Research gaps in Lean manufacturing: a systematic literature review
Abstract
Purpose Literature contributions to Lean manufacturing (LM) are fragmented and show some significant limitations. The purpose of this paper is to identify the existing research gaps in LM as well as to group them into respective themes. Design/methodology/approach A systematic literature review (SLR) of peer reviewed journal articles in LM was carried out by the authors, based on four major publishers, namely, Emerald Online, Science Direct, Springer Link and Taylor & Francis. In total, 120 articles published in 30 journals during 2005–2016 were collected which revealed LM research gaps. A simple affinity diagram was applied in order to group the research gaps into logical themes. Findings A large number of research gaps are identified in the LM literature and meaningful themes of these gaps are also revealed. Research limitations/implications The SLR carried out by the authors is based on only four academic journal publishers and some of other publishers might have been missed out in this search. Excluding articles focusing on an individual Lean principle or tool/technique is also a limitation of the present SLR. Practical implications Researchers and practitioners can use the LM research gaps presented in this study for further development of LM methodology. Originality/value Presenting LM research gaps analytically and grouping them into meaningful themes, significantly differentiates the present SLR study from those published so far.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 145 · Cited by 93
- Authors
- Psomas, E., & Antony, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Patras (GR)
- Heriot-Watt University (GB)
- Venue
- International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2019-05-07
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 815-839
- ISSN
- 0265-671X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2911288014
- Cited by
- 93
- References
- 145
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 3.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Quality and Supply Management
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Management and Optimization Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Digital Transformation in Industry
- Keywords
- lean manufacturing, research gaps, lean thinking, lean tools and techniques
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