PurposeThis research brings together two streams of thought applied to decision-making: lean thinking and stakeholder theory. Both have been identified as ways to improve organizational value. Previous studies disagree regarding whether they can work together. This study investigates if managers balance stakeholders and lean thinking in decision-making.Design/methodology/approachThis research investigates if both lean thinking and stakeholder salience share common literature by using data mining. It surveys organizations that perceive themselves as lean and have multiple diverse stakeholders to determine whether waste and salience are considered when making decisions. An ANOVA is done to see if organization type, management level, organization size, geographic location, or lean maturity has an effect on the priority of stakeholder salience or lean thinking's waste variants when making decisions.FindingsFindings of this research are: 1) stakeholders salience criteria are considered more often than lean thinking's waste variants in decision-making by managers as a whole and in particular by middle-level managers and senior managers. However, lean thinking's waste variants are considered as often as stakeholder salience criteria by first-line managers. 2) The ranking of stakeholder salience in making decisions is not affected by organization type, respondent position, organization size, perceived lean experience, or geographic location. The organization type, organization size, lean experience, and location do not affect the ranking of lean thinking variants either. But the ranking of lean thinking's waste variants is significantly different for first-line, middle-level, and senior managers. Middle-level managers rank lean thinking higher than that of either first-line or senior-level. Because of this, middle managers have a more balanced approach in using lean thinking and stakeholder salience than other managers. 3) Stakeholder salience criteria have a significantly higher ranking than lean thinking variants in making decisions for all organization types: manufacturing and nonmanufacturing.Originality/ValueThis research demonstrates a significant disconnect exists between lean thinking and demands of stakeholders that impacts the value of an organization, and only middle-level managers bring balance and awareness of both streams of thought. An empirical instrument has been developed to balance the stakeholder salience criteria with the lean thinking variants.

The practice of lean production has been documented in detail by production and operations management specialists world-wide [B. B. Flynn, S. Sakakibara, R. G. Schroeder, K. A. Bates and E. J. Flynn, Empirical research methods in operations management, Journal of Operations Management 9(2) (1990) 250–284]. Theoretically, on the other hand, there has been little research that define and quantify what it means to be a lean manufacturer. A typological definition of what it means to be lean has in part been resolved by a model initially developed by Shah and Ward [Defining and developing measures of lean production, Journal of Operations Management 25(4) (2007) 785–805]. This definition was used to determine the underlying concepts of lean production in small to medium size manufacturers (SMMs). While most of the factors found in the Shah and Ward [Defining and developing measures of lean production, Journal of Operations Management 25(4) (2007) 785–805] study remained valid, the model developed for SMMs displayed some new factors.

No abstract

Process changes, in manufacturing environments, can have a critical impact on the interface between social dynamics and technical systems if usability and performance are not factored into the project. Socio-technical frameworks allow us to analyze the introduction of new technology and the adaptation of social systems in manufacturing environments, where technological change is constant and is in direct competition for social, technical and capital resources within the organization. A case study method was chosen in an endeavor to collect, present, and analyze data that is being derived from the introduction of new machinery into an existing production line. The main overarching factor identified was organizational ‘fit’. This paper proposes that fit be used as a gauge for new technology introduction in existing production lines. If change can be designed and managed through a socio-technical framework, future expansion and intended improvements can be smoother and more effective.

He has published over 50 articles in different journals and conference proceedings. He has served as an investigator for research projects sponsored by National Science Foundation, Ford Motor Company, and the US Army. Before working at Indiana State University, he was a faculty in the University of Louisville for 10 years. He also has over four years of industrial experience. He received his D.Eng. degree in Mechanical Engineering from Lamar University (USA) in 1999, M.Sc. in Materials Engineering from Isfahan University of Technology in 1991, and B.