Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 213 (2015) 728 – 733

20th International Scientific Conference Economics and Management - 2015 (ICEM-2015)

The Lean Management Maturity Self-Assessment Tool Based on

Organizational Culture Diagnosis
Wieslaw Urbana, *
a
Bialystok University of Technology, Wiejska 45A, Bialystok 15-351, Poland

Abstract

Lean Management is considered as the most effective methodology for substantial productivity improvement in any kind of
organization. It is becoming more and more popular among companies and public institutions. The aim of this study is to design a
tool for self-assessment of Lean Management maturity by an organization. The study is based on theoretical deliberations. It
considers the scientific literature in the area of Lean Management. As well as this, it draws significantly on practical cases of
Lean implementation, and also on the author’s experience. The proposed assessment approach is original in being focused on the
organizational culture sphere. Organizational culture shows if Lean is truly implemented in an organization. The tool can help
managers in better recognition of the current state of Lean transformation. Thanks for this, Lean transformation in organizations
could be faster and more effective.
© 2015
© 2015TheTheAuthors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier Ltd. Ltd.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
Peer-review under responsibility of Kaunas University of Technology, School of Economics and Business.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of Kaunas University of Technology, School of Economics and Business
Keywords: Lean Management; Services; Organizational culture; Lean Culture; Lean maturity; Management tool.

Introduction

Companies and other institutions are always aiming for better performance. There are offered a series of tools,
methodologies and models designed to improve organizations and achieve higher business performance. The Lean
Management approach seems to be the most effective in terms of achieving significant productivity improvement in
a relatively fast manner. Considering that Lean Management transformation is a process taking place within an
organization, this study is focused on Lean Management maturity. The study is based on the assumption that

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +48 85 746 9053; fax: +48 85 746 9053.
E-mail address: w.urban@pb.edu.pl

1877-0428 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of Kaunas University of Technology, School of Economics and Business
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.527
 Wieslaw Urban / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 213 (2015) 728 – 733 729

organizational culture reflects Lean Management advancements on the Lean journey. Therefore, it aims to design a
practical tool based on organizational culture for self-assessment of Lean maturity. This tool would be helpful for
managers in many ways, particularly in understanding existing gaps in Lean adoption and identifying further
transformation paths. The study adopts a theoretical approach. In designing the tool the author has taken advantage
of the scientific literature, published business case studies and guidelines, and the author’s practical experience from
working with a number of companies. The output of this study is a tool for Lean maturity self-assessment.

1. Lean Management way

The simplest definition of Lean Management is “doing more with less” (Rymaszewska, 2014). This very simple
idea is at the same time very powerful and inspiring. According to Womack et al. (1990), Lean is lean because it
uses less of everything compared with mass production – half the human effort in the factory, half the manufacturing
space, half the investment in tools, half the engineering hours to develop a new product in half the time. Whilst
explaining the idea of Lean every one of the five principles of Lean by Womack & Jones (1996) are called upon.
The first principle argues that a company should comprehensively understand what a product’s value means in
customers’ eyes. The second one says that the value stream should be determined among the departments of the
company. The next one announces that the value stream needs to be leaner and leaner through waste elimination.
The fourth principle recommends reorganizing the stream as timing in the rhythm of the demand. The final one
suggests an unfaltering striving for perfection. A streamlined high-quality system and continuous elimination of
waste (Shah & Ward, 2003) form the absolute bases of Lean.
Lean Management is a broad management approach. It is considered as a collection of management tools, a
management system, and very often as a philosophy or even an ideology. Authors state (Arlbjørn & Freytag, 2013)
that there are many interpretations of Lean, and they are ranged from a focus on waste elimination, utilizing
RSHUDWLRQDOWRROVDQGLPSOHPHQWLQJVSHFL¿FSURGXFWLRQ-related principles, to identifying conditions that are linked
to the product and/or the service, and the predictability of demand and its stability.
What distinguishes Lean from other management techniques is its strong emphasis on continuous change towards
increasing sophistication. According to Camacho-Minano et al. (2013), Lean is not a single act of introduction into
an organization. Lean has always been considered as a process. Lean is a continuous and never- ending process of
improvement. Similarly, Byrne & Womack (2012) see Lean as a long process of transformation, and Liker (2004)
sees Lean by Toyota as the way. Therefore, understanding the advancement in a Lean journey is very beneficial for
managers.

2. Organizational culture as an inherent enabling factor of Lean Management

Organizational culture is most commonly understand as a pattern of shared basic assumptions that a group learns
as it solves its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, and which has worked well enough to be
taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems (Schein, 1992). It
is very often conceptualized by using the metaphor of an onion’s layers, where at least three layers exist: behaviour,
values and basic assumptions (Groseschl & Doherty, 2000). Organizational culture is not fully visible, but an
observer can directly recognize behaviour or culture symbols in an organization. Values form a central point of the
organizational culture concept. Although organizational culture is not easy to grasp in an accurate manner
(Groseschl & Doherty, 2000), investigations into organizational culture very often tend to decode the values shared
within an organization. According to Hofstede (1984), values are unconscious and conscious feelings which
manifest themselves in human behaviour.
Lean incrementally contains a series of values which distinguish this approach from others. First of all, there is
the so-called strong Lean philosophy (Bhasin & Burcher, 2006; Papadopoulou & Ozbayrak, 2005). According to
Bhasin & Burcher (2006), Lean philosophy implies that Lean is not a kind of final state to achieve, but a journey on
which a company needs to go. The essence of Lean philosophy is a striving for perfection, and it leads an
organization toward world class operational excellence (Papadopoulou & Ozbayrak, 2005). Authors claim (Dibia et
al., 2014) that the Lean journey in an organization should not be a gradual implementation of tools and techniques. It
needs strong leadership. And top managers’ commitment to Lean is an indispensable component of Lean leadership.
730 Wieslaw Urban / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 213 (2015) 728 – 733

Another value characteristic for Lean is serious attention to waste identification and elimination, and organizing
all operations around the value stream (Liker, 2004). Only if this value took root and became highly prevalent in an
organization it starts moving towards a significant productivity increase typical for Lean. Lean is recognizable for its
involvement culture (Bhamu & Sangwan, 2014). The deep commitment of employees is one of the most serious
challenges when implementing Lean in an organization (Rymaszewska, 2014). The commitment of people is
conditioned by the belief that only common engagement leads an organization to success. Emiliani and Emiliani
(2013) strongly underline the indispensability of “respect for people” by senior managers while moving forward on a
Lean journey.
Apart from the above-mentioned values, authors prove directly that organizational culture is a crucial Lean
element. Jørgensen et al. (2007) state that to think and act Lean has become an inherent part of employees’ daily
work. Lean activities are more of a habit than a specific task. Miller et al. (2013) see the culture of kaizen as a main
long-term improvement factor. According to Henderson & Larco (1999), among many Lean components
organizational culture is the most important one. Others explicitly conclude that to succeed in Lean, a focus on
changing the organizational culture is very important (Ingelsson & Mårtensson, 2014). Liker (2004) deems that
corporate culture is a result of, as well as an enabler for, sustainable and successful Lean operations.

3. Lean Management maturity assessment

Starting from the mid-1990s researchers and consultants proposed instruments for assessing Lean adoption
(Malmbrandt & Åhlström, 2013). They were mostly focused on enablers of Lean, or tools and techniques, or
organization performance. Assessment instruments are scientifically or practically focused, the former try to
understand deeper Lean advancements in industries, but the latter aim to help managers in their decisions appearing
on the Lean road. The latter ones are of particular interest in this study. The summary of practical Lean maturity
assessment instruments is presented in Table 1 beneath.
The presented instruments adopt different approaches to Lean maturity assessment, and the criteria taken into
consideration noticeably differ. There are checklists and levels of criteria fulfilment assessment procedures. But all
of them undoubtedly try to grasp visible and clear signs of Lean adoption. Some of them try to determine Lean
maturity by Lean rules adoption, some being Lean tools and techniques. Lean performance seems to be the primary
component of Lean assessment. Indeed, this is clear evidence of effectively working Lean methodology in an
organization. None of the instruments treats organizational culture issues comprehensively.

4. Lean self-assessment tool based on organizational culture

Lean Management's development trajectory is unique in each organization (Lewis, 2000). A great deal of research
on Lean transformation is focused on Lean practices – tools and techniques (Camacho-Minano et al., 2013). Lean
practices might significantly differ between organizations aiming at Lean excellence. In the sphere of organizational
culture the changes are eventually very similar: organizations usually reach similar extraordinary performance
effects typical for Lean. Bhasin (2011) has observed strong relationships between Lean values and business
performance.
The idea of a Lean maturity self-assessment tool based on organizational culture is intended judge an organization
on five sets of criteria. See the tool presented in Appendix A. The first one considers Lean vision (V) in an
organization. A user should figure out if the vision really exists, and if it is coherent with elementary Lean
foundations. The second set of criteria concerns Leadership (L) activities taken in an organization. The smooth flow
of information, work and materials stream is another Lean foundation. Therefore, the next set of questions concerns
shared assumptions about the rules of value stream (S) organization. Another comprises routines concerning
operational improvement (I). And finally the fifth set of criteria asks about people treatment (P) rules in an
organization.
For each criterion a user can allocate up to five points, including zero. In this way Lean culture existence in an
organization is assessed on the scale from 0 to 100 points. This is a score showing maturity in Lean Management.
But the culture score in the tool is supplemented by results typical for Lean (R) achieved by an organization. Lean
results are composed of eight criteria assessed by a user on the same point scale. From the results criteria an
 Wieslaw Urban / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 213 (2015) 728 – 733 731

organization can get up to 40 points. Finally, a user can conclude how advanced Lean is in her/his organization,
bearing in mind that Lean culture should always go hand in hand with tangible performance effects.

Table 1. Summary of practical Lean maturity assessment instruments.

Author/instrument Purpose The scope of assessment Presence of Lean culture assessment
name
Nightingale & Self-assessment tool The tool is composed of three sections: (1) Lean The assessment relies on the identification of
Mize, 2002; Lean designed to help the transformation/leadership - the processes and a number of practices. The first section
Enterprise Self- degree of leanness leadership supporting Lean transformation, (2) concerns 9 practices (out of 28 in this section)
Assessment Tool and provide feedback life cycle processes - product development from closely related to organizational culture.
(LESAT) for improvement conception to after sale service, (3) enabling These are as follows: focus on customer
infrastructure - processes responsible for value, senior management commitment, Lean
resources enabling company operations enterprise vision, a sense of urgency,
enterprise flow, relationships based on mutual
trust, employee empowerment, providing
education and training, structured continuous
improvement processes
Sánchez & Pérez, This is an integrated The tool is based on quantitative measures. They It is difficult to discern symptoms of Lean
2001; Lean check-list to assess are incorporated in six groups: (1) elimination of culture in this tool. All the indicators
Production check- manufacturing zero-value activities, (2) continuous comprehensively capture possible Lean
list changes toward Lean improvement, (3) team work, (4) JiT production effects
and delivery, (5) suppliers’ integration, and (6)
flexible information system
Nesensohn et al., It provides It comprises 11 key attributes. They are as At least three attributes are closely related to
2014; Lean organisations with an follow: (1) Lean leadership, (2) customer focus, organizational culture. These are Lean
Construction assessment of the (3) way of thinking, (4) culture & behaviour, (5) leadership, the way of thinking, and culture
Maturity Model current state of their competencies, (6) improvement enablers, (7) and behaviour
(LCMM) Lean Construction processes & tools, (8) change, (9) work
journey environment, (10) business results, (11) learning
and competency development
Donovan, 2015; The tool is a checklist It consists of a number of yes/no questions Some check-questions refer to organizational
Lean for the assessment of focused on several fields important in the Lean culture. The issue of top management
Manufacturing: an organization’s Management approach. Namely: process involvement and leadership are widely
Performance current status and on- planning and control, management and represented. There are also questions on
Evaluation Audit going progress in leadership, quality control and planning, TPM, values of continuous improvement and
adopting Lean suppliers, selected Lean techniques, customer employee involvement. Moreover the
Manufacturing focus, and performance improvement instrument puts stress on awareness of
criteria customer satisfaction
Ray et al., 2006; To give a company A set of indices specifying performance typical Lean culture does not appear in this
Lean Index feedback on the for Lean transformation. For example: instrument at all.
leanness of its productivity measured in product volume per
operations and to labour hour, energy consumption per labour
prioritize lean hour, and so on
efforts. Intended for
use in the wood
products industry

Conclusions

Organizational culture, being the collective programming of the mental characteristic for particular organization
members (Hofstede, 1984), obviously has reflections of Lean Management, providing that the Lean concept is truly
implemented in an organization. The literature states that the organizational culture stays in relationship to how an
organization behaves and performs (Uzkurt et al., 2013; Cordes et al., 2010; Chu, 2003). So, that assessment of Lean
Management maturity in an organization by auditing organizational culture is absolutely reasoned. It is particularly
valuable because many Lean transformation initiatives fail (Nightingale & Mize, 2002).
Managers need to understand the distances they have travelled, and know the directions for future transformation.
In industries where Lean Management is still a kind of novelty, the expected advantages of the proposed self-
assessment tool might be more important. For instance, in the post-communist countries the corporate culture is still
a mixture of national business traditions, owners’ self-teaching, and western bureaucracy standards. Lean
Management is often perceived as another management tool box for fast implementation in a company for achieving
732 Wieslaw Urban / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 213 (2015) 728 – 733

productivity improvement. This perception of Lean is very misleading. Lean cannot bring such striking effects
without real corporate culture transformation.

Appendix A. Lean Management maturity assessment tool

How far is our organization Lean? - Self-assessment tool based on organizational culture
Please rate the following statements concerning shared values within your company on a scale of 0-5, 0 means
absolutely no, 5 definitely yes. Part I presents components of Lean culture, Part II typical effects of Lean.
Part I. Lean culture
Organization’s vision components (0-5 points for each criterion)
V1. A clear vision of organizational improvement, shared by all employees, exists in our company
V2. We believe that in order to achieve a long-term vision of the company, short-term gains are sacrificed if
necessary
V3. In our company we do not accept temporary solutions to problems. We get them right first time, and if it is
necessary, we stop the whole process to solve the problem immediately
V4. Our company shows respect for our business partners, and if they want us to, we help them to improve their
processes
Leadership (0-5 points for each criterion)
L1. Our company emphasizes the development of leaders who identify with the company’s vision and rules
L2. It is obvious that top managers are often found close to the value stream, and they serve there in problem solving
L3. We believe that decisions should be forwarded to an operational level; employees are empowered to make
decisions about issues related to their work
L4. In our company we do not accept “pretend projects” that run without a full understanding of their meanings and
without the conviction that they will bring good results
Associated with the value stream (0-5 points for each criterion)
S1. It is obvious that the reference point for most of the activities within the company is the value stream. It
determines the organization of operations
S2. It is sought to obtain a continuous and smooth flow in the value stream
S3. The company aims to manufacture/serve according to customer orders; a pulling system is being implemented –
production is proceeded by external needs
S4. In our company we do not accept impulsive, careless decisions; before any decision there is long thought, but
immediately after the decision is made it is implemented into practice
Operational improvement (0-5 points for each criterion)
I1. The norm is that we still carry out improvement projects in various spheres of the company
I2. It is important for our company to improve all operations systematically, and all employees continuously work
on discovering and eliminating waste
I3. In our company nobody hides faults; spotted errors are treated as an opportunity to improve
I4. We emphasise communicating in a visual way all the guidance of operations, and other important information,
such as errors and performance
People treatment (0-5 points for each criterion)
P1. The employees are treated with respect and healthy partnership; care of people is manifested in attention to their
needs and their development
P2. We believe that continuous learning for all employees should be an integral part of the work in our company
P3. We always remember to challenge people; challenges are taken on by managers and employees
P4. We pay attention to facilitate conditions for individual initiative and creativity in every position in our company
The sum of five groups (V+L+S+I+P) is …… out of 100.
Part II. Lean results obtained (0-5 points for each criterion)
R1. There is noticeable stabilization of our economic situation and our position in the market
R2. Our customers’ satisfaction has being improved thanks to our improvement actions
R3. Our company records a noticeable improvement in processes
R4. We have noticed shorter lead-time and the reduction of response to customer needs time
 Wieslaw Urban / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 213 (2015) 728 – 733 733

R5. The quality of our products is being improved, and the number of defects and errors is also being reduced
R6. Inventory turnover is being improved, and the inventory in stock and work in progress are also reduced
R7. Employee productivity is increasing, for example, calculated for man-day's work or working hour
R8. The unit costs of our products have a downward tendency
The sum of groups (R) is …… out of 40.

References

Arlbjørn, J.S., & Freytag, P.V. (2013). Evidence of lean: a review of international peer-reviewed journal articles. European Business Review, 25,
174-205.
Bhamu, J., & Sangwan, K.S. (2014). Lean manufacturing: literature review and research issues. International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, 34, 876-940.
Bhasin, S. (2011), Performance of organisations treating lean as an ideology, Business Process Management Journal, 17, 986-1011.
Bhasin, S., & Burcher. P. (2006). Lean viewed as a philosophy. Journal of Manufacturing and Technology Management, 17, 56-72.
Byrne, A., & Womack, J.P. (2012). The Lean Turnaround: How Business Leaders Use Lean Principles to Create Value and Transform Their
Company. London: McGraw-Hill.
Camacho-Minano, M..M., Moyano-Fuentes, J., & Sacristan-Diaz, M. (2013). What can we learn from the evolution of research on lean
management assessment? International Journal of Production Research, 51, 1098-1116.
Chu, K.F. (2003). An organizational culture and the empowerment for change in SMEs in the Hong Kong manufacturing industry. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 139, 505-509.
Cordes, C., Richersonb, P.J., & Schwesinger, G. (2010). How corporate cultures coevolve with the business environment: The case of firm
growth crises and industry evolution. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 76, 465–480.
Dibia, I.K., Dhakal, H.N., & Onuh, S. (2014). Lean “Leadership People Process Outcome” (LPPO) implementation model. Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management, 25, 694-711.
Donovan, M. (2015). Lean Manufacturing: Performance Evaluation Audit. R. Michael Donovan & Co., Inc., www.rmdonovan.com [accessed
March 2015].
Emiliani, M.L., & Emiliani, M. (2013). Music as a framework to better understand Lean leadership. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 34(5), 407-426.
Groseschl, S., & Doherty, L. (2000). Conceptualising culture. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 7, 12-17.
Henderson, B.A., & Larco, J.L. (1999). Lean Transformation How to Change Business into a Lean Enterprice. Richmond: The Oaklea Press.
Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture Consequences. London: SAGE Publications.
Ingelsson, P., & Mårtensson, A. (2014). Measuring the importance and practices of Lean values. The TQM Journal, 26, 463-474.
Jørgensen, F., Mathiessen, R., Nielsen, J., & Johansen, J. (2007). Lean Maturity, Lean Sustainablity. In J. Olhager, & F. Persson (Eds.), Advances
in Produvtion Management Systems (pp. 371-378). Boston: Springer.
Lewis, M.A. (2000). Lean production and sustainable competitive advantage. International Journal of Operations & Production Management,
20(8), 959–978.
Liker, J. (2004). The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World's Greatest Manufacturer. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Malmbrandt, M., & Åhlström, P. (2013). An instrument for assessing lean service adoption. International, Journal of Operations & Production
Management, 33, 113 -1165.
Miller, J., Wroblewski, M., & Villafuerte, J. (2013). Creating a Kaizen Culture: Align the Organization, Achieve Breakthrough Results, and
Sustain the Gains. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional.
Nesensohn, C., Bryde, D., Ochieng, E., Fearon, D, & Hackett, V. (2014). Assessing Lean Construction Maturity. Proceedings IGLC-22 “People,
Culture and Change”, June, Oslo, Norway, 1157-1168.
Nightingale, D.J., & Mize, J.H. (2002), Development of a lean enterprise transformation maturity model. Information Knowledge Systems
Management, 3, 15-30.
Papadopoulou, T.C., & Ozbayrak, M. (2005). Leanness: experiences from the journey to date. Management, 16, 784-807.
Ray, C.D., Zuo, X., Michael, J.H., & Wiedenbeck, J.K. (2006). The Lean Index: Operational “Lean” Metrics for The Wood Products Industry.
Wood and Fiber Science, 38, 238-255.
Rymaszewska, A.D. (2014). The challenges of lean manufacturing implementation in SMEs. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 21, 987-
1002.
Sánchez, A.M., & Pérez, M.P. (2001). Lean indicators and manufacturing strategies. International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, 21, 1433-1452.
Schein, E.H. (1992). Organizational Culture and Leadership: A dynamic View. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Uzkurt, C., Kumar, R., Kimzan, H.S.,  (PLQRۜOX * (2013). Role of innovation in the relationship between organizational culture and firm
performance: a study of the banking sector in Turkey. European Journal of Innovation Management, 16, 92–117.
Womack, J.P., & Jones, D.T. (1996). Lean Thinking - Banish Waste and Create Wealth in your Corporation. New York: Free Press.
Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., & Roos, D. (1990). The machine that changed the world. New York: Free Press.