精益生产系统研究述评

Mitsuhiro Fukuzawa
{"title":"精益生产系统研究述评","authors":"Mitsuhiro Fukuzawa","doi":"10.7880/ABAS.0190403A","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": Since the 1990s, research has been done on lean production systems with progressive development of a scale for measuring characteristic leanness in efficient production organizations. For example, Shah and Ward (2003, 2007) originated from the HPM and IMSS surveys become as the de facto standard. However, the explanations of these studies were not necessarily convincing. In contrast, in the IMVP survey, site visits were made to automakers’ development and production genba or sites in each country surveyed, in addition to the use of questionnaires. However, in actuality, a comparison of multiple Japanese automakers showed differences in methods and means for achieving just-in-time production in organizations, even at the genba that would be believed to score high on a leanness scale, such as JIT production. It is difficult to detect and measure these differences through large-scale cross-industry questionnaire surveys alone, and there is a possibility that this difficulty manifests in the weak explanatory power of the lean studies. Approaches to explaining differences in performance using “leanness scale” are based on a lean hypothesis where there is a best practice lean situation transcending nations and industries, yet its low explanatory power creates suspicion with regard to the validity of this hypothesis.","PeriodicalId":52658,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Business Administrative Science","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Critique on the lean production system research\",\"authors\":\"Mitsuhiro Fukuzawa\",\"doi\":\"10.7880/ABAS.0190403A\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\": Since the 1990s, research has been done on lean production systems with progressive development of a scale for measuring characteristic leanness in efficient production organizations. For example, Shah and Ward (2003, 2007) originated from the HPM and IMSS surveys become as the de facto standard. However, the explanations of these studies were not necessarily convincing. In contrast, in the IMVP survey, site visits were made to automakers’ development and production genba or sites in each country surveyed, in addition to the use of questionnaires. However, in actuality, a comparison of multiple Japanese automakers showed differences in methods and means for achieving just-in-time production in organizations, even at the genba that would be believed to score high on a leanness scale, such as JIT production. It is difficult to detect and measure these differences through large-scale cross-industry questionnaire surveys alone, and there is a possibility that this difficulty manifests in the weak explanatory power of the lean studies. Approaches to explaining differences in performance using “leanness scale” are based on a lean hypothesis where there is a best practice lean situation transcending nations and industries, yet its low explanatory power creates suspicion with regard to the validity of this hypothesis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52658,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Business Administrative Science\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Business Administrative Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7880/ABAS.0190403A\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Business Administrative Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7880/ABAS.0190403A","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

自20世纪90年代以来,人们对精益生产系统进行了研究,并逐步开发出了衡量高效生产组织特征精益度的量表。例如,Shah和Ward(2003年,2007年)起源于HPM和IMSS调查成为事实上的标准。然而,这些研究的解释并不一定令人信服。相比之下,在IMVP调查中,除了使用问卷外,还对每个被调查国家的汽车制造商的开发和生产基地进行了实地考察。然而,实际上,对多家日本汽车制造商的比较显示,在组织中实现准时生产的方法和手段存在差异,即使在被认为在精益尺度上得分较高的genba,如JIT生产。仅通过大规模跨行业问卷调查很难发现和衡量这些差异,这种困难可能体现在精益研究的解释力较弱。使用“精益规模”解释绩效差异的方法是基于精益假设,其中存在超越国家和行业的最佳实践精益情况,但其低解释力使人们对该假设的有效性产生怀疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Critique on the lean production system research
: Since the 1990s, research has been done on lean production systems with progressive development of a scale for measuring characteristic leanness in efficient production organizations. For example, Shah and Ward (2003, 2007) originated from the HPM and IMSS surveys become as the de facto standard. However, the explanations of these studies were not necessarily convincing. In contrast, in the IMVP survey, site visits were made to automakers’ development and production genba or sites in each country surveyed, in addition to the use of questionnaires. However, in actuality, a comparison of multiple Japanese automakers showed differences in methods and means for achieving just-in-time production in organizations, even at the genba that would be believed to score high on a leanness scale, such as JIT production. It is difficult to detect and measure these differences through large-scale cross-industry questionnaire surveys alone, and there is a possibility that this difficulty manifests in the weak explanatory power of the lean studies. Approaches to explaining differences in performance using “leanness scale” are based on a lean hypothesis where there is a best practice lean situation transcending nations and industries, yet its low explanatory power creates suspicion with regard to the validity of this hypothesis.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
5 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信