Proposed guidelines for treatment of recurrent failures for sustainability of results in the post-project improvement stage process

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Caio Melo Almeida ◽  
Fernando Oliveira Araujo ◽  
Chrystyane Gerth Silveira Abreu ◽  
Haydee Maria Correia da Silveira Batista
Keyword(s):  
Process Improvement ◽  
Process Performance ◽  
Mining Company ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Stage Process ◽  
Improvement Programs ◽  
Low Performance ◽  
Methodological Aspects ◽  
Selection Of

PurposeThe maintenance of process improvement programs within organizations is not an easy task. Some processes do not maintain the results achieved with the improvement project and again present low performance shortly after completion of the project. This paper aims to identify the socio-technical causes responsible for the loss of process performance after applying improvement projects, in order to support the mitigation of the problem.Design/methodology/approachA systematic review of the literature was carried out, which allowed the selection of 28 articles. The empirical stage used the benchmarking technique, along a large Brazilian mining company with an international standard of production and quality. This organization has been using improvement projects for more than ten years.FindingsThe research complements the literature regarding the prioritization of the 26 identified failures and the identification of seven new failure factors and two resources. Findings in this study can be an inspiration for other organizations, considering the similarity of methodological aspects of improvement projects since internationally standardized methodologies such as Six Sigma, Lean, Kaizen and 5S are used.Originality/valueThe research presented a proposal of guidelines that corroborate to the mitigation of loss of process performance after improvement project.

Estimating performance from capabilities in business process improvement

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 1099-1117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boyd A. Nicholds ◽  
John P.T. Mo
Keyword(s):  
Process Improvement ◽  
Business Process ◽  
Expected Improvement ◽  
Management Decision ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Performance Gain ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Business Process Improvement ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Content Type

Purpose The research indicates there is a positive link between the improvement capability of an organisation and the intensity of effort applied to a business process improvement (BPI) project or initiative. While a degree of stochastic variation in applied effort to any particular improvement project may be expected there is a clear need to quantify the causal relationship, to assist management decision, and to enhance the chance of achieving and sustaining the expected improvement targets. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach The paper presents a method to obtain the function that estimates the range of applicable effort an organisation can expect to be able to apply based on their current improvement capability. The method used analysed published data as well as regression analysis of new data points obtained from completed process improvement projects. Findings The level of effort available to be applied to a process improvement project can be expressed as a regression function expressing the possible range of achievable BPI performance within 90 per cent confidence limits. Research limitations/implications The data set applied by this research is limited due to constraints during the research project. A more accurate function can be obtained with more industry data. Practical implications When the described function is combined with a separate non-linear function of performance gain vs effort a model of performance gain for a process improvement project as a function of organisational improvement capability is obtained. The probability of success in achieving performance targets may be estimated for a process improvement project. Originality/value The method developed in this research is novel and unique and has the potential to be applied to assessing an organisation’s capability to manage change.

Process improvement project failure: a systematic literature review and future research agenda

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiju Antony ◽  
Bart A. Lameijer ◽  
Hans P. Borgman ◽  
Kevin Linderman
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Process Improvement ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Research Directions ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Project Failure ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Future Research Directions ◽  
Research Propositions

Purpose Although scholars have considered the success factors of process improvement (PI) projects, limited research has considered the factors that influence failure. The purpose of this paper is to extend the understanding of PI project failure by systematically reviewing the research on generic project failure, and developing research propositions and future research directions specifically for PI projects. Design/methodology/approach A systematic literature review protocol resulted in a total of 97 research papers that are reviewed for contributions on project failure. Findings An inductive category formation process resulted in three categories of findings. The first category are the causes for project failure, the second category is about relatedness between failure factors and the third category is on failure mitigation strategies. For each category, propositions for future research on PI projects specifically are developed. Additional future research directions proposed lay in better understanding PI project failure as it unfolds (i.e. process studies vs cross-sectional), understanding PI project failure from a theoretical perspective and better understanding of PI project failure antecedents. Originality/value This paper takes a multi-disciplinary and project type approach, synthesizes the existing knowledge and reflects upon the developments in the field of research. Propositions and a framework for future research on PI project failure are presented.

Value co-creation in asset integrity and improvement portfolio: evidence from the Australian mining industry

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brenton Lawson ◽  
Larissa Statsenko ◽  
Morteza Shokri-Ghasabeh
Keyword(s):  
Project Management ◽  
Value Creation ◽  
Single Case ◽  
Case Study Research ◽  
Mining Industry ◽  
Mining Company ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Project Portfolios ◽  
Project Lifecycle

Purpose Adopting a qualitative research design and following a single case study research methodology 21 semi-structured interviews with asset integrity project managers (PM), project sponsors (PS) and members of the project management office (PMO) were conducted. These were complemented with company’s project management framework documents and tools and direct observation by the researcher’s observation. Design/methodology/approach The data on the value creation in the mining asset integrity and improvement project portfolio was collected through 21 interviews with PM, PS and members of the PMO and complemented by observational data and the analysis of the Australian mining company process documentation. Findings The study finds that establishing a culture of delivering value supported by functional governance is critical for effective value creation practice in asset integrity and improvement project portfolios. In addition, early engagement of the key stakeholders with clearly defined roles and utilisation of project value management artifacts, enables effective value delivery throughout the project lifecycle. Originality/value The research offers an empirically grounded framework to facilitate value creation throughout the project lifecycle in asset integrity and improvement project portfolios drawing on a benchmarking case of an Australian mining company.

scholarly journals Workaround behaviour in information systems research

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 430-446
Author(s):  
Aline de Vargas Pinto ◽  
Antônio Carlos Gastaud Maçada ◽  
Gabriela Labres Mallmann
Keyword(s):  
Information Systems ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Systems Research ◽  
Time Period ◽  
Information Systems Research ◽  
Two Stages ◽  
Methodological Aspects ◽  
Selection Of

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of the studies about workaround behavior in the Information Systems (IS) area, addressing its positive and negative aspects and raising the key related issues. Design/methodology/approach A systematic literature review was conducted to verify how workaround behavior has been approached in IS studies. A qualitative method was adopted and implemented in two stages: selection of articles from the time period 2007-2017 in the databases Web of Science, ScienceDirect and Scopus and analysis of the selected articles. Findings The results showed that many studies have been concerned with identifying the principal reasons for the manifestation of workaround behavior and the measures taken to reduce its impacts. Many studies from international journals examined the implementation of an ERP along with the workaround behavior. The need to expand the national studies on workaround behavior is emphasized, because the majority of the identified studies are international. Research limitations/implications The key limitation is related to the period of analysis, because only articles published since 2007 were selected. Practical implications This paper contributes to both theory and practice, bringing relevant concepts about workaround behavior, and corroborating the importance of the studies on workaround in the IS area. The literature review of the 20 articles analyzed reveals the main features in each article, such as theoretical and methodological aspects that support the research. Based on this analysis, a conceptual map was developed presenting the most relevant points about workaround behavior, where the causes, the negative and positive consequences, the types of solutions and the organizational and individual impacts are presented. Originality/value Research into workaround behavior has increased in recent years, however very few studies have been conducted in Brazil. To the best of the authors' knowledge, no articles regarding Brazil and this subject were published between 2007 and 2017. Thus, this paper seeks to redress this imbalance.

Top ten reasons for process improvement project failures

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 367-374 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiju Antony ◽  
Sandeep Gupta
Keyword(s):  
Process Improvement ◽  
Six Sigma ◽  
Resistance To Change ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Recognition System ◽  
Lean Six Sigma ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Monitoring And Control ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Content Type

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide the top ten reasons of process improvement projects termination or failure to Lean and Six Sigma professionals and researchers. Design/methodology/approach The top ten reasons of process improvement projects termination or failure are based on literature, interaction of authors with Lean Six Sigma Master Black Belts, consultants, practitioners and trainers on various topics of Lean, Six Sigma, general quality management and continuous improvement along several years’ experience of the authors. Findings The top ten reasons in our opinion include lack of commitment and support from top management; poor communication practices; incompetent team; inadequate training and learning; faulty selection of process improvement methodology and its associated tools/techniques; inappropriate rewards and recognition system/culture; scope creepiness; sub-optimal team size and composition; inconsistent monitoring and control; and resistance to change. Research limitations/implications The top ten reasons mentioned in this study are based on only literature and authors’ opinion. The authors of this paper have been pursuing a global study to critically evaluate the reasons behind process improvement projects failure based on a case-study approach. Originality/value The chief operations officers and senior executives of various businesses can use these top ten reasons to develop project failure risk mitigation strategies and save significant cash-savings associated with such project terminations or failures in some other cases.

Business process improvement: empirical assessment and extensions

2008 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 778-802 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samia M. Siha ◽  
Germaine H. Saad
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Process Improvement ◽  
Business Process ◽  
Operations Management ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Business Process Improvement ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Implementation Guidelines ◽  
Improvement Programs

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to survey and analyze current process improvement (PI) approaches, their empirical results reported in the literature, and develop accordingly a conceptual framework and implementation guidelines.Design/methodology/approachA literature review of the popular business database to search for case studies and empirical research on PI methods was conducted. The empirical evidence on success and failure factors were inferred and tabulated. Based on synthesis of the lessons learned from this empirical evidence along with concepts drawn from economics, and operations management, a conceptual framework is developed.FindingsIt was found that the framework would serve as a diagnostic tool for identification of, and recovering from root causes of problems and inefficiencies faced in business environments. The framework proposed synthesizes and extends earlier PI tools and basic approaches used for mitigating disruptions faced in operations practice. The framework design consists of three main phases: Specify; Analyze; and Monitor closely. Accordingly, it is denoted by SAM.Practical implicationsDecision makers can be altered to both the success factors and causes of failure of different PI approaches, and a framework is provided along with implementation guidelines that help assure practical effectiveness of PI efforts. The guidelines provided for practicing managers comprise two categories: specific; tool‐based, and general; system‐based.Originality/valueThe contribution of this paper is two fold: first, empirical evidence on the drivers of success and failure of four main PI approaches, were synthesized. These include: six sigma, benchmarking, reengineering and process mapping. Second, based on this empirical evidence, a conceptual framework that guides both the choice and implementation of business process improvement programs is developed. The proposed framework and its implementation guidelines help assure actual effectiveness of PI practice.

A DMAIRC approach to lead time reduction in an aerospace engine assembly process

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jose Arturo Garza-Reyes ◽  
Ashley Flint ◽  
Vikas Kumar ◽  
Jiju Antony ◽  
Horacio Soriano-Meier
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Process Improvement ◽  
Lead Time ◽  
Continuous Process ◽  
Assembly Process ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Content Type ◽  
World Class ◽  
Improvement Methodologies

Purpose – Problem solving and continuous process improvement are key elements to achieve business excellence. Many problem solving and process improvement methodologies have been proposed and adopted by organisations, with DMAIC being the most widely used. The purpose of this paper is to present an empirical application of a modified version of DMAIC which enabled a world-class organisation to achieve an optimum reduction in the lead time of its aerospace engine assembly process. Design/methodology/approach – The paper reviews the most commonly used problem solving and process improvement methodologies and specifically, DMAIC, its variations and limitations. Based on this, it presents define, measure, analyse, improve, review, control (DMAIRC). Finally, DMAIRC is empirically applied through a case study, in a world-class manufacturing organisation. Findings – The results obtained from the case study indicate that DMAIRC is an effective alternative to achieve the maximum improvement potential of a process. In particular, DMAIRC helped the organisation studied to achieve a 30 percent reduction in the lead time of its engine assembly process. Originality/value – The novel problem solving and process improvement methodology presented in this paper can be used by organisations to undertake a more effective improvement project by assuring that the maximum potential of their improvement initiatives and processes is achieved.

scholarly journals Process improvement capability: a study of the development of practice(s)

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (7) ◽  
pp. 1841-1866
Author(s):  
Oliver Jones ◽  
Jeff Gold ◽  
Julia Claxton
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Process Improvement ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Education Institution ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Large Set ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Relative Significance ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Student Management

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to report on a research project, using intervention research (IR), which aims to identify how a higher education institution could develop process improvement (PI) capability. Design/methodology/approach The paper adopts a practice perspectives of routines, and classifies and catalogues the potential routines that could form PI capability. The development of these routines are investigated using the constructive research approach, a form of IR), in the action research mode. Within this approach, the methodology of mediated discourse analysis was employed to trace the empirical trajectory of the routine development, in a student management office within the context of an improvement project by the institutions PI unit. Findings Of relative significance is the implication that there is a small group of initialising PI practices which are accessible to practitioners, in contrast to a large set of critical success factors. Second, these PI practices transcend particular methodologies, meaning their development can be incorporated into customised, contextualised methodologies, by individual organisations. Practical implications The set of PI practices identified are able to be enacted by practitioners and are not dependent on macro-management factors. Second they are relatively simple to understand and are not associated with any particular improvement fad or fashion. Originality/value The study contributes to the appreciation of PI in higher education as a capability, and outlines the potential array of routines that could constitute that capability. It provides a theoretical view on how key PI routines are developed in an organisational field, and a more nuanced and richer view of “process mapping” and its effect on other PI practices.

Organisational ambidexterity within process improvement

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 458-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rupert L. Matthews ◽  
Kim Hua Tan ◽  
Peter E. Marzec
Keyword(s):  
Process Improvement ◽  
Case Study Methodology ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Operational Process ◽  
Dynamic Operating ◽  
Study Methodology ◽  
New Research ◽  
Selection Of

Purpose – Organisational ambidexterity has emerged as a new research paradigm that is relevant for promoting long-term firm performance however, research within practice-oriented domains has been limited. The purpose of this paper is to explore process improvement through the theoretical lens of organisational ambidexterity to understanding the conflicting aims of variation increasing and decreasing forms of operational process improvement. Design/methodology/approach – Drawing on reviews of both operations and strategic management literature, the paper employs a case study methodology to unpack critical aspects of ambidextrous process improvement across a range of organisational environments. Findings – The research shows that while the companies engaged in qualitatively different forms of improvement, by interpreting practices from an ambidextrous perspective, the complimentary nature of the two forms of improvement could be appreciated. The diversity of firms involved in the research also allowed findings to be considered in relation to a range of operational contexts. Research limitations/implications – The research highlights the relevance of an organisational ambidexterity perspective on operational process improvement, although the selection of companies the research draws from, limits it relevance to non-project-oriented organisations. Practical implications – Provides practitioners with a framework to inform their views and aims when engaging in process improvement activities. Originality/value – This is one of the first articles exploring process improvement from an ambidextrous perspective. This will help re-conceptualise process improvement away from wholly focusing upon quality improvement and variation reducing activities to help account for a more dynamic operating environment.

Improvement process selection framework for the formation of improvement solution alternatives

2015 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 702-722 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shye-Nee Low ◽  
Shahrul Kamaruddin ◽  
Ishak Abdul Azid
Keyword(s):  
Process Improvement ◽  
Flow Line ◽  
Production Performance ◽  
Process Selection ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Line Production ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Production Improvement ◽  
Improvement Process

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) processes within a flow-line production-improvement activity. Investigation can lead to understanding of how a process improvement framework influences the decision and fulfillment of the potential to successfully change the operation process. Design/methodology/approach – The improvement process selection (IPS) framework is built systematically by incorporating all related decision criteria with suitable tools required to select improvement alternatives. The process consists of three phases: identification, prediction, and selection. The IPS framework is validated through a case study of a company that was carrying out a flow-line production-improvement project. Findings – The developed framework is used to prioritize the problem scope and select the solutions from various options. The case study illustrates the process through which the developed framework provided a systematic approach in identifying the solutions and achieving the desired performance improvement. Prediction result analysis shows the framework achieved sustainable process improvement changes and prevents management levels from higher risks in failure improvement. The feedback of the case study has verified the robustness of the framework. Practical implications – Quantitative improvement tools, such as MCDM employed in the IPS framework are vital for better understanding of the improvement impact of changes. Thus, the improvement solution alternatives can be analyzed in more comprehensive ways by considering numerous performance metrics in order to select the best improvement alternatives. Originality/value – The IPS framework can assist the company in determining optimal decisions in relation to selection of improvement alternatives. As a result, production performance can be affected positively.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document