Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal

ISSN: 1625-8312 (Print) 1624-6039 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tscf20

The human dimension of lean: a literature review

Florian Magnani, Valentina Carbone & Valérie Moatti

To cite this article: Florian Magnani, Valentina Carbone & Valérie Moatti (2019): The human
dimension of lean: a literature review, Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal, DOI:
10.1080/16258312.2019.1570653

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/16258312.2019.1570653

Published online: 24 Jan 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tscf20
SUPPLY CHAIN FORUM: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
https://doi.org/10.1080/16258312.2019.1570653

The human dimension of lean: a literature review

Florian Magnani, Valentina Carbone and Valérie Moatti
Information and Operations Management Department, ESCP Europe, Paris, France

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Interest in lean, the managerial system exemplified by the Toyota Production System, has Lean management; Toyota
gradually spread throughout different industries since the 1980s. Compared to mass produc- production system; human
tion systems, lean systems ultimately transform the way employees act within their work dimension; literature review
environment. Despite significant improvements in operations management, the human
dimension of lean has received surprisingly limited attention from the academic realm,
until recently. This study serves primarily as a literature review of articles at the crossroads
between the technical part of lean and its human-related issues. We reviewed 95 articles and
our analysis provides a clearer view of the evolution of lean literature with regard to its
human elements. The different levels of analysis can be summarised as follows: lean’s impact
on working conditions and employee outcomes, HR practices as facilitators of lean adoption,
and employee development as a moderator of lean adoption. We conclude with a framework
that serves as a potential guide to include the human dimension of lean in research.

Lean is a widely studied concept with many applications guide the development of employee competencies and
in services and industries. Lean studies began when work conditions interconnected with the technical
American researchers became interested in the way dimension of TPS. ‘Making things’ (Monozukuri) was
Toyota made their cars using the Toyota Production the nature of the industry, but the Toyota Way added
System (Cusumano 1988; Krafcik 1988; Monden 2011). In the ‘educating people’ dimension (Hitozukuri), promot-
the early 1980s, an MIT study group – International Motor ing the ongoing development of skills and abilities in an
Vehicle Program – launched an international investiga- environment of mutual trust (Saito 1995). The Hitozukuri
tion of motor vehicle production and discovered dimension, also known as ‘respect for people’ (Sugimori
a significant paradigm shift in mass production methods et al. 1977), is reflected in human mechanisms and
(Fujimoto 1999; Womack, Jones, and Roos 1990), which benefits the organisation by providing employees with
led to an increase in both quality and productivity. They the opportunity to contribute and achieve self-
characterised this shift as lean production (Krafcik 1988) to realisation while maximising their performance
describe the system exemplified by Toyota: the Toyota (Emiliani and Stec 2005). The Respect for People princi-
Production System (Monden 2011). Practices associated ple presented in the Toyota Way demonstrates one of
with lean then began to spread across the supply chain the prevalent convictions that Toyota cultivates: TPS was
(Buonamico, Muller, and Camargo 2017; Lemieux et al. first and foremost a human-based system in which peo-
2012; Sánchez and Pérez 2001) and service industries ple were engaged in the continuous improvement of
(Zhu, Johnson, and Sarkis 2018). While lean and TPS organisational processes and in which people’s needs
have been studied by researchers as innovative opera- were both understood and respected (Dahlgaard and
tions and organisation management concepts, Dahlgaard-Park 2006). At that point, Toyota demon-
the second part of Toyota’s motto – ‘We do not just strated that the Just-In-Time system and Quality
build cars, we build people’ – has not been fully taken Management system (Basu and Miroshnik 1999) were
into consideration (Koenigsaecker 2010). built upon and deeply rooted in ‘Respect for People’
Few researchers have studied the technical dimen- (Liker and Hoseus 2010). Even though the human
sion of lean and its interaction with its inherent human dimension described in the Toyota Way appears to be
dimension (Jayamaha et al. 2014). Neither Ohno (1988) explicitly related to its technical dimension,
nor Womack, Jones, and Roos (1990) have constructed a comprehensive characterisation of the human dimen-
explicitly clear theories concerning the inclusion of the sion of TPS remains absent from the literature.
human dimension during lean adoption. Fujio Cho, then Recently, researchers have highlighted that lean pri-
president of Toyota, introduced ‘The Toyota Way’, the marily focuses on employees, at least in the TPS
human dimension of TPS, as a new set of values that (Jayamaha et al. 2014). Specifically, these new studies

CONTACT Florian Magnani florian.magnani@edu.escpeurope.eu Information and Operations Management Department, ESCP Europe, 79
Avenue de la République, Paris 75011, France
© 2019 KEDGE Business School
2 F. MAGNANI ET AL.

consider the human dimension as undoubtedly one of to the other can be understood by looking at the adjust-
the most influential parameters in the successful adop- ment of Japanese management practices (Aoki,
tion of lean by an organisation (Bortolotti, Boscari, and Delbridge, and Endo 2014). For example, the HR prac-
Danese 2015). Some lean research has been devoted to tices associated with Japanese management practices
topics connected to the human dimension, such as the were adapted to facilitate transferability (Basu and
human resources system or its cultural embeddedness, Miroshnik 1999) during the adoption of new technical
without ever explicitly referring to the human dimen- bundles. A possible explanation for these differing
sion. A well developed research stream emphasising the points of view amongst theorists rests on the posture
cultural embeddedness of lean principles (Bortolotti, researchers or practitioners adopt depending on the
Boscari, and Danese 2015) seeks a finer understanding way they perceive lean and, respectively, its human
of the human dimension related to a company’s cultural dimension. Distinguishing between these sometimes
factors. Some studies have tried to understand the rea- contradictory results requires a finer understanding of
sons behind the differences between Toyota and other the existing relationships between the lean technical
companies’ adoption of lean – highlighting the specifi- dimension and its human dimension.
cities of Japanese culture in comparison with Western Recent studies have depicted lean as a sociotechnical
culture (Taira 1996), whereas others have focused on system (Soliman, Saurin, and Anzanello 2018), which
other contextual factors such as national culture or consequently opened the door to discussions about
organisational culture (Kull et al. 2014). Lean appears the human (soft) dimension (Jayamaha et al. 2014;
to be anchored in its contextual factors, which explains Preece and Jones 2010; Taylor, Taylor, and McSweeney
why lean adoption has proven to be a challenge outside 2013) and its interactions with the technical (hard)
of Toyota (Arlbjørn and Freytag 2013). And the contex- dimension. As a result, there has been a shift from
tual factors seem to be embedded in the human dimen- seeing lean as purely a process-oriented strategy to
sion. Accordingly, a better understanding of the lean as a people-oriented strategy (Jayamaha et al.
influence the human dimension has on lean adoption 2014; Marodin and Saurin 2013). However, there
may help to better understand the mechanisms remains a notable lack of theoretical considerations
involved during the adoption process. associated with the human dimension (Taylor, Taylor,
Reading through the academic literature on lean and McSweeney 2013). Studies that explored the inter-
dealing with aspects of the human dimension, one action between lean’s technical dimension and its
finds a surprisingly large variety of approaches, ques- human dimension took into account a variety of human-
tions, and definitions that have been adopted. Even related definitions, approaches and questions. This
though Shah and Ward (2003) described lean constitu- meant that the emerging literature lacked a common
ents, including human resources management (HRM), vocabulary, which is needed in order to theoretically
the diverse interpretations of lean have made it difficult frame lean and its human dimension relationships. The
for researchers to determine the effects that lean has on following table (Table 1) points out the different con-
performance (Buonamico, Muller, and Camargo 2017; notations of the word ‘human’ used in articles dealing
Lemieux et al. 2012), on employees (Parker 2003) or its with the human dimension in a lean context:
impact on HRM (Forrester 1995). The relationship The term ‘human’ has multiple meanings in the
between lean constituents and its human dimension lean literature. However, the concept of HRM fre-
shows us the impact of JIT/TQM/TPM bundles on HRM, quently incorporates a combination of all or many of
such as consequences on employees (Jackson and these connotations. Often referred to as personnel
Martin 1996) or the human influence during the adop- management or labour relations (Forrester 1995;
tion of technical bundles (Oliver 1990). Some studies MacDuffie 1995) in recent usage, HRM has been
(Lewchuk and Robertson 1996; Parker 2003; de Treville regarded as the philosophies, policies, procedures,
and Antonakis 2006) aim to better understand the con- and practices that relate to effective people manage-
sequences that lean work practices have on employees. ment and positive employee outcomes in an organi-
The first relationship, between lean and employees’ sation. However, the terms do not make a clear
issues, has been depicted alternately as positive, nega- distinction between the impacted employee and the
tive, or controversial. The second relationship can be people influencing the adoption. The term ‘human
summarised as HRM support of technical bundles dimension’ aims to encompass all these connotations.
(Furlan, Dal Pont, and Vinelli 2011). Here we find that Consequently, we wish to address the following
some authors see potential in creating conditions that gaps identified in the introduction: the lack of
effectively tap into and develop the human dimension a characterisation of the human dimension of lean,
(Power and Sohal 2000), such as the supportive role of of understanding the influence of the human dimen-
HR practices (Deshpande, Golhar, and Stamm 1994) or sion during the adoption process, and of clarity con-
the HR function’s role and its interaction with other cerning its relationship with the technical dimension.
departments’ support of the technical bundles (Palo This paper attempts to answer Marodin and Saurin’s
and Padhi 2005). The transition from one relationship (2013) call to identify effective theories and practices
 SUPPLY CHAIN FORUM: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 3

Table 1. The connotations of ‘human’ found in the lean Review methodology

literature.
Authors Connotations of ‘human’: We chose to perform a structured literature review to
Treville and Antonakis (2006)
Employee: workforce as a resource increase reproducibility and to provide an appropriate
Lewchuk and Robertson Impacted employees: distinction means for synthesising a growing field of knowledge
(1996) between managers and workers
Sparrow and Otaye-Ebede HR functions: the department such as lean literature (Marodin and Saurin 2013). We
(2014) responsible for management of gathered and summarised the research findings pertain-
personnel
MacDuffie (1995) HR practices: activities that facilitate
ing to the human dimension of lean found in the existing
HR Management and HR literature in relevant journals across the fields of
Development Operations Management, Human Resources, Psychology
Martínez-Jurado, Moyano HR management: the management of
Fuentes, and Gómez (2013) working conditions and Sociology. In order to reduce bias and to increase
Alagaraja and Egan (2013) HR development: employee skills and research transparency, a detailed description of the steps
abilities development
taken to select and analyse the literature is provided
below (Denyer and Tranfield 2009). In conducting the
literature review, we followed the steps presented in
to manage the systemic, human and organisational
Figure 1.
dimensions of lean. To do so, we decided to study
The first stage of the structured literature review called
how the literature has addressed the combination of
for a keyword search of journal articles in all major data-
the lean technical dimension and its human dimen-
bases, such as EBSCO host (Business Source Premier),
sion. Through a literature review (Methodology), this
Scopus, Springer, Web of science, ScienceDirect, etc. We
article aims to build upon the human dimension per-
aimed to cover the human dimensions of lean or TPS
spectives (Results) found in articles examining lean
through our choice of keywords. Our search consists of
and the characterisation of the human dimension
a combination of terms related to both lean and its
addressed therein. Finally, we will discuss the results
human dimension. Details regarding the keyword combi-
(Discussion) and map out potential future research
nations used for the search are provided in Table 2. We
directions (Research agenda).
chose these words in order to find any possible combina-
tion of ‘human’, ‘HR’, ‘people’, ‘worker’ etc., terms used
Methodology interchangeably to signify the human dimension and the
human resources (employees) themselves. In studies that
To assess whether and how lean and its human dimen-
try to investigate in depth the lean and TPS concepts, it is
sion have been analysed in research, we conducted
difficult to find unequivocal definitions or clear-cut dis-
a structured literature review. By making a finer analysis
tinctions to differentiate the two concepts (Jayamaha
of previous literature (Denyer and Tranfield 2009), this
et al. 2014; Jones 1992). Consequently, we included
literature review initiates a theory building process. This
both terms in our search, taking into consideration that
section describes the review methodology and offers
many authors use the two concepts interchangeably.
a descriptive analysis of the results.

Search Results: 581 Additional articles: 0

Scientific Databases (EBSCO, Scopus, Springer…) From other sources

Screened Articles: 581 Excluded Articles: 389

Title search + papers in English From non peer-reviewed journals

Eligible Articles: 192 First selection of articles for screening: 56

Peer-reviewed journals Excluded manually: food topics, book reviews and duplicates

Full-text articles Full-text articles excluded with reasons: 41

assessed for review: 136 Excluded manually because not relevant to the topic: Lean and
Topic relevance HR

Final set of articles for

qualitative synthesis: 95
Relevant articles based on the following criteria:
Articles focusing on the relationships between Lean and HR
Articles focusing on the impact of Lean on HR
Articles focusing on the influence of HR on Lean

Figure 1. Search process and results.

4 F. MAGNANI ET AL.

Table 2. Results of the combination of words link to lean and More than half of the papers (52/95) were published
its human dimension. between 2013 and 2017. This shows a recent, increasing
Combination Results Combination Results interest in lean topics linked to human dimensions. Most
Lean Human 7 Toyota Human 6 of the research takes a qualitative approach (41), but
Human resource 14 Human resource 2
Employee 22 Employee 4 quantitative (32) and conceptual studies (6) are also repre-
People 4 People 1 sented. Single-case studies dominate the sample. The
HR* 9 HR* 0
Labor 12 Labor 0 complexity of the topic makes it difficult to model and
Worker 8 Worker 0 test relationships through survey data, so researchers
Workforce 1 Workforce 0
Manager 5 Manager 0 prefer in-depth studies with only one or a few subjects.
Total 82 Total 13 Moreover, emerging fields of research are predominantly
conceptual and qualitative, as researchers in this phase try
to establish a common vocabulary, define concepts, and
In the second stage, we categorised the results accord-
explore causal relationships. Table 3 shows the distribu-
ing to their sources (academic journals, book reviews,
tion of methodologies applied in the articles.
newspaper articles). We limited the review exclusively to
Before starting our qualitative analysis of the articles,
academic peer-reviewed publications in order to ensure
we decided to focus on the ones that used a literature
the academic credibility of the study and that the ana-
review methodology to gather most of the information
lysed work met certain standards. We did not specify
that would help us during the review process. Three of
particular journals, as we wanted to observe a broad
the literature reviews focused on the impact lean has on
range of research and reflect the diversity of approaches
employees, particularly regarding work and health. One
in the field. Regarding the time frame, no starting date
focused on HRM in companies that adopted lean and
was specified and we searched up to 30 September 2018.
one focused on lean enablers that can foster employee
We manually excluded database subjects that were unre-
participation in improvement initiatives. Table 4 pre-
lated to social sciences or to our areas of interest, such as
sents preliminary results of the two main perspectives:
FOOD and MEDICAL studies, where ‘lean’ has a different
organisational and team-level enablers’ perspectives
meaning. In the end, we obtained a total of 136 articles
and the impacts of lean on employees’ health and work.
from the database. After a careful reading of the 136
Of the 95 articles reviewed, the results show that
articles, we reduced the corpus to the 95 articles that
more than 50% of the articles discussed the human
explicitly deal with the central focus of our review: the
dimensions in terms of positive and negative impacts
human dimension of lean or TPS. Drawing on our pre-
of lean on employee conditions, such as work trans-
liminary results, we selected articles based on the follow-
formation or social impacts. We also identified an
ing criteria: (1) focus on the relationships between lean/
emerging interest in the human dimension as
TPS and the human dimension; (2) focus on the impact of
a potential facilitator of lean, i.e. transformation of
lean on the human dimension and (3) focus on the
policies within HR practices that facilitate lean adop-
influence of the human dimension on lean.
tion. Looking carefully at how lean was implemented
in organisations, we found that lean was either
described as a process-oriented strategy, focusing
Descriptive analysis
especially on its technical dimension, or as a people-
In this section, we will describe the remaining articles and oriented strategy, focusing primarily on its human
their contributions to understanding the human dimen- dimension. These preliminary results pertain to the
sion of lean. Figure 2 shows the evolution in the numbers purpose of lean and the type of relationship between
of articles published. It is important to note the scarcity of the technical and human dimensions.
articles dealing with lean and its human dimension com- Looking at employees, we noticed that they were
pared to the 1000+ academic articles dealing solely with considered either as impacted, impactor or neutral dur-
the technical dimension of lean. ing the lean adoption. There is also a distinction to be

Figure 2. Number of publications per year.

 SUPPLY CHAIN FORUM: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 5

Table 3. Research methods used in the articles.

Qualitative
Single- Multiple- Action Mixed Quantitative Conceptual/ Literature
case cases research methods surveys Theoretical review Editorial Commentary
27 11 3 6 32 6 5 2 3

Table 4. Preliminary results from existing literature reviews (Beauvallet and Houy 2010; Hasle et al. 2012; Landsbergis, Cahill,
and Schnall 1999; Rampasso et al. 2017; Van Dun and Celeste 2012).
Organisational level enablers Team level enablers Individual level effects
High-level leadership support Organisational commitment Effects on Job and Working environment Effects on Health and Well-Being
Strategic and structural clarity Knowledge sharing Job satisfaction Meaning of work
Human resource policy Conflict management Skills development Worker fatigue
Reward and recognition system Performance monitoring Increase in responsibilities Stress
Middle management support Team leadership Rewards based on collective performance Depression
Operator control system Team cohesion Skill variety Injuries
Resource abundance Team member support Decrease of control and autonomy Pressure
Psychological safety Repetitive work & intensification Tension and conflicts
Innovation Layoffs, employee turnover Social issues

made between the operating, supervising and inter- with articles that investigate the nature of employee
mediary roles they play during the lean adoption. In outcomes during the lean adoption process.
light of these preliminary results, our literature review
aims to bring into focus the different characteristics of
the human dimension (Table 5). To accomplish this task, Job characteristics and work transformation
we proceeded by reading and individually evaluating
Researchers discovered that lean leads to a modification
each article, looking for consistencies within the aspects
of work characteristics, in contrast to mass production
of the human dimension cited above. We then desig-
methods (Anderson-Connolly et al. 2002; Parker 2003).
nated sets of ‘key topics’ and human dimension char-
These modifications were brought about using lean
acteristics, which acted as codebooks and provided
methods and can be summarised as follows: intensifica-
guidance to structure our findings. The key topics
tion of work (Perez Toralla, Falzon, and Morais 2012),
emerged from the first round of article screening. This
increased autonomy (Anderson-Connolly et al. 2002),
classification process was conducted by two research-
and increased skills and team work (Cullinane et al.
ers. After thorough consideration, we agreed upon
2013). They are presumed to impact each employee’s
a classification of the 95 articles in relation to the
role: employees display higher levels of competency
human dimension. This study was built on the matrix
and problem solving capabilities, as well as increased
of categories presented in Table 5, which offers
cooperation, responsibility and continuous motivation
a foundation for comparing and contrasting the levels
to improve processes (Seppälä and Klemola 2004).
of analysis considered in the literature.
Work transformation causes a change in the work-
place environment. Some researchers asserted that tak-
Review results ing work hazards and variability into account in the
design of new work processes may help to improve
In this section, we examine the results of the literature
working conditions (Perez Toralla, Falzon, and Morais
review by analysing the human dimension addressed in
2012). They concluded that lean involved employees in
research articles. We found three perspectives: lean’s
business processes that went beyond the scope of their
impact on employees, HR practices that facilitate lean
specific jobs by incorporating methods that foster inno-
adoption, and employee behaviours related to human
vative behaviours. These behaviours, in turn, led
development.
employees to move beyond their assigned, compart-
mentalised tasks and to moderate the effect of lean
Lean’s impact on employee conditions and practices on employee outcomes.
outcomes
After looking at the transformation of work character- Worker perception and social outcomes
istics brought about by lean, this first section deals
Researchers suggested that lean adoption can have
a positive impact (Conti et al. 2006; Cullinane et al. 2013;
Table 5. Human dimension characteristics.
Longoni et al. 2013; Losonci, Demeter, and Jenei 2011;
Human status Human role
Workers object/impacted/recipient operating
Perez Toralla, Falzon, and Morais 2012; Seppälä and
Managers subject/impactor/performer supervising Klemola 2004; Shadur, Rodwell, and Bamber 1995),
Lean expert assistant/neutral/promoter intermediary a negative impact (Bouville and Alis 2014; Genaidy and
6 F. MAGNANI ET AL.

Karwowski 2003; Lindsay et al. 2014; Mathew and Jones while mediating its potentially negative effects on
2013; Parker 2003; Stewart et al. 2010) or an indeterminate employees.
impact (Distelhorst, Hainmueller, and Locke 2016;
Landsbergis, Cahill, and Schnall 1999) on employees’ psy-
HR practices that moderate employees’
chological and physical health. Lean practices make
perception of lean
heavy demands on workers’ muscular, cognitive, and
emotional resources (Genaidy and Karwowski 2003). Some authors described the roles employees played
However, Parker (2003) explained that the negative during the paradigm shift in a lean adoption (James
effects can be attributed to the employees’ perceptions and Jones 2014; Winfield 1994): they were operating,
of deteriorating work characteristics. supervising or moderating the lean adoption. HR prac-
Knowing which lean practices these companies tices help employees adopt these new roles by improv-
adopted could help to understand the reason for the ing their capabilities, increasing their motivation, and
different outcomes (positive and negative). It has been ultimately by mediating operational and social out-
suggested that if lean is inadequately understood or not comes (MacDuffie 1995). Because lean adoption is con-
wholly integrated, it can result in ‘lean-type approaches’ tingent upon the sociocultural, historical and
(Lindsay et al. 2014). Similarly, it has been shown that environmental context of the host nation and company
short-term, profit-maximising strategies can depreciate (James and Jones 2014), HR practices regulate the
human assets and create merely the illusion of empower- employees’ roles during the lean adoption while main-
ment (Jones, Latham, and Betta 2013). In addition, it has taining reciprocal social relationships (Winfield 1994).
been argued that management interests inevitably Recent studies have suggested that, through appropri-
diverge to some extent from those of the workers (Taira ate HR practices, the possible negative outcomes – poor
1996). These factors, as well as the manner in which lean is health outcomes, work density, and resistance – could
adopted, contribute to the inconsistent employee out- vanish (Bonavia and Marin-Garcia 2011; Martínez-
comes. These studies suggest that negative employee Jurado, Moyano Fuentes, and Gómez 2013). HR prac-
outcomes should be analysed with a finer understanding tices that develop and maintain an entirely co-operative
of the organisational context in which lean is adopted and and committed workforce support the standardisation
also taking management’s underlying intentions into of work processes and its improvements during a lean
consideration. adoption (Bonavia and Marin-Garcia 2011).
Some researchers were interested in identifying the Researchers stress the need to take into account
factors that might minimise such negative outcomes the different phases of lean adoption in order to
(Mathew and Jones 2013). They stressed how lean’s fully appreciate the potential contributions of HR
new work organisation can positively influence health- practices. Accordingly, in the pre-adoption phase,
related outcomes through job enrichment (Cullinane external change agents and internal managers may
et al. 2013), empowerment (Landsbergis, Cahill, and take steps to avert employee passivity or lack of
Schnall 1999), and involvement and learning (Bouville interest. In the post-adoption phase, HR practices
and Alis 2014; Seppälä and Klemola 2004; Sterling and focused on training, communication and recogni-
Boxall 2013). Other researchers proposed integrating tion may contribute to employees voluntarily
the interests of workers with those of the organisation embracing and anchoring the lean adoption
and considering whether individual factors are compa- (Martínez-Jurado, Moyano Fuentes, and Gómez
tible with each other (Losonci, Demeter, and Jenei 2011; 2013). Acknowledging these phases enhances the
Shadur, Rodwell, and Bamber 1995) and to what degree adaptability of HR practices: lean can be fostered
they are compatible with contextual factors (Seppälä by improving HR’s selection and hiring processes
and Klemola 2004). Lean’s impact on employee out- (Suaréz-Barraza and Ramis-Pujol 2010) or generally
comes remains a very controversial topic. On the one developing the human capital value stream. These
hand, lean is found to impose greater demands and studies demonstrated how HR practices facilitated
work pressures on employees, while on the other the adoption of lean while simultaneously increas-
hand, lean is seen as a human-centred system generat- ing the return on investment in human capital,
ing positive outcomes from an employee perspective. instead of merely serving as support for
Thus, internal and external factors appear to explain the management.
positive or negative outcomes concerning the impact
that lean has on employee working conditions.
Management’s role in facilitating employees’ lean
adoption
Researchers observed a significant increase in lean
HR practices that facilitate lean adoption
adoption levels when HR practices supported the lean
This section examines the arguments researchers implementation initiative through the managerial role
made about HR practices that foster lean adoption (Camuffo, De Stefano, and Paolino 2017; Olivella,
 SUPPLY CHAIN FORUM: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 7

Cuatrecasas, and Gavilan 2008). Lean adoption depends (Sterling and Boxall 2013). Employee participation in
on employee involvement in lean practices, which is improvement activities also largely depends on the
achieved by direct managers empowering them and clarity of their directives, the quality of their individual
providing them with more training, information and learning experiences and the collective acceptance of
new forms of recognition (Marin-Garcia and Bonavia the adoption (Alagaraja and Egan 2013).
2015). For example, managers typically train their work-
ers and improve their employment security (Bonavia
Competencies development
and Marin-Garcia 2011; LaScola et al. 2002). Managers’
roles and behaviours positively influence employees’ Researchers suggest that workforce competencies, not
perception and adoption of lean (Gelei, Matyusz, and only technical but also soft skills (Shokri, Waring, and
Losonci 2015; Van Dun, Hicks, and Wilderom 2017). Nabhani 2016), act as moderators of lean adoption
Managers foster collaborative problem-solving and (Uhrin, Bruque-Cámara, and Moyano-Fuentes 2017).
help create a supportive environment where employees Employee development is often done by an in-house
act as creative thinkers (Huo and Boxall 2017, 2018). lean training system (Martínez-Jurado, Moyano Fuentes,
Researchers acknowledged adapted HR practices and Gómez 2013; Tortorella and Fogliatto 2014; Winfield
(Olivella, Cuatrecasas, and Gavilan 2008), such as trust and Hay 1997) capable of capitalising on the collective
building and competency development activities willingness to adopt new working practices. Worker
(Anand and Kodali 2010; Bonavia and Marin-Garcia capability development (Liker and Hoseus 2010) and
2011; Martínez-Jurado, Moyano Fuentes, and Gómez empowerment (de Treville and Antonakis 2006) are pro-
2013; Preece and Jones 2010). HR practices focused on cesses grounded in management behaviours (Camuffo,
such activities are predictors of lean adoption De Stefano, and Paolino 2017). Researchers supporting
(Spasojevic Brkic and Tomic 2016) and contribute to this idea explained that the system relies on manage-
greater adoption involvement: employee and manager ment’s willingness to learn, adapt, and help employees
involvement positively affects the adoption of lean. solve problems. Lean managers promote lean adoption
Researchers showed that a performance appraisal linked through mentoring/coaching activities at the individual
to an employee reward and recognition system could level, interpersonal communication and group activities
potentially drive the adoption (Karlsson and Åhlström at the team level, as well as problem solving develop-
1996), inspiring employees and managers to become ment and guidelines deployment at the organisational
active participants during the transition (Emiliani and level (Tortorella et al. 2015). These interactions moderate
Stec 2005; Worley and Doolen 2006). employee outcomes and facilitate the alignment of
individual and organisational lean adoption (Gagnon
and Michael 2003). These ‘action-based’ educational
Employee behaviours related to development
activities (Winfield and Hay 1997) lay the foundations
While the previous sections looked at articles that for greater levels of trust between managers and
discuss lean’s impact on employee conditions and employees.
the HR practices that facilitate lean adoption, those
presented in this section depict employee behaviours
Strategic human resources management
as facilitators or inhibitors of the adoption.
In addition to these developmental activities,
Beauvallet and Houy (2010) started to discuss the
Participation in improvement activities
human dimension as a key to understanding the
Studies have shown that significant improvements in technical part of lean differently. Alagaraja and
work quality can be attributed to the individual learn- Egan’s (2013) research exemplified the influencer
ing that takes place when employees participate in role of cross-functional human principles, through
the adoption process. Following the ‘respect for peo- HRM, while adopting lean (Yorks and Barto 2013).
ple’ principle (Sugimori et al. 1977) developed by Subsequently, HRM can be considered as the reflec-
Toyota, consideration of workers’ capabilities is tion of the human dimension of lean. Researchers
emphasised by entrusting them with greater respon- evaluated HRM systems and human-oriented princi-
sibility and authority. Workers show higher levels of ples as a support for lean adoption (Anand and Kodali
acceptance of new practices and propose a greater 2010; de Koeijer, Paauwe, and Huijsman 2014; Gollan,
number of improvements (Mothersell 2009) when Kalfa, and Xu 2014; Sparrow and Otaye-Ebede 2014).
they are given the opportunity to display their cap- Researchers argue that there is a symbiotic relation-
abilities in full by actively learning in their own envir- ship between the human and technical dimensions of
onment (Yasukawa, Brown, and Black 2014). The latter lean (Anand and Kodali 2010; Gollan, Kalfa, and Xu
has been shown to lead to an overall increase in the 2014). HRM participates in translating continuous
motivation of workers involved in lean adoption, as improvement mechanisms to boost the effectiveness
well as managers’ opportunities to learn from them of human dimension integration (Sparrow and Otaye-
8 F. MAGNANI ET AL.

Ebede 2014). Some researchers argue that HRM, while negative outcomes of lean adoption from an employee
focusing on the development of shared lean compe- perspective. Some explanatory factors for such diver-
tencies, seems to progressively foster strategic gent results that emerged from our analysis could be
employee behaviours that assist in improving the linked to which phase of the lean adoption was
lean adoption process (de Koeijer, Paauwe, and observed by the researchers, along with cultural and/
Huijsman 2014). Researchers add that when HR pro- or organisational aspects. These contextual factors need
fessionals do not participate in the adoption, employ- to be clarified in order to better understand the specifi-
ees and managers are more reluctant to fully adopt cities of the human dimension and the employee out-
lean practices (Thirkell and Ashman 2014). comes of lean. The human dimension represents a key
In this literature review, we have attempted to to understanding the technical dimension and the over-
explain the perspectives of the human dimension all adoption process. Figure 3 is a representation of the
studied in lean research. The different levels of analy- human dimension framework that emerged in our lit-
sis can be summarised as follows: lean’s impact on erature review.
employee outcomes, HR practices as facilitators of These perspectives reveal how lean and its human
lean adoption, and employee behaviours as dimension have evolved. The human dimension of lean
a moderator of the outcomes. in the ‘Respect for People’ concept has rarely been put
into practice by managers (Emiliani 2003) and, conse-
quently, has been kept in the dark for a long time. After
Discussion the first appearance of the term lean, its definition
varied depending on the author or period. Holweg
Although the human dimension is intrinsic to the
(2007) showed that the definition and understanding
original TPS concept, we have evidence of an overall
of lean continues to change so much that, at some
scarcity of research on the human dimension of lean
point, it may no longer be recognisable. These changes
and, therefore, suggest avenues for future study. Our
led to confusion among academics and practitioners:
research helps to better understand the human
some talk about fake lean, others about lean-type
dimension as studied in existing literature. We pro-
approaches (Lindsay et al. 2014). Stakeholders’ under-
pose a framework that presents the human dimension
standing and perception of lean seems to be the mod-
components found in the literature.
erator variable of its adoption and its human dimension.
Clarifying the definition of lean, and thus deepening
Different views for lean and its human dimension stakeholders’ understanding of it, can lead to improve-
ments in operational efficiency that will consequently
Our results reveal firstly that the human dimension sup- have a positive impact on employee satisfaction and
ports lean adoption. HRM systems and guiding princi- motivation regarding lean adoption (Hopp 2018).
ples, a reflection of the human dimension, foster
collaborative employee behaviours. It seems relevant
to study the characteristics of HRM systems, such as
Moderator variables that explain the
HR practices related to competency development in
controversial outcomes
companies adopting lean. HR practices appear to
shape worker perceptions of the transformation culti- Our analysis suggests that lean itself is not necessarily
vated by lean and to guide expected behaviours. the primary cause of employee outcomes, inasmuch
Secondly, lean impacts employee development, specifi- as it is a question of the ‘how’ and the context of its
cally through continuous learning and group activities. adoption (Beauvallet and Houy 2010). These reflec-
Thirdly, developmental systems and interactions tions imply that analysts such as Krafcik (1988) and
between managers and employees seem to facilitate Womack, Jones, and Roos (1990) downplayed the
the alignment of individual and collective lean practices. importance of the context in which lean is introduced.
Our literature review also contrasts positive and Political, economic and social contexts are crucial in

Figure 3. Human dimension framework emerging from the literature.

 SUPPLY CHAIN FORUM: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 9

determining employee outcomes (Turner and Auer benefit from this human dimension, we suggest that
1996). Thus, lean’s impact on employees can be the practitioners focus on the interactions among employees
result of systemic issues and constraints in the orga- and their associated behaviours, and therefore maximise
nisational context (Stanton et al. 2014). Looking at the the positive interactions among employees that will sus-
‘respect for people’ principle on which the lean phi- tain motivation and operational efficiency. Employee
losophy is based reminds us that employee develop- developmental activities at all levels of the organisation
ment was the central focus of lean systems. seem to provide the necessary supportive environment to
Evidence of the impact of lean can be difficult to assess achieve these two objectives.
given the often contradictory or ideological research Before conducting lean research, researchers should
designs that are used. Accordingly, it is interesting to consider the academic discipline through which they
look at the different lean schools of thought (Hoss and were originally introduced to lean ideas and the lean
Ten Caten 2013) and how they view the human dimen- schools of thought that will be acknowledged in the
sion in order to gauge the impact each school of thought study. It would be interesting to compare the different
has on research and results. They all agree on the manner employee outcomes identified in each study, taking into
in which HR systems, as the reflection of the human consideration the researcher’s concern with lean (theo-
dimension, emerge and sustain cohesion to foster retical or practical) and the lean schools of thought that
employee support. Only two lean schools point out guide their understanding. We already know that lean
employee development or the ‘Respect for Humans’ sys- schools of thought such as System Engineering and
tem, as a moderator of employee outcomes. We observe Organisational Development have been the most influ-
that studies from the mechanistic schools of thought first ential in the evolution of thinking about lean.
identified and gave instructions on how to apply lean Consequently, we consider that it is necessary to first
practices, then evaluated employee outcomes. Only stu- carry out more in-depth empirical research that mobi-
dies taking an interpretive approach of the evolutionary lises qualitative and quantitative methodologies from an
school of thought have tried to explain the inherent evolutionary perspective and that takes the organisa-
human dimension of lean while interpreting employee tions and their environments into account.
outcomes. Moreover, separating lean’s technical dimension
Another major point of our analysis brings to light an from its human dimension can lead to harmful conse-
emerging stream of research focusing on HR practices as quences in both the academic and organisational
facilitators of lean adoption through the monitoring of realms. Finally, Thirkell and Ashman (2014) called for
employee participation and the development of a conceptual clarification on how lean can be main-
a trusting environment. Soft aspects have a positive tained while practices are adapted to specific contextual
impact on hard aspects and indirectly contribute to the conditions. More research is necessary to understand
success of continuous improvement initiatives (Zeng, Anh the human dimension’s role in helping to ensure that
Phan, and Matsui 2015). A lean environment reinforced by lean adoption is successful. Seeking to align ourselves
HR practices can assist employees in harnessing their with this idea, we recommend that theory-testing
intellect and becoming creative system thinkers. Thus, research be done on the interactions between lean
organisations that consistently integrated their HRM and its human dimension, paying close attention to
(soft) and technical (hard) systems outperformed the the adoption phase and contextual factors.
others.

Implications & directions for further research Conclusion

This paper contributes to lean research by clarifying the Throughout this paper, we have sought to depict the
inherent human dimension in the following areas: lean human dimension of lean. We have explained the con-
adoption can affect employees’ working conditions and troversial aspects and the differences in employee out-
organisational practices can facilitate lean adoption. In comes during a lean adoption from an employee
addition to these, the assumptions and the organisational perspective. The results of this review carry a number
initiatives for employee development can mediate the of specific implications for organisations pursuing a lean
effects on employee behaviours throughout the adop- adoption, with special attention given to integrating the
tion. In the absence of a definition for the human dimen- human dimension. Our results reveal firstly that the
sion of lean, we propose to define it as the sum of the human dimension supports lean adoption. We present
following elements: (1) employees’ individual and collec- a framework comprising the three main perspectives:
tive characteristics, (2) employees’ interactions with orga- the impact of lean on employees’ work, practices that
nisational factors, (3) employees’ behaviours, which can facilitate lean adoption and employee behaviours
positively or negatively influence the steps of the lean related to development. Finally, we provide
adoption process. This is the first attempt to define the a definition of the human dimension of lean. This frame-
human dimension. However, in order to more greatly work should be used in future research on real cases of
10 F. MAGNANI ET AL.

lean adoption to examine the human dimension of lean Development Quarterly 24 (1): 1–27. doi:10.1002/
and its alignment with the technical dimension. hrdq.21155.
Anand, G., and R. Kodali. 2010. “A Mathematical Model for
There has been serious dissonance in most ‘lean’
the Evaluation of Roles and Responsibilities of Human
systems, which, paradoxically, do not incorporate the Resources in A Lean Manufacturing Environment.”
necessary human dimension. We suggest that more International Journal of Human Resources Development &
studies be conducted on the human dimension in Management 10 (1): 63–100. doi:10.1504/
order to fully acknowledge the transformation from an IJHRDM.2010.029447.
employee perspective. Without understanding how the Anderson-Connolly, R., L. Grunberg, E. S. Greenberg, and
S. Moore. 2002. “Is Lean Mean? Workplace
two dimensions fit and work together, it is difficult to
Transformation and Employee Well-Being.” Work,
objectively assess lean’s impact. Surprisingly, many Employment and Society 16 (3): 389–413. doi:10.1177/
organisations emulate Toyota’s technical systems rather 095001702762217407.
than their human system. Human resources manage- Aoki, K., R. Delbridge, and T. Endo. 2014. “‘Japanese Human
ment, labour relations and organisational learning par- Resource Management’ in Post-Bubble Japan.” The
International Journal of Human Resource Management 25
ticipate in maintaining lean adoption. This is quite
(18): 2551–2572. doi:10.1080/09585192.2012.722118.
possibly the reason so many organisations struggle to Arlbjørn, J. S., and P. V. Freytag. 2013. “Evidence of Lean:
sustain their lean adoption (Marksberry 2012). A Review of International Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles.”
European Business Review 25 (2): 174–205. doi:10.1108/
09555341311302675.
Acknowledgments Basu, D. R., and V. Miroshnik. 1999. “Strategic Human
Resource Management of Japanese Multinationals –
The first version of this article was presented at the 22nd A Case Study of Japanese Multinational Companies in
EurOMA conference. We would like to thank all the partici- the UK.” Journal of Management Development 18 (9):
pants for their suggestions. We would also like to thank 714–732. doi:10.1108/02621719910300775.
Professor Åhlström for his insightful feedback. Finally, we Beauvallet, G., and T. Houy. 2010. “Research on HRM and
would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their Lean Management: A Literature Survey.” International
observations and helpful comments that helped us improve Journal of Human Resources Development & Management
this article. 10 (1): 14–33. doi:10.1504/IJHRDM.2010.029444.
Bonavia, T., and J. A. Marin-Garcia. 2011. “Integrating Human
Resource Management into Lean Production and Their
Disclosure statement Impact on Organizational Performance.” International
Journal of Manpower 32 (8): 923–938. doi:10.1108/
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the 01437721111181679.
authors. Bortolotti, T., S. Boscari, and P. Danese. 2015. “Successful
Lean Implementation: Organizational Culture and Soft
Lean Practices.” International Journal of Production
Notes on contributors Economics 160: 182–201. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.10.013.
Florian Magnani is a PhD student at ESCP Europe and Arts Bouville, G., and D. Alis. 2014. “The Effects of Lean
& Métiers ParisTech within the framework of an industrial Organizational Practices on Employees’ Attitudes and
agreement with the PSA group. His research focuses on the Workers’ Health: Evidence from France.” International
characterisation of the human dimension of Lean during its Journal of Human Resource Management 25 (21):
historical evolution. Florian also participated in the creation 3016–3037. doi:10.1080/09585192.2014.951950.
of a training and experimental platform in Aix-en-Provence, Buonamico, N., L. Muller, and M. Camargo. 2017. “A New
France. Fuzzy Logic-Based Metric to Measure Lean Warehousing
Performance.” Supply Chain Forum: An International
Valentina Carbone is Professor of Operations and Supply Journal 18 (2): 96–111. doi:10.1080/
Chain Management at the Paris Campus of ESCP Europe and 16258312.2017.1293466.
scientific co-director of the Deloitte Chair on the Circular Camuffo, A., F. De Stefano, and C. Paolino. 2017. “Safety
Economy and Sustainable Business Models. Her current Reloaded: Lean Operations and High Involvement Work
research covers the sustainable dimension of SCM, corpo- Practices for Sustainable Workplaces.” Journal of Business
rate social and environmental responsibility, and sharing Ethics 143 (2): 245–259. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2590-8.
and circular economy business models. Conti, R., J. Angelis, C. Cooper, B. Faragher, and C. Gill. 2006.
“The Effects of Lean Production on Worker Job Stress.”
Valérie Moatti is Professor of Supply Chain Management
International Journal of Operations & Production
and Strategic Management at ESCP Europe. She is currently
Management 26 (9): 1013–1038. doi:10.1108/
the Dean of Faculty. She is the scientific director of the
01443570610682616.
Lectra Chair on Fashion & Technology. Her research covers
Cullinane, S.-J., J. Bosak, P. C. Flood, and E. Demerouti. 2013.
growth strategies and the interface between strategy and
“Job Design under Lean Manufacturing and Its Impact on
supply chain management.
Employee Outcomes.” Organizational Psychology Review 3
(1): 41–61. doi:10.1177/2041386612456412.
Cusumano, M. A. 1988. “Manufacturing Innovation: Lessons
from the Japanese Auto Industry.” Sloan Management
References
Review 30 (1): 29–39.
Alagaraja, M., and T. Egan. 2013. “The Strategic Value of HRD Dahlgaard, J. J., and S. M. Dahlgaard-Park. 2006. “Lean
in Lean Strategy Implementation.” Human Resource Production, Six Sigma Quality, TQM and Company
 SUPPLY CHAIN FORUM: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 11

Culture.” TQM Magazine 18 (3): 263–281. doi:10.1108/ Manufacturing.” Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources
09544780610659998. 55 (3): 280–297. doi:10.1111/1744-7941.12152.
Denyer, D., and D. Tranfield. 2009. “Producing a Systematic Huo, M.-L., and P. Boxall. 2018. “Are All Aspects of Lean
Review.” In The Sage Handbook of Organizational Research Production Bad for Workers? an Analysis of How
Methods., edited by Buchanan, D. A. and A. Bryman, Problem-Solving Demands Affect Employee Well-Being.”
671–689. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Human Resource Management Journal 28 (4): 1–16.
Deshpande, S. P., D. Y. Golhar, and C. L. Stamm. 1994. doi:10.1111/1748-8583.12204.
“Human Resource Management in the Just-In-Time Jackson, P. R., and R. Martin. 1996. “Impact of Just-in-Time
Environment.” Production Planning & Control 5 (4): 372. on Job Content, Employee Attitudes and Well-Being:
doi:10.1080/09537289408919508. A Longitudinal Study.” Ergonomics 39 (1): 1–16.
Distelhorst, G., J. Hainmueller, and R. M. Locke. 2016. “Does doi:10.1080/00140139608964429.
Lean Improve Labor Standards? Management and Social James, R., and R. Jones. 2014. “Transferring the Toyota Lean
Performance in the Nike Supply Chain.” Management Cultural Paradigm into India: Implications for Human
Science 63 (3): 707–728. doi:10.1287/mnsc.2015.2369. Resource Management.” The International Journal of
Emiliani, M. L. 2003. “Linking Leaders’ Beliefs to Their Human Resource Management 25 (15): 2174–2191.
Behaviors and Competencies.” Management Decision 41 doi:10.1080/09585192.2013.862290.
(9): 893–910. doi:10.1108/00251740310497430. Jayamaha, N. P., J. P. Wagner, N. P. Grigg, N. M. Campbell-
Emiliani, M. L., and D. J. Stec. 2005. “Leaders Lost in Allen, and W. Harvie. 2014. “Testing a Theoretical Model
Transformation.” Leadership & Organization Development Underlying the ‘Toyota Way’ – An Empirical Study
Journal 26 (5): 370–387. doi:10.1108/01437730510607862. Involving a Large Global Sample of Toyota Facilities.”
Forrester, R. 1995. “Implications of Lean Manufacturing for International Journal of Production Research 52 (14):
Human Resource Strategy.” Work Study 44 (3): 20–24. 4332–4350. doi:10.1080/00207543.2014.883467.
doi:10.1108/00438029510146944. Jones, D. T. 1992. “Beyond the Toyota Production System:
Fujimoto, T. 1999. Evolution of Manufacturing Systems at The Era of Lean Production.” In Manufacturing Strategy:
Toyota. 1st ed. New York: Productivity Press. Process and Content, edited by Voss, C. A., 189–210. 1st
Furlan, A., G. Dal Pont, and A. Vinelli. 2011. “On the ed. London: Chapman & Hall.
Complementarity between Internal and External Just-in- Jones, R., J. Latham, and M. Betta. 2013. “Creating the
Time Bundles to Build and Sustain High Performance Illusion of Employee Empowerment: Lean Production in
Manufacturing.” International Journal of Production the International Automobile Industry.” The International
Economics, Towards High Performance Manufacturing 133 Journal of Human Resource Management 24 (8):
(2): 489–495. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.07.043. 1629–1645. doi:10.1080/09585192.2012.725081.
Gagnon, M. A., and J. H. Michael. 2003. “Employee Strategic Karlsson, C., and P. Åhlström. 1996. “Assessing Changes
Alignment at a Wood Manufacturer: An Exploratory Towards Lean Production.” International Journal of
Analysis Using Lean Manufacturing.” Forest Products Operations & Production Management 16 (2): 24–41.
Journal 53 (10): 24–29. doi:10.1108/01443579610109820.
Gelei, A., Z. Matyusz, and D. Losonci. 2015. “Lean Production Koeijer, R. J. D., J. Paauwe, and R. Huijsman. 2014. “Toward
and Leadership Attributes – The Case of Hungarian a Conceptual Framework for Exploring Multilevel
Production Managers.” Journal of Manufacturing Relationships between Lean Management and Six
Technology Management 26 (4): 477–500. doi:10.1108/ Sigma, Enabling HRM, Strategic Climate and Outcomes
JMTM-05-2013-0059. in Healthcare.” International Journal of Human Resource
Genaidy, A. M., and W. Karwowski. 2003. “Human Management 25 (21): 2911–2925. doi:10.1080/
Performance in Lean Production Environment: Critical 09585192.2014.953974.
Assessment and Research Framework.” Human Factors Koenigsaecker, G. 2010. Leading the Lean Enterprise
and Ergonomics in Manufacturing 13 (4): 317–330. Transformation. 1st ed. New York: Productivity Press.
doi:10.1002/hfm.10047. Krafcik, J. F. 1988. “Triumph of the Lean Production System.”
Gollan, P. J., S. Kalfa, and Y. Xu. 2014 September. “Strategic Sloan Management Review 30 (1): 41–52.
Hrm and Devolving Hr to the Line: Cochlear during the Kull, T. J., T. Yan, Z. Liu, and J. G. Wacker. 2014. “The
Shift to Lean Manufacturing.” Asia Pacific Journal of Moderation of Lean Manufacturing Effectiveness by
Human Resources. doi:10.1111/1744-7941.12055. Dimensions of National Culture: Testing Practice-Culture
Hasle, P., A. Bojesen, P. L. Jensen, and P. Bramming. 2012. Congruence Hypotheses.” International Journal of
“Lean and the Working Environment: A Review of the Production Economics 153: 1–12. doi:10.1016/j.
Literature.” International Journal of Operations & ijpe.2014.03.015.
Production Management 32 (7): 829–849. doi:10.1108/ Landsbergis, P. A., J. Cahill, and P. Schnall. 1999. “The Impact
01443571211250103. of Lean Production and Related New Systems of Work
Holweg, M. 2007. “The Genealogy of Lean Production.” Organization on Worker Health.” Journal of Occupational
Journal of Operations Management 25 (2): 420–437. Health Psychology, Psychological and Behavioral
doi:10.1016/j.jom.2006.04.001. Approaches to Occupational Health 4 (2): 108–130.
Hopp, W. J. 2018. “Positive Lean: Merging the Science of doi:10.1037/1076-8998.4.2.108.
Efficiency with the Psychology of Work.” International LaScola, K., B. Norman, B. Bidanda, P. Ariyawongrat,
Journal of Production Research 56 (1–2): 398–413. W. Tharmmaphornphilas, and R. C. Warner. 2002.
doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1387301. “Assessing Human Capital: A Lean Manufacturing
Hoss, M., and C. S. Ten Caten. 2013. “Lean Schools of Example.” Engineering Management Journal 14 (3): 35–39.
Thought.” International Journal of Production Research 51 Lemieux, A.-A., S. Lamouri, R. Pellerin, and L. Simon. 2012. “A
(11): 3270–3282. doi:10.1080/00207543.2012.762130. Lean-Based Analysis Framework Oriented Towards the
Huo, M.-L., and P. Boxall. 2017. “Lean Production and the Upstream Supply Chain for the Luxury Industry.” Supply
Well-Being of the Frontline Manager: The Job Demands – Chain Forum: An International Journal 13 (4): 14–24.
Resources Model as a Diagnostic Tool in Chinese doi:10.1080/16258312.2012.11517303.
12 F. MAGNANI ET AL.

Lewchuk, W., and D. Robertson. 1996. “Working Conditions Parker, S. K. 2003. “Longitudinal Effects of Lean Production
under Lean Production: A Worker-Based Benchmarking on Employee Outcomes and the Mediating Role of Work
Study.” Asia Pacific Business Review 2 (4): 60–81. Characteristics.” Journal of Applied Psychology 88 (4):
doi:10.1080/13602389600000020. 620–634. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.620.
Liker, J. K., and M. Hoseus. 2010. “Human Resource Perez Toralla, M. S., P. Falzon, and A. Morais. 2012.
Development in Toyota Culture.” International Journal of “Participatory Design in Lean Production: Which
Human Resources Development & Management 10 (1): Contribution from Employees? for What End?” Work 41
34–50. doi:10.1504/IJHRDM.2010.029445. (February): 2706–2712.
Lindsay, C., J. Commander, P. Findlay, M. Bennie, Power, D., and A. S. Sohal. 2000. “An Empirical Study of
E. D. Corcoran, and V. D. M. Robert. 2014. “‘Lean’, New Human Resource Management Strategies and Practices
Technologies and Employment in Public Health Services: in Australian Just-In-Time Environments.” International
Employees’ Experiences in the National Health Service.” Journal of Operations & Production Management 20 (8):
International Journal of Human Resource Management 25 932–958. doi:10.1108/01443570010332953.
(21): 2941–2956. doi:10.1080/09585192.2014.948900. Preece, D. A., and R. Jones. 2010. “Introduction[: Human
Longoni, A., M. Pagell, D. Johnston, and A. Veltri. 2013. Resource Development/Management in Lean
“When Does Lean Hurt? – An Exploration of Lean Production].” International Journal of Human Resources
Practices and Worker Health and Safety Outcomes.” Development & Management 10 (1): 1–13. doi:10.1504/
International Journal of Production Research 51 (11): IJHRDM.2010.029676.
3300–3320. doi:10.1080/00207543.2013.765072. Rampasso, I. S., R. Anholon, O. L. Gonçalves Quelhas, and
Losonci, D., K. Demeter, and I. Jenei. 2011. “Factors W. L. Filho. 2017. “Primary Problems Associated with the
Influencing Employee Perceptions in Lean Health and Welfare of Employees Observed When
Transformations.” International Journal of Production Implementing Lean Manufacturing Projects.” Work
Economics 131 (1): 30–43. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.12.022. (Reading, Mass.) 58 (3): 263–275. doi:10.3233/WOR-172632.
MacDuffie, J. P. 1995. “Human Resource Bundles and Saito, K. 1995. Principles of Continuous Learning Systems. Vol.
Manufacturing Performance: Organizational Logic and 1. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Flexible Production Systems in the World Auto Sánchez, A. M., and M. P. Pérez. 2001. “Internet, Lean
Industry.” Industrial & Labor Relations Review 48 (2): Production and Supply Chain Management in the
197–221. doi:10.1177/001979399504800201. Automotive Supplier Industry.” Supply Chain Forum: An
Marin-Garcia, J. A., and T. Bonavia. 2015. “Relationship International Journal 2 (2): 2–11. doi:10.1080/
between Employee Involvement and Lean Manufacturing 16258312.2001.11517085.
and Its Effect on Performance in a Rigid Continuous Process Seppälä, P., and S. Klemola. 2004. “How Do Employees
Industry.” International Journal of Production Research 53 Perceive Their Organization and Job When Companies
(11): 3260–3275. doi:10.1080/00207543.2014.975852. Adopt Principles of Lean Production?” Human Factors
Marksberry, P. 2012. The Modern Theory of the Toyota Production and Ergonomics in Manufacturing 14 (2): 157–180.
System: A Systems Inquiry of the World’s Most Emulated and doi:10.1002/hfm.10059.
Profitable Management System. 1st ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press. Shadur, M. A., J. J. Rodwell, and G. J. Bamber. 1995. “Factors
Marodin, G. A., and T. A. Saurin. 2013. “Implementing Lean Predicting Employees’ Approval of Lean Production.”
Production Systems: Research Areas and Opportunities for Human Relations 48 (12): 1403–1425. doi:10.1177/
Future Studies.” International Journal of Production Research 001872679504801202.
51 (22): 6663–6680. doi:10.1080/00207543.2013.826831. Shah, R., and P. T. Ward. 2003. “Lean Manufacturing:
Martínez-Jurado, P. J., J. Moyano Fuentes, and P. J. Gómez. Context, Practice Bundles, and Performance.” Journal of
2013. “HR Management during Lean Production Operations Management 21 (2): 129–149. doi:10.1016/
Adoption.” Management Decision 51 (4): 742–760. S0272-6963(02)00108-0.
doi:10.1108/00251741311326545. Shokri, A., T. S. Waring, and F. Nabhani. 2016. “Investigating
Mathew, S. K., and R. Jones. 2013. “Toyotism and Brahminism: the Readiness of People in Manufacturing SMEs to
Employee Relations Difficulties in Establishing Lean Embark on Lean Six Sigma Projects: An Empirical Study
Manufacturing in India.” Employee Relations 35 (2): in the German Manufacturing Sector.” International
200–221. doi:10.1108/01425451311287871. Journal of Operations & Production Management 36 (8):
Monden, Y. 2011. Toyota Production System: An Integrated 850–878. doi:10.1108/IJOPM-11-2014-0530.
Approach to Just-In-Time. 4th ed. New York: Productivity Press. Soliman, M., T. A. Saurin, and M. J. Anzanello. 2018. “The
Mothersell, W. M. 2009. “The Role of Technology and People in Impacts of Lean Production on the Complexity of
the Diffusion of Lean Production in the Automotive Supplier Socio-Technical Systems.” International Journal of
Industry.” International Journal of Automotive Technology & Production Economics 197 (C): 342–357. doi:10.1016/j.
Management 9 (3): 290–315. doi:10.1504/IJATM.2009.027169. ijpe.2018.01.024.
Ohno, T. 1988. Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Sparrow, P., and L. Otaye-Ebede. 2014. “Lean Management
Production. New York: Productivity Press. and HR Function Capability: The Role of HR Architecture
Olivella, J., L. Cuatrecasas, and N. Gavilan. 2008. “Work and the Location of Intellectual Capital.” International
Organisation Practices for Lean Production.” Journal of Journal of Human Resource Management 25 (21):
Manufacturing Technology Management 19 (7): 798–811. 2892–2910. doi:10.1080/09585192.2014.953975.
doi:10.1108/17410380810898750. Spasojevic Brkic, V., and B. Tomic. 2016. “Employees Factors
Oliver, N. 1990. “Human Factors in the Implementation of Importance in Lean Six Sigma Concept.” The TQM Journal
Just-In-Time Production.” International Journal of Edited by Dr Vidosav D. Majstorovic and Prof 28 (5):
Operations & Production Management 10 (4): 32–40. 774–785. doi:10.1108/TQM-10-2015-0131.
doi:10.1108/EUM0000000001263. Stanton, P., R. Gough, R. Ballardie, T. Bartram, G. J. Bamber,
Palo, S., and N. Padhi. 2005. “How HR Professionals Drive TQM: and A. Sohal. 2014. “Implementing Lean Management/Six
A Case Study in an Indian Organization.” TQM Magazine 17 Sigma in Hospitals: Beyond Empowerment or Work
(5): 467–485. doi:10.1108/09544780510615960. Intensification?” International Journal of Human Resource
 SUPPLY CHAIN FORUM: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 13

Management 25 (21): 2926–2940. doi:10.1080/ Issues.” Journal of Operations Management 24 (2):

09585192.2014.963138. 99–123. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2005.04.001.
Sterling, A., and P. Boxall. 2013. “Lean Production, Employee Turner, L., and P. Auer. 1996. “A Diversity of New Work
Learning and Workplace Outcomes: A Case Analysis Organization: Human-Centered, Lean and In-Between.”
through the Ability-Motivation-Opportunity Framework.” In Social Reconstructions of the World Automobile
Human Resource Management Journal 23 (3): 227–240. Industry: Competition, Power and Industrial Flexibility, edi-
doi:10.1111/hrmj.2013.23.issue-3. ted by Deyo, F. C., 233–257, New York: Palgrave
Stewart, P., A. Danford, M. Richardson, and V. Pulignano. Macmillan.
2010. “Workers’ Experiences of Skill, Training and Uhrin, Á., S. Bruque-Cámara, and J. Moyano-Fuentes. 2017.
Participation in Lean and High Performance Workplaces “Lean Production, Workforce Development and
in Britain and Italy.” Employee Relations 32 (6): 606–624. Operational Performance.” Management Decision 55 (1):
doi:10.1108/01425451011083654. 103–118. doi:10.1108/MD-05-2016-0281.
Suaréz-Barraza, M. F., and J. Ramis-Pujol. 2010. “Implementation Van Dun, D. H., and P. M. W. Celeste. 2012. “Human
of Lean-Kaizen in the Human Resource Service Process: Dynamics and Enablers of Effective Lean Team Cultures
A Case Study in A Mexican Public Service Organisation.” and Climates.” In International Review of Industrial and
Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 21 (3): Organizational Psychology 2012 (Vol 27), edited by
388–410. doi:10.1108/17410381011024359. Hodgkinson, G. P. and J. Kevin Ford, 115–152. 27 vols.
Sugimori, Y., K. Kusunoki, F. Cho, and S. Uchikawa. 1977. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
“Toyota Production System and Kanban System Van Dun, D. H., J. Hicks, and C. Wilderom. 2017. “Values and
Materialization of Just-in-Time and Respect-for-Human Behaviors of Effective Lean Managers: Mixed-Methods
System.” International Journal of Production Research 15 Exploratory Research.” European Management Journal 35
(6): 553–564. doi:10.1080/00207547708943149. (April): 174–186. doi:10.1016/j.emj.2016.05.001.
Taira, K. 1996. “Compatibility of Human Resource Winfield, I. 1994. “Toyota UK Ltd: Model HRM Practices?”
Management, Industrial Relations, and Engineering Employee Relations 16 (1): 41–53. doi:10.1108/
under Mass Production and Lean Production: An 01425459410054916.
Exploration.” Applied Psychology: An International Review Winfield, I., and A. Hay. 1997. “Toyota’s Supply Chain:
45 (2): 97–117. doi:10.1111/apps.1996.45.issue-2. Changing Employee Relations.” Employee Relations 19
Taylor, A., M. Taylor, and A. McSweeney. 2013. “Towards (5): 457–465. doi:10.1108/01425459710186331.
Greater Understanding of Success and Survival of Lean Womack, J. P., D. T. Jones, and D. Roos. 1990. The Machine
Systems.” International Journal of Production Research 51 that Changed the World: The Story of Lean Production,
(22): 6607–6630. doi:10.1080/00207543.2013.825382. 2000. New York: Free Press.
Thirkell, E., and I. Ashman. 2014. “Lean Towards Learning: Worley, J. M., and T. L. Doolen. 2006. “The Role of
Connecting Lean Thinking and Human Resource Communication and Management Support in a Lean
Management in UK Higher Education.” International Manufacturing Implementation.” Management Decision
Journal of Human Resource Management 25 (21): 44 (2): 228–245. doi:10.1108/00251740610650210.
2957–2977. doi:10.1080/09585192.2014.948901. Yasukawa, K., T. Brown, and S. Black. 2014. “Disturbing
Tortorella, G. L., and F. S. Fogliatto. 2014. “Method for Practices: Training Workers to Be Lean.” Journal of
Assessing Human Resources Management Practices and Workplace Learning 26 (6/7): 392–405. doi:10.1108/JWL-
Organisational Learning Factors in a Company under 09-2013-0068.
Lean Manufacturing Implementation.” International Yorks, L., and J. Barto. 2013. “Invited Reaction: The Strategic
Journal of Production Research 52 (15): 4623–4645. Value of HRD in Lean Strategy Implementation.” Human
doi:10.1080/00207543.2014.881577. Resource Development Quarterly 24 (1): 29–33.
Tortorella, G. L., G. A. Marodin, F. S. Fogliatto, and doi:10.1002/hrdq.21157.
R. Miorando. 2015. “Learning Organisation and Human Zeng, J., C. Anh Phan, and Y. Matsui. 2015. “The Impact of
Resources Management Practices: An Exploratory Hard and Soft Quality Management on Quality and
Research in Medium-Sized Enterprises Undergoing Innovation Performance: An Empirical Study.”
a Lean Implementation.” International Journal of International Journal of Production Economics 162:
Production Research 53 (13): 3989–4000. doi:10.1080/ 216–226. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.07.006.
00207543.2014.980462. Zhu, Q., S. Johnson, and J. Sarkis. 2018. “Lean Six Sigma and
Treville, S. D., and J. Antonakis. 2006. “Could Lean Environmental Sustainability: A Hospital Perspective.”
Production Job Design Be Intrinsically Motivating? Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal 19 (1):
Contextual, Configurational, and Levels-of-Analysis 25–41. doi:10.1080/16258312.2018.1426339.