5 TH

International Journal of Lean Six Sigma
Assessing the application of Kaizen principles in Indian small-scale industry

Amit Kumar Arya, Suraj Choudhary,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Amit Kumar Arya, Suraj Choudhary, (2015) "Assessing the application of Kaizen principles in Indian
Downloaded by DR BR Ambedkar National Institute of Technology At 02:52 02 August 2017 (PT)
small-scale industry", International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 6 Issue: 4, pp.369-396, https://
doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS-11-2014-0033
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS-11-2014-0033
Downloaded on: 02 August 2017, At: 02:52 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 75 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 459 times since 2015*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2014),"Impacts of Kaizen in a small-scale industry of India: a case study", International Journal of
Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 5 Iss 1 pp. 22-44 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS-03-2013-0019">https://
doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS-03-2013-0019</a>
(2015),"Critical success factors of Lean Six Sigma deployment: a current review", International
Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 6 Iss 4 pp. 339-348 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/
IJLSS-04-2015-0011">https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS-04-2015-0011</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:585333 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2040-4166.htm
Assessing the application of Kaizen

principles
Kaizen principles in Indian
small-scale industry
Amit Kumar Arya and Suraj Choudhary 369
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Received 11 November 2014
Ambala College of Engineering and Applied Research, Ambala, India Revised 1 January 2015
Accepted 17 January 2015
Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to represent Kaizen implementation in a machine vice manufacturing
company. Kaizen has shown tremendous impacts on the production techniques and lead times. A large
number of small-scale industries have shown their existence in India. It has been difficult for small
industries to survive due to tough competition among them. All are facing problems like low production
and poor-quality products.
Design/methodology/approach – The methodology applied to implement Kaizen in Indian
small-scale industry. Fishbone diagrams have been used to represent cause and effects. The result has
been shown as savings in terms of money and time.
Findings – Inventory access time is reduced up to 87 per cent and total distance travelled and total
time taken by product is reduced up to 43.75 and 46.08 per cent, respectively. A habit to maintain a clean
workplace has been developed in workers.
Research limitations/implications – ISO could be integrated with Kaizen for more improvements.
Practical implications – The paper should assist those practitioners and consultants who have the
desire to understand a better way of Kaizen implementation in small-scale industries of India.
Originality/value – This paper yields lots of values for practitioners to understand the need, impacts
and significance of Kaizen implementation in small-scale industries of India. Also, it bridges the gap
between theory and practice of Kaizen implementation in real working conditions in Indian industries.
Keywords Kaizen, Lean, Small scale industry, Principles, Waste
Paper type Case study
1. Introduction
Today, in the era of combative and dynamic markets, it is very tough for a small
industry to survive. Indian small-scale industries have contributed a vital role in
economic growth of the country. To bring these small industries at the level of the world,
it has been necessary to adopt new brain waves in these industries. Lean Manufacturing
have proved to be an impactful tool for refining the working culture and production
approach of large industries. Lean can prove its endowment in small industries too. Lean
is dynamism that eliminates/reduces the misapplications in human efforts, inventory
and lead time. As a result, the speed to market increases and organizations become more
sensible to the calls of dynamic markets while producing superior-quality products in
International Journal of Lean Six
the most efficient, effective and economical way. The Lean approach consists of various Sigma
practices that aim to improve efficiency of the production process, product quality and Vol. 6 No. 4, 2015
pp. 369-396
responsiveness according to the customer demand. A large number of small-scale © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
2040-4166
industries exist in India. These are facing huge competition from large industries. To DOI 10.1108/IJLSS-11-2014-0033
IJLSS prevail in Indian markets, it has been mandatory for an industry to provide high-quality
6,4 products at low price. It is a frightful stage for those small industries of India which are
lagging behind in terms of speed of response, price and quality of the products. So it is
necessary to make practitioners aware about how Lean can ensure the successful
survival of small-scale industries in India. Tools like Poka-Yoke, Visual control,
one-piece flow, Value Stream Mapping (VSM), cellular manufacturing, inventory
370 management, standardization of work, scrap reduction and workplace organization
have been used for reducing wastes in manufacturing. Kaizen is an excellent tool for any
enterprise that aims to be Lean (Russell and Taylor, 1999). Historically, Kaizen has been
applied to not only the production field but also to service business field (Emiliani,
2004b). The waste has been found in the service sector too (Ohno, 1988). A rise has been
achieved in the online degree programs in graduate business school education due to
Kaizen (Zimmerman, 1991; Grey, 2004). People, especially part-time working
professionals, have been shifting toward online degree programs (Emiliani, 2005).
Japanese manufacturing companies are experts of Kaizen in the field of automobiles.
Indian industries have to learn many facts from the Japanese manufacturers. Early
learning of Kaizen has been the basic reason of Japanese success (Pfeffer and Fong,
2002). Kaizen principles have been taught in schools, such as how to continuously
cultivate things and how to do more with less in the most efficient manner. So, there are
no worrying factors for Japanese industries because they are already familiar with
Kaizen. The Japanese can adopt changes very easily (Watanabe, 2011). The working
culture of Indian industries is extremely different from that of Japanese industries. Now,
there is a need not only for learning Kaizen concepts but also discovering the ways to
implement it in Indian industries (Oliver and Delbridge, 2002). A firm which is providing
poor-quality products cannot survive in such tough competition. To produce and deliver
good-quality products at a reasonable cost, it has become necessary to eliminate wastes
from the manufacturing systems and culture. The Indian small-scale industries are
suffering from quality issues, longer lead times, old and poor working methods and
unsafe working conditions. The case study represents ways to tackle the factors that
add no value to the end product, reduce production and quality but increase the cost of
the products. This paper represents the methodology to implement Lean and how to “Do
more with less in Indian industries”.
2. Literature review
Kaizen has been a fundamental part of an entire business philosophy named as “Lean”
(Ohno, 1988). Kaizen has been linked with Toyota Production System (TPS). TPS aims
to increase the production by elimination of wastes in manufacturing systems. Kaizen
aims to continuously improve the production process by eliminating the
Non-Value-Adding factors from the production methods. TPS has been the origin of
“Lean”. It has been signified by Ohno that TPS is not developed just in a single night but
it has taken 30 years of stepped-up developments and improvements. Womack et al.
(1990) described Kaizen as a tool of “Lean Philosophy” that transformed the
manufacturing world. Lean has been generated in the manufacturing fields and can be
implemented in management fields, HRD, hospitals and other areas too (Stone, 2012).
The collaboration of Kaizen with Value Stream Accounting has been demonstrated by
the research of Chiarini (2012). In 2011, Chiarini (2011) compared six important systems
and found nine important factors like end results, style of the management, system
deployment, managing employee, customer needs, IT, tools, technology, regularly Kaizen
analysis of the conditions and stabilizing the system. These can be achieved principles
successfully under the shadow of Kaizen. Imai (1989) described Kaizen as a means to
continuously enhance personal life, social life, home life and the working life. Kaizen has
been adopted successfully by South African Automobile industries (Charles and
Chucks, 2012). Some authors described Kaizen as a life philosophy which improves the
way of personal circle, family circle, social circle and working circle (Wittenberg, 1994; 371
Gondhalekar, 1995). The word “KAIZEN” evolved from two Japanese words “KAI” and
“ZEN”. “KAI” means “Change” and “ZEN” means “Better” (Donaldson, 2002).
“KAIZEN” means “Change for the better” (Doria et al., 2003). The gap between existing
state and proposed state of any manufacturing and servicing system can be bridged by
using VSM (Singh et al., 2010). VSM can eliminate waste activities from the value stream
(Ruiz et al., 2013). Kaizen can be collaborated with VSM successfully (Canel, 2000;
Brunet and New, 2003). VSM can identify the waste activities in the process (Ruiz et al.,
2013). If the wastes are identified and eliminated continuously and systematically, it
leads organizations toward improved quality, high production, high efficiency and high
competitive edge (Cuscela, 1998).
The time when the Japanese economy climbed the success ladder, the way of working
of the Japanese Management has now been adopted by European and American
manufacturers (Karkoszka and Honorowicz, 2009). Today, a customer decides the price
of the product in the market. The elimination of misapplication of resources and
implementation of Lean manufacturing are key strategies to reduce the manufacturing
cost (Chauhan and Singh, 2013). Manufacturers face an increasingly uncertain external
environment as the rate of change in customer expectations, worldwide competition and
variety of technology (Huber, 1984; Eroglu and Hofer, 2011). Achieving higher levels of
productivity in this complex and dynamic environment requires the manufacturing
system to quickly adjust itself to complexities, uncertainties and changes of the markets
(Demeter and Matyusz, 2010; Karlsson and Ahlstorm, 1996).
2.1 Principles of Kaizen

2.1.1 Process-oriented system. The manufacturing processes has to be improved
continuously for better output and best quality (Chiarini, 2012). Management has to
provide an initiating force for continuous improvements in the manufacturing processes
(Donaldson, 2002). To improve any process, the relationship of that process with the
other activities should also be considered (Smadi, 2009). This requires the direct
involvement of the employees because nothing can be improved without that.
Management has the responsibility to provide them adequate training to improve their
skills and mindset (Schroeder and Robinson, 1991; Berger, 1997).
2.1.2 Continuous improvement and maintenance of standards. This principle
integrates the innovations with the ongoing efforts. An improved standard has to be
maintained continuously (Priestman, 1985; Gondhalekar, 1995). It is the responsibility of
the management to continuously observe whether everything is going within desired
limits of established standards (Toni and Eileen, 2008; Watanabe, 2011). If there is any
deviation from the defined standards, correction should be made on time. That
organization is called “The Disciplined Organization” (Evans and Jukes, 2000; Turney
and Anderson, 1989). The manufacturing process can be improved easily using the
IJLSS PDCA cycle. Routine standardizing work and improvements can be linked together
6,4 (Imai, 1989).
2.1.3 People-based culture. Every individual of the company should be involved in the
improvement process, whether its management or a worker on machine (Motwani,
2003). People’s desires and beliefs design the platform for successful implementation of
Kaizen. The management has to look and realize the importance of Kaizen because it is
372 the guarantee of the long-run success in the future (Karapetrovic, 1999). There are
basically three types of activities involved in Kaizen. Every activity has its own focus
and point of view in the improvement process (Etzioni, 2002). The first activity rotates
around the management. The management has to make decisions regarding planning,
implementation, scanning and control of information system (Handy, 2002). The second
activity revolves around the group of workers and mainly focuses on the working
methods and manufacturing processes. The third important activity forces “on-the-spot
improvement”. Every individual of the company first has to improve his/her own work,
attitude, routine, working methods and the ways of utilization of resources. A
well-disciplined and undisputed nature of the manager can motivated a large group of
workers toward continuous improvement movement (Berger, 1997). Kaizen helps to
detect the hidden wastes in the manufacturing processes, targeting their root causes and
finding their solutions (Stone, 2012). This collectively results in good-quality products,
quick service, low manufacturing cost, high speed to market and better working culture
inside the company (Roffe, 1998).
In India, people are not so much aware about Kaizen. A proper awareness and
training is to be given to the workers. The company has to spend on the training and
awareness programs for the workers regarding Kaizen (Jorgensen, 2003). That
expenditure is investment, not the waste (Gondhalekar et al., 1991). In Indian industries,
the involvement of every individual in improvement activities has not been considered
yet. Kaizen should be developed as a habit and routine-work of the workers (Pomlett,
1994). On-the-job-training plays a vital role regarding the growth of Kaizen in Indian
small industries (Lam, 2000; Edwards et al., 1998). Kaizen helps in eliminating the social
barrier between various working forces (Lam, 2000). Aoki (2008) signified that Kaizen
has been adopted routinely and successfully all over the world. It received attention of
the entire world (Bateman and David, 2002). It develops a habit inside a system to learn
and improve continuously from an existing system, thus pursuing improvements. The
habit of learning from the mistakes leads the company on the way of new improvements
(March, 1991). It helps to develop the dynamic abilities of the company such as quick
adjustment with dynamic demands and environments of the markets and to cope with
changes in working culture inside and outside of the organization (Teece and Pisano,
1997). The aim of the Kaizen is to attain a competitive advantage by establishing
continuous learning and improvements (Lewis, 2000). Japanese workers individually
developed the capabilities to learn and improve their own work independently (Koike,
1994). Self-initiation plays a vital role here (Cole, 1994). The implementation of the
Kaizen approach in India can open new opportunities for the long-term successful
survival of small scale industries (Edwards et al., 1998).
The bottom-line of Kaizen approach is to minimize or complete elimination of those
activities which do not adds value to end product. To increase the competitive edge and
to compete in today’s dynamic markets, US manufacturers understood that the
conventional mass production approach has to be adopted and the new improved ideas
of Lean manufacturing have to be integrated with it (Ahlstrom, 2000). US Kaizen
manufacturers’ sleep was broken by Womack in 1994. Lean Manufacturing rewarded principles
great success to large industries and it bridged the gap that existed among Japanese and
US manufacturing companies. The idea of improvements by Lean implementation was
successfully adopted by US companies because the successful journey of the Japanese
companies has been viewed by world. The Japanese were producing and distributing
the products by using half or very low human effort, less capital investment, using lesser 373
floor space, lesser tools, lesser materials, in less time and lower expenditure (Capelli,
1994). Lean can be implemented successfully in small-scale industries of India. The
small industries largely contribute to the economic growth of India (Hines, 2004;
Womack and Jones, 1994).
2.2 What is waste?

The activities that do not add value to the end product but increase the cost of the
product are called wastes (Ibrahim, 2005). These activities are necessary to perform
which may or may not support the production activities directly or indirectly (Hines,
1998). There are the following types of wastes:
• Waste of over production: If products are manufactured more than the required
numbers and those that are not needed in the immediate future are forms of waste.
It leads to locked inventory, extra material handling, aging and finally expenses.
• Waste of waiting: When a machine is running idle or a machine is busy and
inventory to be processed is waiting for its operation, it is termed as waste of
waiting. It is of two kinds, that of the operator and of the material.
• Waste of transportation: Moving the components from one station to another
station just adds cost and not the value to the end product, and hence, should be
reduced as far as possible. It may be possible to perform any process during
movement of a material from one to another station.
• Waste of stocks: Storing the inventory only adds costs and needs to be reduced.
• Waste of unnecessary motions: Waste is added if the method of working is
followed by the operator needs of unnecessary motions like searching for tool and
walking, which are all wastes of motion (Brunet and New, 2003).
• Waste of making defects: Producing defective products is other type of the waste
which increases expenses and also interrupts the flow of production. Sometimes,
a complete lot could be rejected due to poor quality of the products, the costs of
which are much higher and need to be eliminated (Pheng, 2001).
• Waste of processing itself: When a particular product should not be made or any
particular process should not be used. The best process is the one that consistently
makes the product with an absolute minimum of scrap in the quantities needed
(Pheng, 2001).
The sources and causes of the various wastes are interrelated to each other, so if one
waste is eliminated, it might result in complete elimination or reduction of the other
(Womack and Jones, 1994). It is not wrong if the inventory is considered as the major
source of the wastes. Work-In-Process inventories and finished inventories do not add
any value to the final product but add expenses in handling them, and there is the need
IJLSS to eliminate or reduce them. If the level of the inventory is reduced systematically, then
6,4 hidden problems can be targeted and eliminated successfully. There are so many ways
to reduce the levels of the inventory. Reducing the lot size is one of them and is an
impactful way. To reduce and make cost per unit constant, the reduction in lot size
should be followed by reduction in setup times (Arya and Jain, 2013). Single Minute
Exchange of Dies (SMED) is a concept to decrease the setup times which was developed
374 at Toyota by Shingo. SMED is used for reduction in setup times in large-punch presses.
Production lot size can be reduced up to great extent by this method. There is another
effective way to decrease the level of the inventory which focuses on reducing the
machine downtime. Preventive maintenance plays a big role in this. It has been cleared
that if the level of inventory is reduced, then other causes and sources of wastes linked
to it can be reduced. It has been illustrated with the help an example of space inside the
factory. If the level of inventory is reduced, then the space which is used to place
the inventories could be used to place some other useful things to increase the capacity
of the factory. If machine setup time is reduced, it can reduce the levels of inventories
(Arya and Jain, 2013). It is necessary to reduce the unnecessary movements of the
materials so as to reduce the time associated with this component within the production
process.
One simple way to eliminate this kind of problem is utilizing a layout based on
cellular manufacturing so as to ensure that the flow of products remains smooth and
continuous. From here it can be seen again that elimination of one of the sources of waste
reduces or completely eliminates the other sources of wastes. Non-value-adding
activities can be eliminated if the machines and workers are grouped together into the
cells, which is termed as cellular manufacturing (Newitt, 1996). Now, because a team or
a group of workers can be completely dedicated to only that cell, this is going to
eliminate the waste associated with excess human utilization. The defects, rework and
scraps combined form another big source of waste (Hays, 1986).
2.3 Implementation of Kaizen

How a company should implement Lean Production? What should they focus on? Which
time perspective should they have? and How should they plan and arrange the work?
These are some important factors which should be looked over by the companies. The
staff have been educated about two courses: “Lean game” and “5S” course. Not all
companies did it in this order and some companies developed improvement groups
before the different courses to the group together underwent training, some afterwards.
They all followed almost the same concept, train first, let the concept to be understood
and then implement it in an easy visible area of the company so that everybody can see
that something is happening (Mintzberg, 2002).
They also divided big goals into small steps, and they also looked back to find out
what they have achieved. All the companies have an implementation plan regarding
future works, customer requirements, price, market changes, resource management and
capital management. Companies should develop future state plans to get the work
sustainable because “the time limit is to focus on the eternity”. Improvement should be
done in all the sections of the company whether it is the manufacturing section or the
administration department (John et al., 1996). The company should have a weekly
meeting in the factory in which at least one member from every group should be
involved. These members have to report back to the group to which he/she belongs. It
will ensure that everyone in the company knows what is going on inside the company, Kaizen
which are the latest orders, how the results from various analyses have been created and principles
which group is focusing on some particular improvement job (Melcher and Acar, 1990).
If the company wants to sustain in today’s tough and dynamic market, all the employees
of the company have to work together. The company has to be one step ahead of its
competitors. It can be possible only when the system of a company is improved
continuously. 375
2.3.1 Success factors in implementing Lean. There are following factors significant
for Lean implementation.
2.3.1.1 Targeted and holistic change strategy. It has been argued that Lean
philosophy and techniques require adoption in the entire system in a holistic manner
rather than applying techniques in a piecemeal fashion. Womack and Jones (1996)
suggested that managers have drowned in techniques as they tried to implement
isolated parts of the Lean system without understanding it entirely. On the other hand,
a piecemeal approach is generally adopted mainly as a result of resistance from the
employees to the new ideas (Mckenna, 1991). A more focused training gives evidence for
a better understanding among personnel of the key principles of waste elimination and
flow of value.
2.3.1.2 Company culture. Changes of mindset have given people an aim in their
working life and have the potential to change attitudes so that the employees begin to
think differently. They became more willing to contribute to company’s improvement
initiatives (Manuel and Barraza, 2012b). Sometimes, the management’s strong control
makes the organization structure bureaucratic, which makes it difficult to change from
the existing ways of doing things.
2.3.1.3 Product focus. The focus should be on the specific product value stream also,
so that the utilization of resources could be free from wastages (Angelis et al., 2012).
2.3.1.4 Senior management commitment. Consistency in management commitment is
emphasized as an important element in effective implementation of improvements in the
organization (Styhre, 2001).
2.3.1.5 Timing for performance improvements. It is also considered as a significant
factor for change in the organization (Manuel and Barraza, 2012a). The companies need
to be prepared for the Lean transformation.
2.3.2 Challenges in applying Lean thinking. There are so many factors that create
barriers in implementation of Lean thinking. The first factor is time spent on working
and capability, which has been used as the “physics” of process improvement (Bessant
et al., 1995). Even if time is added for improvements, it takes time for the problem in the
process to be identified, then the cause of the problem is to be discovered, solutions to be
found out and problems to be eliminated. Unfortunately, it happened that even after
such efforts, Lean thinking faces challenges in implementation. Another question is that
even the improvement activity does not lasts forever; for example, it is applied to
technical equipment that is amortization and getting obsolete or where the products are
changing often (Grant, 1991). It seems to be connected with the management decision
regarding reaching the desired goal. This could be performed in two ways – work harder
or work smarter. If the management pushes workers to work harder so as to meet the
target, or just add more working hours, which, in most cases, leads to great pressure and
high levels of stress. The alternative is to increase the capability of the process and that
is the best way to improve performance. Smart working situations gives the employees
IJLSS the possibility to experiment with new ideas and to find a solution for performing work
6,4 better. If an organization puts enough efforts in improving its process capability, then its
performance will rise. In the situation of working harder, cutting the investments for
process improvements decreases the performance in the long term. Because of the
pressure to meet the high target, from beginning the performance comes higher than in
general, which deludes the work. Later on, the performance declines (Emiliani, 2004a).
376 When working smarter, actual performance time decreases when the time spent in
working decreases and the time for improvements increases. In a long run, capability
increases apparently. As a result, work becomes less and performance becomes higher
due to the increase in process capability (Emiliani, 2001). One of the most daunting
challenges for every CEO of global firms is to keep their firm competitive in the long
term (Mefford, 2009). They face pressure for keeping the costs low and profitability high,
and, at the same time, they have to innovate and improve the product design, so as to
compete with the global market. A decision for lower costs and higher profitability could
increase the productivity of the firm. A challenging job for the managers is the effective
communication of the vision and plan for Lean implementation for the workforce. To
understand the new vision, new order and new communication at organization levels
seems to be a difficult task for the management as well. Sometimes even when the CEO
of the company is fully committed to the organizational improvement program, it still
appears that the organization faces some problems with the implementation of the new
approach. People resists to bring changes on their working place even if the
management is dedicated and enough efforts in training programs and explaining the
values of the new practice, especially when veteran workers encounter the change.
Many negative attitudes can turn into a great resistive force (Mefford, 2009). There may
be hard times when decisions have to be taken to let go some of the employees who do
not want to adopt new ways of doing work and do not want to support the
implementation efforts (Hoerl and Gardner, 2010). Another challenge for the managers
in the beginning of the implementation process comes in the form of rollback of the
system to the previous stage. Another challenge for companies is the departure of the
employees from the companies in the advanced level of Lean implementation
(Wittenberg, 1994).
Employees’ skills, knowledge and experience necessary for performing some specific
tasks throughout the company are difficult to copy and hence provide a platform for
sustainable competitive advantage (Watanabe, 2011). When the key members of the
staff become headhunted by other larger organizations that offer them substantial
benefits, it becomes difficult to retain those staff members. It becomes time-consuming,
expensive and can have a major impact on the morale of single-status firms (Lyu, 1996).
The human resource policy in the observed company is based on low levels of staff
turnover and the experience of facing a struggle to replace key workers after they have
left the company (Falk et al., 1993). Even though that staff expresses loyalty to the
company in all surveys conducted, in the face of such incentives, they still leave (Pheng,
2001; Gondhalekar, 1994).
2.4 Indian small-scale industries

The Ministry of Medium and Small Enterprises (MSME) Act 2006 described a
small-scale industry in which the total investment in terms of rupees does not exceed
beyond the limit of 10 million. It may be the service sector or manufacturing sector.
Small-scale industries play an important role in the Indian economy. These industries Kaizen
are run directly by the owner of the industry with a small group of the workers (Arya principles
and Jain, 2013). These workers are mostly untrained and working conditions are unsafe.
Still, these industries are helping to provide new employment opportunities for many
workers, contributing hugely to both rural and urban areas. But these industries are
facing some resisting factors that restrict their growth, reduce product quality and
increase manufacturing costs. These factors involve lack of motivation, old working 377
methods, poor working culture and lack of improvement activities (Jain, 2012a). These
industries are lagging behind in terms of the documentation of the work. All the
information just remains in the head of an individual. At least there should be an

operator who is maintaining the data and work in files or in a computer system. These
industries are using old methods and techniques, which is another worrying factor.
With modern technologies, a product can be manufactured very fast, in good designs
and at a lower cost. Old technology is unable to do so. Large industries are giving huge
competition in terms of quality and cost of the product. Large industries using latest
technologies in production and quality standards are much higher than those of small
industries. Small industries are not able to provide good-quality product in markets at
cheaper rates (Arya and Jain, 2013). The future of the Indian small-scale industries needs
to be secured and the competitive edge of these industries needs to be increased so as to
secure the future of India. And this can only be done by implementing Lean in the small
industries of India.
3. Research methodology
The methodology applied to implement Kaizen in Indian small-scale industry. First of
all, the literature related to Lean Manufacturing has been reviewed. After that, a
small-scale industry has been selected where Kaizen has to be implemented. Visits to
industry were carried out on a weekly basis. During the visits, the information regarding
conditions from different work locations, before implementing Kaizen has been collected
from the small-scale industry. Then assistance of cause and effect diagrams was taken
for analysis of working conditions without Kaizen. After analysis, the corrective action
plans for each activity and work location were designed. The action plan has been
implemented at different work locations and regularly practiced in the company. After
the implementation of Kaizen, again the information from improved working conditions
from different work locations with Kaizen was collected, analyzed and then the
conclusion was drawn. The methodology applied at various work-locations and is
explained in much better way by case studies Figure 1 shows various steps involved:
3.1 Kaizen implementation in safety

3.1.1 Observation of past conditions. The inventories that were lying on the floor could
cause injury to any worker. The inventories were occupying useful space that could be
used somewhere for some fruitful assignment.
3.1.2 Analysis of past conditions. Safety depends upon the working method, material,
operator attitude, working environment, routine, safety rules, precautions and, most
important, the habit to follow those rules. Figure 2 showing the cause and effect diagram
for safety.
3.1.3 Action plan suggestion and implementation. Table I showing the action plan
suggested for safety.
IJLSS
6,4
378
Figure 1.
Methodology
adopted for
implementing Kaizen
Figure 2.
Fishbone diagram for
safety
3.1.4 Conditions after implementation and comparison before and after. Before taking
action plans, the conditions were unsafe for working. The inventories were lying in the
path of traveling. Those inventories were blocking the path of walking.
Here Plate 1 shows the past conditions and Plate 2 represents the improved
conditions after implementation of the action plan. The habit of the workers to place the
inventories anywhere on the floor created erratic operating conditions which could Kaizen
cause injuries to any worker. Those inventories has been given a separate space inside principles
a rack and the pathway has been cleaned. An area of “5 square feet” is saved by
removing inventories from the floor.
3.1.5 Analysis after implementation. Cost of 1 square feet area ⫽ Rs 900.
Area saved ⫽ 5 square feet.
Savings ⫽ Saved area (Sq ft.) ⫻ Cost per square feet ⫽ 5 ⫻ 900 ⫽ Rs 4,500. 379
Type Action plan suggestion for safety
Method Working method should be safe

Machine Machine should be rigid. The preventive maintenance ensures the machine
always in good condition. It should be safe to use
Operator Operator should be attentive, skilled, trained. He/she should fully
concentrate on process and safety. He should follow the safety rules properly
Environment Environment should be clean, safe for work. A thermometer should be kept
to check the temperature Table I.
Material Material should be handled carefully. There should not be any inventory on Action plan for
the floor or in the pathway safety
Plate 1.
Inventories lying on
floor (past
conditions)
IJLSS
6,4
380
Plate 2.
Clean and proper
place given to
inventories
(improved
conditions)
3.2 Kaizen implementation in tool/Inventory access time

3.2.1 Observation of past conditions. The presence of undesired items makes the worker
spend an average of 10 minutes in search of tool/inventory every time. The objective is
to reduce tool/inventory retrieval time from the store room.
3.2.2 Analysis of past conditions. Inventory access time relies on conditions of store,
labeling of boxes of inventory, attitude and attention of the worker, environmental
conditions and visibility in the store room. Figure 3 shows the cause and effect diagram
for tool access time.
3.2.3 Action plan suggestion and implementation. Table II shows the action plan
suggested.
3.2.4 Conditions after implementation and comparison before and after. Plate 3
shows the scenario of the store before Kaizen implementation. The inventories in the
store were dislocated and spread here and there. The unnecessary items in the
storeroom were creating troubles. It was difficult to find out the desired inventory
from the store. The worker was spending an average of 10 minutes in search of
tool/inventory every time. There was a huge wastage of time, every time a worker
visits the store. In the action plan, different boxes have been provided to keep the
inventories and tools. Proper labels are provided on boxes so as to ensure that the
worker picks the right item from the right box in the minimum time. Undesired items
like covers, clothes sticks, etc. are eliminated. After the implementation of the action
Kaizen
principles
381
Figure 3.
tool access time
Type Action plan suggestion for inventory access time
Method Working method should be safe and quick

Operator Operator should be attentive, skilled and his attitude should be
towards completion of work successfully at proper time. A
habit of preventive cleaning should be developed in the
workers
Environment Environment should be clean, safe for work. Visibility inside
the store room should be good so as to avoid difficulty in
reading the labels of the boxes. Unnecessary items should be
eliminated from the store so as to avoid any interference
Material Inventory should be properly arranged and should be kept
inside boxes and each box should be labeled properly so as to Table II.
ensure that the worker straightaway access the right inventory Action plan for tool/
box without wasting crucial time inventory access time
plan, workers are now able to find the required inventory in just 1.3 minutes. The
improved conditions are shown in Plate 4. The time for searching and taking the
inventories from the store has been reduced up to 87 per cent. Comparison of the time
taken inside the store is shown in Figure 4.
3.2.5 Analysis after implementation. Average pay of a worker per month ⫽ Rs 9,000.
Average working hour per day ⫽ 8.
Average labor rate per minute ⫽ 9,000/(30 ⫻ 8 ⫻ 60 ⫻) ⫽ Rs 0.62.
Saved minute per worker ⫽ (10-1.3) ⫽ 8.7 minutes.
Total money saved per worker ⫽ 8.7 ⫻ 0.62 ⫽ Rs 5.394.
It means that there is a saving of Rs 5.394 every time workers makes a visit to the
store.
Average visits of the worker to the store per day ⫽ 5.
IJLSS
6,4
382
Plate 3.
Past conditions of
store
Saving per day per worker ⫽ 5 ⫻ 5.394 ⫽ Rs 26.97.

Total number of workers in the industry ⫽ 12.
Total saving per day ⫽ 12 ⫻ 26.97 ⫽ Rs 323.64.
Per month saving ⫽ 323.64 ⫻ 30 ⫽ Rs 9709.2.
3.3 Kaizen implementation in inventory safety

3.3.1 Observation of past conditions. Earlier, the inventories were not given appropriate
place, due to which inventories were covered with a layer of rust. There was a need to
protect the inventories from damage.
3.3.2 Analysis of past conditions. The deficiency in inventory depends upon various
factors such as worker’s attitude, skills and work handling approach. The
environmental factors are moisture content, chemicals and heat which affect the safety
of the inventory. The defective machine and wrong working/handling method can
introduce defects in products. The type of work material and pre-existing defects in the
casting also affect the safety of the inventory. Figure 5 shows the cause and effect
diagram for inventory safety.
Kaizen
principles
383
Plate 4.
Store after
implementing action
plans
Figure 4.
Comparison of
inventory access time
before and after
action plan
implementation
3.3.3 Action plan suggestion and implementation. Table III shows the action plan
suggested.
3.3.4 Conditions after implementation and comparison before and after. Earlier, the
habit of the workers to place the inventories anywhere has created lots of troubles as
IJLSS
6,4
384
Figure 5.
inventory safety
Type Action plan suggestion for inventory safety
Method Inventories should not be kept on the floor

Machine Machine should be rigid, preventive maintenance ensures the
machine in good condition always
Operator Operator should have a habit to place the inventories at defined
space, not at floor
Table III. Environment Environment should be clean, moisture and heat should not be high
Action plan for Material Material should be handled carefully. Covers could be provided on
safety of inventory inventory so as to prevent it from the dust
shown in Plate 5. The lot of inventories got damaged due to rust and mishandling. That
problem has been solved by providing awareness regarding inventory safety to the
workers. The company has to pay for defective items and it affects the company’s
earnings and its name too. After implementation of Kaizen, workers were more aware
regarding proper care and safety of the inventory, which has been shown in Plate 6.
3.3.5 Analysis after implementation. After implementation of Kaizen, workers’ habit
has changed. They realized the value of proper material handling.
3.4 Kaizen implementation in layout improvements

3.4.1 Observation of past conditions. By observing the past layout, it has been found that
the layout was suffering from backtracking, large distance between workstations and
disarrangement of the machines. The layout has been shown in Figure 7. Symbols L1, L2,
L3 and L4 represent Lathe Machines; G1, G2, G3 and G4 represent Surface Grinding
Machines; M1, M2, M3 and M4 represent Vertical Milling Machines; HM1 and HM2 are
used for Horizontal Milling Machines; “T” is the Tapping Machine; D1 and D2 are the
Drilling Machines; “F” is the Filing process; “A” is the Assembling process; “I” is the
Kaizen
principles
385
Plate 5.
Inventories lying on
floor covered with
layers of rust
Inspection process; and “P” is the Packing process. Flow between work-stations is
explained further:
• The flow of work (SCV) has started from workstation “1”. It is represented by L4
in layout. Facing operation has been performed there.
• The Second work-station is M1. The Sizing operation has been performed there. It
was situated at 28 ft. away from workstation “1”. It takes 38 sec to cover that
distance.
• The third workstation is M3, where machining of sides of the work was
performed. It was 40 ft. away from M1, and it takes 52 sec to cover that.
• Next station is “M4”. It was situated at 4 ft. distance from workstation “3”. A time
of 6 sec was taken to reach workstation “4”. Flange cutting operation was used to
be performed on workstation “4”.
• After moving 22 ft. from workstation “4”, workstation “5” was situated, where
sizing of the slot was performed on Horizontal Milling machine (HM2). A time of
29 sec was taken to reach workstation “5” from workstation “4”.
• Cutting of slot was performed on workstation “6” (HM1). For that, 6 ft. distance has
to be covered in 8 sec.
• Drilling operation was performed at workstation “7”. It was situated at 32 ft. from
workstation “6” and 42 sec was taken to reach there.
IJLSS
6,4
386
Plate 6.
A proper place given
to the inventories
• Tapping was performed at workstation “8” which was situated at 8 ft. from
workstation “7”. A time of 11 sec was taken to reach there.
• At 14 ft. from workstation “8”, workstation “9” was situated, where filing has been
performed manually. A time of 19 sec was taken to reach there.
• At workstation “10” Surface grinding on the front side of work piece used to be
performed. It is represented by “G2”. It was situated at 20 ft. from workstation “9”
and 26 sec was taken to cover that.
• Surface grinding on backside of the work piece was performed on workstation
“11”, which is represented by “G1”. It was situated at 4 ft. from workstation “10”.
A time of 6 sec was taken to reach there.
• At 16 ft. from there, workstation “12” was situated and 21 sec has taken to reach
there. Workstation “12” has to perform the assembling operation.
• Inspection was performed at workstation “13”, which was situated at 16 ft. from
workstation “12”. A time of 21 sec was taken to reach there.
• The packaging of product was performed on workstation “14”, which was
situated at 12 ft. away from workstation “13”. A time of 16 sec was taken to reach
here.
• The store was situated at 18 ft. distance from the packing section and 24 sec was
taken to reach there.
• In whole, the flow of material from workstation “1” to the store, a total of 224 ft. Kaizen
distance was covered and 319 sec was taken to cover that distance. The flow of principles
material along with the distance covered is shown in Figure 6.
Figure 7 shows the past layout of the industry, and Table IV shows the distance and
time taken between the workstations before the implementation of Kaizen.
Due to poor layout, the product had to travel a lot between workstations and it 387
consumed more time too.
3.4.2 Analysis of past conditions. The lead time and distance travelled by a product
relies upon the working method, machine rigidity, worker’s attitude, training, skills,
working conditions, defects and rework. Figure 7 shows the cause and effect diagram for
distance travelled by a product.
3.4.3 Action plan suggestion and implementation. Table V
• Workstation L4 is used to perform facing. L1 is nearest to workstation “2” as
compared with “L4”. An idea has been provided to change workstation “1” from
L4 to L1. It reduced the distance from 28 to 14 ft. and the time is been reduced from
38 to 19 sec.
• Workstation M3 is been replaced by M2, which reduced the distance between
workstations “2” and “3” from 40 to 4 ft. and the time is reduced from 52 to 6
sec.
• Workstation M3 is placed between M2 and HM1. It reduced the distance from
22 to 4 ft. and the time is reduced from 29 to 6 sec. The drilling operation is
Figure 6.
Layout before the
implementation of
the Kaizen
IJLSS
6,4
388
Figure 7.
distance travelled by
product
S. No. Material flow Distance (ft) Time (sec)
1 Station 1 to 2 28 38
9 Station 9 to10 20 26
10 Station 10 to 11 4 6
Table IV. 11 Station 11 to 12 16 21
Distance & time 12 Station 12 to 13 16 21
taken B/W 13 Station 13 to 14 12 16
workstations (Before 14 Station 14 to15 18 24
implementation) Total 224 319
shifted from D2 to D1. It reduced the distance from 32 to 4 ft. and time is
reduced from 42 to 6 sec. It reduced the distance from 8 to 4 ft. between
workstations 7 and 8. The time reduced from 11 to 6 sec.
• The Inspection table is shifted near the assembly table. It reduced the distance
from 16 to 6 ft. and time reduced from 21 to 8 sec. It reduced the distance
between workstations 13 and 14 from 12 to 6 ft. and time reduced from 16 to 8
sec. Between the packaging station to store 15, the distance is reduced from 18
to 16 ft. and time reduced from 24 to 21 sec.
Type Action plan for improvement in layout
Kaizen
principles
Method Inventories should not be kept on the floor
Machine Machine should be arranged properly, partition lines should be
provided so as to ensure the walking area and machining area.
Backtracking can be avoided by appropriate arrangement of the
machines
Operator Worker should place the inventories at defined space
389
Environment Environment should be clean, moisture and heat should not be high
Material Material should be handled carefully Table V.
• Total distance reduced from 224 to 126 ft; this reduced by 43.75 per cent. The
time reduced from 319 to 172 sec; this reduced by 46.08 per cent. Earlier there
was an obdurate flow of the work between the workstations. It has been
eliminated from the layout. Figure 8 shows an improved layout after action
plans’ implementation
Figure 8 shows an improved layout of the industry, and Table VI shows the distance and
time covered by the product in improved conditions.
Figure 12 shows the comparison of time taken by the product between different
workstations.
Figure 9 shows the comparison of total distance before and after the implementation
of Kaizen.
Figure 8.
Improved layout
IJLSS S. No. Material flow Distance (ft) Time (sec)
6,4
390 5 Station 5 to 6 6 8
9 Station 9 to10 24 32
Table VI. 10 Station 10 to 11 4 6
Distance travelled 11 Station 11 to 12 16 21
and time taken by 12 Station 12 to 13 6 8
product between 13 Station 13 to 14 6 8
workstations (after 14 Station 14 to15 16 21
implementation) Total 126 172
Figure 9.
Comparison of total
distance covered by
the product before
and after
Figure 10 shows the comparison of total time taken before and after the implementation
of Kaizen. Figure 11 shows the distance travelled by products between different
workstations (Figure 12).
3.4.4 Results
• Implementation of Kaizen reduced the total distance between workstations from
224 to 126 ft; this reduced by 43.75 per cent.
• The time taken to cover the total distance reduced from 319 to 172 sec; this
reduced by 46.08 per cent.
• Earlier there was a problem of backtracking and congestion between the
workstations, but that problem has been eliminated, and the layout of the industry
is modified and simplified.
Kaizen
principles
391
Figure 10.
Comparison of total
time taken by the
product
Figure 11.
Comparison of the
distance traveled at
different
workstations
4. Conclusion and implications for research in future

Today, a competitive scenario has been prevailing in the world in every field. The field
of manufacturing has largely been influenced by competitions. For a firm, it is difficult
to survive successfully in such competitive situations. In this study, the implementation
of Kaizen made lots of savings to the Indian small-scale industry, which has been shown
in terms of money and time. Implementation of Kaizen has reduced the inventory access
time for the store from 10 to 1.3 minutes and, by doing this, an amount of Rs 9709.2 has
been saved per month over 12 numbers of workers. The layout of the industry has been
modified and total distance travelled by the product between workstations has
been reduced from 226 to 126 ft. The time taken in covering the total distance has been
reduced from 319 to 172 sec. An area of 5 square feet has been recovered and thus
Rs 4,500 has been saved. A habit to place inventories at defined place has been
developed in the workers.
IJLSS
6,4
392
Figure 12.
Comparison of time
at different
workstations
This paper will inspire practitioners to implement Kaizen in Indian small-scale

industries. This paper highlights how Kaizen can reduce the cost of products by
removing wastes from the processes, how to create a safe workplace, how to develop the
habit of cleanliness in the workers and how to find the ways to increase the capacity of
the industry. These improvements have been necessary to ensure bright future of an
Indian small-scale industry.
Future research can be focused on reduction of product lead time by implementation
of ISO, VSM and creation of such a supportive environment in which implementing
Lean can become easy so as to get more meaningful results.
References
Angelis, J. and Fernandes, B. (2012), “Innovative Lean: work practices and product and process
improvements”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 74-84.
Aoki, K. (2008), “Transferring Japanese Kaizen activities to overseas plants in China”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 518-539.
Arya, A.K. and Jain, S.K. (2013), “Impacts of Kaizen in a small-scale industry of India: a case
study”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 22-44.
Bateman, N. and David, A. (2002), “Process improvement programs: a model for assessing
sustainability”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 22
No. 5, pp. 515-526.
Berger, A. (1997), “Continuous improvement and: standardization and organizational designs”,
Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 110-117.
Bessant, J., Caffyn, S. and Gilbert, J. (1995), “Continuous improvement – the European dimension”,
in Draaijer, D., Boer, H. and Krabbendam, K. (Eds), Proceedings of the 2nd International
Conference of the European Operations Management Association Management and New
Production Systems, Enschede, pp. 31-40.
Brunet, A.P. and New, S. (2003), “Kaizen in Japan: an empirical study”, International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, Vol. 23 No. 12, pp. 1426-1446.
Canel, C. (2000), “Just-in-time is not just for manufacturing: a service perspective”, Industrial Kaizen
Management & Data Systems, Vol. 100 No. 2, pp. 1-60.
principles
Charles, A.A. and Chucks, O.K. (2012), “Adopting the Kaizen suggestion system in South African
Lean automotive components companies”, Science Journal of Business Management.
Chauhan, G. and Singh, T.P. (2013), “Resource flexibility for Lean manufacturing: SAP-LAP
analysis of a case study”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 370-388.
Chiarini, A. (2011), “Japanese total quality control, TQM, deming’s system of profound knowledge, 393
BPR, Lean and Six Sigma: comparison and discussion”, International Journal of Lean Six
Sigma, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 332-355.
Chiarini, A. (2012), “Lean production: mistakes and limitations of accounting systems inside the
SME sector”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 681-700.
Cole, R.E. (1994), “Different quality paradigms and their implications for organizational learning”,
The Japanese Firm: Sources of Competitive Strength, Oxford University Press, New York,
NY, pp. 66-83.
Cuscela, K. (1998), “Kaizen blitz: attacks work processes at Dana Corp”, IIEE Solutions, Vol. 30
No. 4, pp. 29-31.
Demeter, K. and Matyusz, Z. (2010), “The impact of Lean practices on inventory turnover”,
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 133 No. 1, pp. 154-163.
Donaldson, L. (2002), “Damned by our own theories: contradictions between theories and
management education”, Academy of Management Learning and Education, Vol. 1 No. 1,
pp. 96-106.
Doria, J., Rozanski, H. and Cohen, E. (2003), “What business needs from business schools”,
Strategy Business, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 38-45.
Edwards, P., Collinson, M. and Rees, C. (1998), “The determinants of employee responses to total
quality management: six case studies”, Organization Studies, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 449-475.
Emiliani, M.L. (2001), “Redefining the focus of investment analysts”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 13
No. 1, pp. 34-51.
Emiliani, M.L. (2004a), “Is management education beneficial to society?” Management Decision,
Vol. 42 Nos 3/4, pp. 481-498.
Emiliani, M.L. (2004b), “Improving business school courses by applying Lean principles and
practices”, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 175-187.
Emiliani, M.L. (2005), “Using Kaizen to improve graduate business school degree programs”,
Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 37-52.
Eroglu, C. and Hofer, C. (2011), “Lean, leaner, too Lean? The inventory performance link revisited”,
Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 356-369.
Etzioni, A. (2002), “When it comes to ethics, B-schools get an F”, The Washington Post, 4 August,
p. B4.
Evans, S. and Jukes, S. (2000), “Improving co-development through process alignment”,
Falk, C., Brewer, P. and Brewer, V. (1993), “Total quality management in a college of business:
operations and administration”, Mid-American Journal of Business, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 3-12.
Gondhalekar, S. (1995), “Towards TQM using process dynamics: a case study”, International
Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 12 No. 9, pp. 192-209.
Gondhalekar, S., Tripathi, V. and Hambali, S. (1991), “Godrej Kaizen system: companywide
productivity improvement”, Productivity, Vol. 32, pp. 450-457.
IJLSS Grant, R.M. (1991), “The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: implications for
strategy formulation”, California Management Review, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 114-135.
6,4
Grey, C. (2004), “Reinventing business schools: the contribution of critical management
education”, Academy of Management Learning and Education, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 178-186.
Handy, C. (2002), “What’s a business for?”, Harvard Business Review, December, pp. 49-55.
Hoerl, R. and Gardner, M. (2010), “Lean Six Sigma, creativity, and innovation”, International
394 Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 30-38.
Huber, G.P. (1984), “The nature and design of post-industrial organizations”, Management
Science, Vol. 30 No. 8, pp. 928-951.
Ibrahim, A. (2005), “A model for the assessment of waste in job shop environments”, International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 800-822.
Imai, M. (1989), “Kaizen: the key to competitive advantage”, CECSA, Mexico (in Spanish), Vol. 103,
p. 23.
John, L., Michela, J. and Noori, H. (1996), “The dynamics of continuous improvement”,
International Journal of Quality Science, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 19-47.
Jorgensen, F. (2003), “Jump-starting continuous improvement through self-assessment”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 23 No. 10,
pp. 1260-1278.
Karapetrovic, S. (1999), “University, Inc.”, Quality Progress, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 87-95.
Karkoszka, T. and Honorowicz, J. (2009), “Kaizen philosophy a manner of continuous
improvement of processes and products”, Journal of Achievements in Materials and
Manufacturing Engineering, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 197-203.
Karlsson, C. and Ahlstorm, P. (1996), “Assessing changes towards Lean production”,
Koike, K. (1994), “Learning and incentive systems in Japanese industry”, The Japanese Firm:
Sources of Competitive Strength, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp. 41-65.
Lam, A. (2000), “Tacit knowledge, organizational learning and societal institutions: an integrated
framework”, Organization Studies, Vol. 21, pp. 487-513.
Lewis, M.A. (2000), “Lean production and sustainable competitive advantage”, International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 20 No. 8, pp. 959-978.
Lyu, J. (1996), “Applying Kaizen and automation to process reengineering”, Journal of
Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 125-132.
McKenna, J.F. (1991), “America’s best plants: SPX”, Industry Week, Vol. 240 No. 20, pp. 49-50.
Manuel, F. and Barraza, F. (2012a), “Applying Gemba-Kaizen in a multinational food company: a
process innovation framework”, International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences,
Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 27-50.
Manuel, F. and Barraza, F. (2012b), “An exploratory study of 5S: a multiple case study of
multinational organizations in Mexico”, Asian Journal on Quality, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 77-99.
March, J.G. (1991), “Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning”, Organization
Science, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 71-87.
Melcher, A. and Acar, W. (1990), “Standard-maintaining and continuous improvement systems:
experiences and comparisons”, Interfaces, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 24-40.
Mintzberg, H. (2002), “Beyond selfishness”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 67-74.
Motwani, J. (2003), “A business process change framework for examining Lean manufacturing: a
case study”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 103 No. 5, pp. 339-346.
Newitt, D.J. (1996), “Beyond BPR & TQM – managing through processes: is Kaizen enough?”, Kaizen
Proceedings Industrial Engineering, Institution of Electric Engineers, London, pp. 1-38.
principles
Ohno, T. (1988), Toyota Production System – Beyond Large-scale Production, Productivity Press,
New York, NY.
Oliver, N. and Delbridge, R. (2002), “Lean production and manufacturing performance
improvement in Japan, the UK and US 1994-2001”, ESRC Centre for Business Research,
University of Cambridge No. 232, Vol. 16, pp. 44-59. 395
Pfeffer, J. and Fong, C. (2002), “The end of business schools? Less success than meets the eye”,
Academy of Management Learning and Education, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 78-95.
Pomlett, L. (1994), “UK logistics: turning Japanese?”, Logistics Information Management, Vol. 7
No. 1, pp. 14-16.
Priestman, S. (1985), “SQC and JIT: partnership in quality”, Quality Progress, Vol. 18 No. 5,
pp. 31-34.
Roffe, I. (1998), “Conceptual problems of continuous quality improvement and innovation in
higher education”, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 74-82.
Ruiz, P., Santos, J. and Arbos, L. (2013), “Lean manufacturing: costing the value stream”, Industrial
Management & Data Systems, Vol. 113 No. 5, pp. 647-668.
Russell, R.S. and Taylor, B.W. (1999), Operations Management, 2nd ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper
Saddle River, NJ.
Schroeder, D.M. and Robinson, A.G. (1991), “America’s most successful export to Japan:
continuous improvement programs”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 3,
pp. 67-81.
Singh, B., Garg, S.K., Sharma, S.K. and Grewal, C. (2010), “Lean implementation and its benefits to
production industry”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 157-168.
Smadi, S.A. (2009), “Kaizen strategy and the drive for competitiveness: challenges and
opportunities”, Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal
Incorporating Journal of Global Competitiveness, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 203-211.
Stone, K.B. (2012), “Four decades of Lean: a systematic literature review”, International Journal of
Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 112-132.
Styhre, A. (2001), “Kaizen, ethics, and care of the operations: management after empowerment”,
Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 38 No. 6, pp. 795-810.
Teece, D. and Pisano, G. (1997), “Dynamic capabilities and strategic management”, Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 509-533.
Toni, L. and Eileen, M. (2008), “Kaizen events and organizational performance: a field study”,
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 57 No. 8,
pp. 637-658.
Turney, P.B. and Anderson, B. (1989), “Accounting for continuous improvement”, Sloan
Management Review, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 37-47.
Watanabe, R.M. (2011), “Getting ready for Kaizen: organizational and knowledge management
enablers”, Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, Vol. 41 No. 4,
pp. 428-448.
Wittenberg, G. (1994), “Kaizen, the many ways of getting better”, Assembly Automation, Vol. 14
No. 4, pp. 12-17.
Womack, J.P. and Jones, D.T. (1994), “From Lean production to the Lean enterprise”, Harvard
Business Review, March-April, pp. 93-103.
IJLSS Womack, J.P. and Jones, D.T. (1996), “Beyond Toyota: how to root out waste and pursue
perfection”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 74 No. 5, pp. 140-158.
6,4
Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T. and Roos, D. (1990), “The machine that changed the world: based on the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 5-million Dollar 5-year”, Study on the Future of the
Automobile, Rawson Associates, New York, NY.
Zimmerman, W.J. (1991), “Kaizen: the search for quality”, The Journal of Continuing Higher
396 Education, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 7-10.
Further reading
Brunet, A.P. (2000), “Kaizen: from understanding to action”, Institution of Electrical Engineers,
Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 1-45.
About the authors

Amit Kumar Arya is an Assistant Professor in Ambala College of Engineering and Applied
Research, Haryana, India. He is a Master of Technology from Kurukshetra University,
Kurukshetra, Haryana, India, in 2013. His research is primarily focused in the area of Lean
Implementation. He obtained his Bachelor degree from Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra,
India, in 2009. He holds the projects of Lean implementation in small-scale industries. Amit Kumar
Arya is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected]
Suraj Choudhary is an Assistant Professor in Ambala College of Engineering and Applied
Research, Haryana, India. He got his Masters from Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra,
Haryana, India, in 2012.
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]

5 TH

Uploaded by

5 TH

Uploaded by

International Journal of Lean Six Sigma

Assessing the application of Kaizen principles in Indian small-scale industry

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Assessing the application of Kaizen

2.1 Principles of Kaizen

2.2 What is waste?

2.3 Implementation of Kaizen

2.4 Indian small-scale industries

information just remains in the head of an individual. At least there should be an

3.1 Kaizen implementation in safety

Type Action plan suggestion for safety

Method Working method should be safe

3.2 Kaizen implementation in tool/Inventory access time

Type Action plan suggestion for inventory access time

Method Working method should be safe and quick

Saving per day per worker ⫽ 5 ⫻ 5.394 ⫽ Rs 26.97.

3.3 Kaizen implementation in inventory safety

Type Action plan suggestion for inventory safety

Method Inventories should not be kept on the floor

3.4 Kaizen implementation in layout improvements

S. No. Material flow Distance (ft) Time (sec)

Material Material should be handled carefully Table V.

4. Conclusion and implications for research in future

This paper will inspire practitioners to implement Kaizen in Indian small-scale

About the authors

You might also like