The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Determinants and barriers to lean implementation in food-processing SMEs – a multiple case analysis
Abstract
This study explored contextual or determining factors and their impacts on lean manufacturing in small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) operating in food-processing industries. In order to get an in-depth insight into the real situation at the work floor, this study adopted a multiple-case-study research approach. The inherent characteristics of food industries, such as mandatory quality assurance requirements, low shelf life of food products, and the extremely volatile demand and supply presented barriers to lean manufacturing adoption. In addition, the challenges of ‘change’ in an SME environment are distinct from those faced by large organizations. The small size of the plant, the traditional setup, and inflexible layout make it difficult to implement lean manufacturing in food-processing SMEs. The knowledge of contextual factors influencing lean manufacturing adoption in food processing SMEs will be a contribution to current knowledge. Many studies have explored lean constructs and tools, while far fewer have explored the crucial element of actually implementing these. The study will also help practitioners to anticipate potential obstacles and take proper measures to deal with them during lean implementation.
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
Building Theories from Case Study Research
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258557 · Cited by 17,455
Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action.
Jick, T. D. (1979) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392366 · Cited by 7,103 · cited 2×
“This combination of data types can be highly synergistic and is therefore referred to as a triangulation of method (Jick 1979).”
MethodLean 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
Leonard-Barton, D. (1990) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1.3.248 · Cited by 1,360
Cited by
Sharma, R., Shishodia, A., Kamble, S., Gunasekaran, A., & Belhadi, A. (2024) · International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications · doi:10.1080/13675567.2020.1830049 · Cited by 348
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
Antony, J., Psomas, E., Garza-Reyes, J. A., & Hines, P. (2021) · Production Planning & Control · doi:10.1080/09537287.2020.1776410 · Cited by 116
Research gaps in Lean manufacturing: a systematic literature review
Psomas, E., & Antony, J. (2019) · International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management · doi:10.1108/ijqrm-12-2017-0260 · Cited by 93
Evaluation of critical success factors (CSFs) to lean implementation in SMEs using AHP: A case study
Belhadi, A., Touriki, F. E., & Elfezazi, S. (2019) · International Journal of Lean Six Sigma · doi:10.1108/ijlss-12-2016-0078 · Cited by 81
Metadata
- Authors
- Dora, M., Kumar, M., & Gellynck, X.
- Venue
- Production Planning & Control
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2015-06-03
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-23
- ISSN
- 0953-7287 (ISSN-L)
- 1366-5871
- OpenAlex
- W1916053955
- Cited by
- 251
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 49.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Determinants and barriers to lean implementation in food-processing SMEs – a multiple case analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/09537287.2015.1050477
- The paper
- Dora, M., Kumar, M., & Gellynck, X. (2016). Determinants and barriers to lean implementation in food-processing SMEs – a multiple case analysis. Production Planning & Control. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2015.1050477
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.