1993) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/163298.163309 · Cited by 2,604
Lean Thinking—Banish Waste and Create Wealth in your Corporation
Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (1997) · Journal of the Operational Research Society · doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600967 · Cited by 2,122
Lean manufacturing: literature review and research issues
Bhamu, J., & Singh Sangwan, K. (2014) · International Journal of Operations & Production Management · doi:10.1108/ijopm-08-2012-0315 · Cited by 983
Internal lean practices and performance: The role of technological turbulence
Chavez, R., Yu, W., Jacobs, M., Fynes, B., Wiengarten, F., & Lecuna, A. (2015) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.10.005 · Cited by 200 · cited 3×
“This indicates the absence of non-response bias (Khanchanapong et al. 2014; Chavez et al. 2015).”
BackgroundResultGodinho Filho, M., Ganga, G. M. D., & Gunasekaran, A. (2016) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2016.1201606 · Cited by 182
Cited by
The evolution and future of lean Six Sigma 4.0
Antony, J., McDermott, O., Powell, D., & Sony, M. (2023) · The TQM Journal · doi:10.1108/tqm-04-2022-0135 · Cited by 124
‘Better together’: Evidence on the joint adoption of circular economy and industry 4.0 technologies
Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, A. B., Chiappetta Jabbour, C. J., Choi, T.-M., & Latan, H. (2022) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2022.108581 · Cited by 122
Mapping the Terrain for Lean Six Sigma 4.0
Antony, J., McDermott, O., Powell, D. J., & Sony, M. (2021) · IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-92934-3_20 · Cited by 21
Roser, C., Regending, Y., Langer, B., & Wuttke, C.-C. (2021) · IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-85874-2_75 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Buer, S.-V., Semini, M., Strandhagen, J. O., & Sgarbossa, F.
- Venue
- International Journal of Production Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2020-08-21
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1976-1992
- ISSN
- 0020-7543 (ISSN-L)
- 1366-588X
- OpenAlex
- W3080517982
- Cited by
- 331
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 24.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
