See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/351879482

Improving Lean Manufacturing Systems and Tools Engagement Through the

Utilisation of Industry 4.0, Improved Communication and a People
Recognition Methodology in a UK Engine Manufa...

Conference Paper · September 2021

CITATIONS READS

3 1,128

4 authors, including:

Martin McKie Ricky Jones

Jaguar Land Rover Limited Jaguar Land Rover Limited
33 PUBLICATIONS 65 CITATIONS 10 PUBLICATIONS 25 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Julia Miles
Riverside Regional Medical Center
4 PUBLICATIONS 3 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Martin McKie on 09 September 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2021) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

30th International Conference on Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing (FAIM2021)

7-10 September 2021, Athens, Greece.

Improving Lean Manufacturing Systems and Tools Engagement Through

the Utilisation of Industry 4.0, Improved Communication and a People
Recognition Methodology in a UK Engine Manufacturing Centre
M. G. McKiea*, R. Jonesb, J. Milesc, I. R. Jonesd
Jaguar Land Rover, Engine Manufacturing Centre,Wolverhampton, WV9 5GA
*Tel.: 07983717096; E-mail address: mmckie@jaguarlandrover.com

Abstract

There are many companies around the world implementing Lean Manufacturing Systems and Tools, also known as Lean practices.
Although Lean practices have been proven to be very useful, there are a number of challenges when implementing and maintaining
them. Culturally employees in different countries and companies have differing motivations. Therefore, finding a method to
motivate and engage employees to adhere to the Lean practices is a priority. Moreover, there are new technologies emerging which
can be utilised to assist in the communication and improve engagement and adherence of the Lean practices. Additionally, it is
important to understand how these technologies can be linked and cross utilized within the organization in an Industry 4.0 approach.
This case study examines the implementation of Lean practices in an Engine Manufacturing Centre, taking into consideration what
motivates individuals, utilising technology and considering an Industry 4.0 approach.

© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the FAIM 2021.

Keywords Lean; Manufacturing; Engagement; Motivation; Adherence; Improving; Communication; Industry 4.0; Recognition

1. Introduction to the Research technologies and manufacturing methodologies [1, 2].

The authors of this paper are part of the wider Integrated
Production Systems (IPS) team within an Engine
Manufacturing Centre (EMC). Their responsibility within the
EMC is to develop and train out the Lean practice. It is also the
responsibility of the team to capture the data to examine if the
Lean Manufacturing Systems and Tools that have been created
are being utilised within the EMC.
This research examines the utilisation of Lean practices
within the EMC and a method of improving Lean
Manufacturing engagement through communication and a
recognition strategy, whilst using an Industry 4.0 methodical
approach. Research in other manufacturing organisations has
previously proven that there are advantages to cross utilising
In this research there is a focus on Industry 4.0. The authors
believe that Industry 4.0 should be implemented in a staged
approach. This is due to the risks associated with implementing
new technologies across the whole of a business. There are
many cases of failed implementations of technologies such as
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) in organisations [3-5]. To
try and prevent this, the authors will examine a method of
implementing the research, initially in one of the three
assembly halls. If successful the authors will then look to
implement the following stages, as detailed below:
 Stage 1 – Utilise technology to gather the Lean data
into one central location, drawing together the
multiple spreadsheets and communication channels

2351-9789 © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the FAIM 2021.
2 M. G. McKie et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2021) 000–000
into one single source. This will initially be carried out
as a trial in one engine assembly hall.
 Stage 2 – Implement the theory and strategy used in
stage 1 into the two other engine assembly halls.
 Stage 3 – Implement the theory from the assembly
halls into the two machine halls giving full coverage
across the whole of the EMC.
 Stage 4 – Gather all of the Lean data from the
assembly halls and machine halls into one central
location, this will allow the authors to understand, and
display digitally, the Lean Manufacturing Systems
and Tools engagement and utilisation across the entire
EMC.
 Stage 5 – Implement a digital solution which allows
data to be captured without the need of the paper-
based team boards and Toblerones in all areas across
the EMC. Linking it directly to the digital solution.
After the 1st stage, the authors will understand if the new digital
solution and communication and recognition process works
and improves the adherence to the Lean practices.
1.1 Introduction to paper
This research in relation to the introduction to the research,
examines Stage 1, which is to utilise Industry 4.0 practices,
bringing together various software systems into one location.
Then examining and improving communication and
implementing a recognition methodology for the production
systems utilised to support Lean practices. The figure below
best describes the cross utilisation of theories and
methodologies.
Fig. 1. Original Lean adherence Process.
1.2 Lean Manufacturing
Lean employs minimum resources for maximum output, and
it is based on five principles: specify the value by specific
product; identify the value stream for each product; make the
value flow without interruptions; let the customer pull value
from the producer; and pursue perfection [6]. The focus of Lean
Manufacturing is around the elimination of waste [7, 8].
However, Lean is becoming more than just a production tool,
but an all-encompassing business ideology which incorporates
all aspects of value streams, as opposed to individual
production processes [9]. Lean Manufacturing is often credited
to Japanese Manufacturers such as Toyoda Kiichiro, Shigeo
Shingo and Taiichi Ohno who were all instrumental in the
development of Toyota Production Systems, often abbreviated
to TPS [10, 11]. However, Henry Ford in 1926 was once quoted
“One of the most noteworthy accomplishments in keeping the
price of Ford products low is the gradual shortening of the
production cycle. The longer an article is in the process of
manufacture and the more it is moved about the greater is its
ultimate cost”. Therefore, the concept of reducing waste within
automotive manufacturing has been around for a long time. The
basic underlying principle of TPS is to reduce or remove non-
value adding activities from the manufacturing process.
However, as mentioned by Womack and Jones, 2003, it is an
ideology that incorporates all aspects of the value stream and
as such, the integrated production systems used to support
Lean, that were developed and are being utilised by the
Integrated Production Systems Team within the EMC are
designed to support this theory. They are listed below:
 Problem Solving – Concern and Corrective Action
Reporting (CCAR) / Level Zero / Practical Problem
Solving (PPS). CCAR, Level Zero and PPS is a three
staged approach to standardised problem solving
within the EMC. The standardised approach includes
an escalation route.
 5S – Supporting standardised working a method of
Sorting, Setting, Shining, Standardising and
Sustaining the working environment.
 Standardised Work and Standard Work
Confirmation (SWC) – A standardised working
approach to the manufacture of engines within the
EMC. SWC is a method of auditing the standard work
to identify problems with standardised working and
opportunities for improvement.
 Versatility Matrix – A visual management tool that
provides a structured approach to monitoring and
measuring skills and identifying gaps in knowledge
and understanding.
 Kaizen – is a Japanese term meaning “change for the
better” and is an umbrella concept for a management
philosophy based on a set of principles and values [12,
13]: top management commitment and leadership;
focus on processes; Gemba (the place where things
happen) improvement management; people’s
participation; non-judgmental and non-blaming
approach; standardisation, discipline, and constancy;
experimentation and observation skills; and systemic
thinking. Kaizen Continuous Improvement
Methodology has been implemented and is being
utilised by all employees within the Engine
Manufacturing Centre.
 Process Confirmation – A form of peer-to-peer
coaching on the importance of all production systems.
 Team Improvement Circles (TIC) - A 10-step team-
based approach to implementing an improvement.
 Leadership Achievement Measure (LAM) - A
process of measuring the essential daily activities to
 M. G. McKie, et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2021) 000–000
be completed i.e. Work In Progress (WIP) Offline,
SWC’s, Safety Walks conducted. Team Boards,
Toblerones, CCARs checked and Error Proofing
completed.
Fig. 2. Integrated Production Systems / Lean Practices and how they fit around production.
The key objective within manufacturing is to follow the
standardised work practices. Following the Quality Process
Sheets (QPS) and Work Element Sheets (WES) will ensure that
the operators are doing the same process, the exact same way,
repeatedly. The Versatility Matrix supports standardised
working. This process ensures people are trained to the correct
level and that the team is flexible and able to work on multiple
stations. It also identifies training gaps and opportunities.
Visual Factory again supports standardised working by
ensuring materials, waste, Work In Progress (WIP), etc is
clearly marked using a colour coded Kanban system. 5S
supports standardised working by ensuring that all areas are
clean, tidy, and all tools, materials, etc are in their designated
location “a place for everything and everything in its place”.
Process Confirmation ensures that the team is regularly
discussing the systems and tools with each other, reinforcing
the standards.
In Fig 2. if the adherence to standardised work begins to dip,
then the problem-solving tools must be utilised to pull the
process back to the baseline condition. Concern and Corrective
Action Report (CCAR) will be initially utilised to record and
resolve the issue. If the issue cannot be resolved within 10 days,
due to no root cause identification, the issue will be escalated
to Level Zero which is a tool designed to measure baseline
condition. Level Zero will either identify that there is an issue
in the baseline condition allowing the root cause of the issue to
be identified. Alternatively, if there are no issues identified in
the baseline condition, then the concern will be escalated to
Practical Problem Solving (PPS). PPS is a complex, multi-
functional deep dive into the concern, utilising the Level Zero
and other problem-solving tools to resolve the issue.
If the standardised process is at baseline, then there is an
opportunity to improve. This is where the Kaizen tool is used
to implement continuous improvement ideas. If the continuous
improvement idea is successful it could potentially set a new
standard baseline condition.
Standard Work Confirmation is effectively an audit of the
Standardised Working Processes. By auditing the standardised
3
work processes, three things will occur. Either the SWC will
show that the process is being adhered too, alternatively it will
identify problems or continuous improvement ideas within the
standardised process.
1.3 Lean Manufacturing and Culture
Previous research has shown a relatively low success rate
for the implementation of Lean. For example, a thesis
published in 2015 on the implementation of Lean in the UK
Foundry Industry stated 46.15% of respondents were not using
Lean to its full potential. A further 69.23% stated in the same
study that they agreed or strongly agreed that the
implementation of lean was difficult [3]. In the opinion of the
authors, one of the biggest challenges is organisational culture
and its effect on Lean adherence and operational performance
[3]. Additionally, research carried out into Quality
Management Systems, supports this by highlighting the
importance of organisational culture for the success of Quality
Management Systems and the achievement of the
organisation’s desired results [14]. Not only that, but a previous
study has shown a scarcity of research around the organisations
cultural aspects when considering the implementation and
execution of Lean in organisations [15]. Moreover, it has been
identified that organisational culture plays a vital role for the
management in the challenges associated with changing the
culture [16]. However, a recent study, carried out in 2019,
involving 295 UK manufacturers showed that cultural
dimensions are shown to fully mediate the impact of Lean
management practices on operational performance [17]. The
findings from the same paper indicated that Lean practices are
positively associated with organisational cultures that are
procedurally focused, employee oriented, structurally open,
socially loose, rule driven (norm) and market oriented [15].
4 M. G. McKie et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2021) 000–000

1.4 Recognition, Motivation and Engagement Table 1. Communication Practices

Original practice Opposite Practice High Level Description:
Previous research has proven that organisations use reward (Observed) (Derived)
systems and strategies to motivate their employees and to Blending Separation Blending – Managers
communication
increase their performance. A study completed in the global attempts to become
banking sector in 2011 discusses this [18]. part of the workers
situation. Using words
One particular theory on motivation known as Maslow’s in communication such
Need Theory argued that human beings strive to satisfy the as “we”
Separation – Managers
following needs: physiological needs, safety needs, social or
communication are
belonging needs, self-esteem needs, and self-actualisation directive: “you” or
needs [19-21]. The study suggested that these needs are “your team” for
hierarchal; if a worker’s physiological needs have been met, example.
then they will therefore pursue the next need, which is safety. Positive Engagement Negative Positive Engagement –
To tie this in with the UK culture a study carried out by Engagement Managers
communication is
Proverbs, D. G., et. al., 1998, looked at workers in developed
always positive in the
countries such as Germany, France and England. The study sense of moving
suggested that German workers were more productive in production through
reinforcement fixing than workers from France or the United injecting energy
Kingdom. This is because Germans working in the construction
industry were more highly paid and regarded as on par with Negative Engagement
– Managers
people doing intellectual and scientific work [22]. Therefore, communication is not
physiological and esteem needs are satisfied together. In the abusive or rough
EMC which is an automotive manufacturing organisation, the language, but rather
plan is to utilise recognition as a motivational tool: Recognising the dampening of
individuals or groups who have shown the greatest Lean energy through only
noting failures.
adherence to the integrated production systems. As per
Soft words Hard words Soft Words – Managers
Maslow’s Need Theory, the employees at the EMC, in the communication –
authors’ opinion, meet the hierarchal needs i.e., physiological, always responds in an
safety, social and belonging needs. The recognition will feed emotionally positive
into the self-esteem and self-actualisation, allowing people to manner.
realise or fulfil their talents and full potential.
Hard Words –
Managers
1.5 Communication and Lean communication –
manager engages in
A paper published by Alpenberg, J, and Scarbrough, P., emotionally negative
2016, explores communication practices in lean production. In and disinhibited
the paper, the authors carry out a study to examine the daily behaviours when
working practices at organisations that successfully incorporate interacting with
workers.
Lean production practices into the organisational culture.
Moreover, the paper examines specifically the management
communication practices in relation to Lean practices. This This study showed that in three Toyota plants and one
paper examines the management communication practices Scania plant, which all embedded Lean successfully, they were
listed in Table. 1 along with their high-level description. able to utilise positive engagement, soft words and blending in
their Lean communications. Alternatively, embedding Lean
failed in companies such as Subaru, Suzuki, GM and Mazda
where the opposite approach was utilised [23].
 M. G. McKie, et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2021) 000–000 5

1.6 Industry 4.0
It is widely regarded that Industry 4.0 is a term that was first
introduced by the German Government at the Hannover Fair in
2011 as an initiative to support German industry in addressing
future challenges, mainly in relation to digital technology
adoption [24].
The term Industry 4.0 is a term which refers to the 4th
Industrial Revolution. The 1st Industrial Revolution that
introduced water and steam powered machines occurred
between the late 1700’s and early 1800’s. The 2nd Industrial
Revolution took place in the late 1800’s to the early part of the
1900’s and was characterised by the utilisation of electricity
and steel in factories. This period also saw the introduction of
the moving assembly line and the concept of mass production
[24-25]. The third Industrial Revolution began to develop in the
early 1950s as manufacturers began utilising more electronic
technology [24]. The fourth and current industrial revolution,
also known as Industry 4.0, is based on the integrated use of
digital technology and new levels of interconnectivity [24].
This allows data to be analysed in real time. Recently the term
Industry 4.0 has become a buzzword, used to describe
digitalisation in any phase of the value chain of an enterprise
[26].
(IPS) Team, who are responsible for Lean practices, training
and roll out to the Operations Team, which included the Team
Leaders on each zone, the Process Leaders, Senior Process
Leader and Assembly Manager.
2.1 Original Lean Adherence Process
1. Daily, the Team Leaders on the zones would input the
Leadership Achievement Measure (LAM) data into a
bespoke Google® spreadsheet. This data was then
checked every Monday by a member of the IPS team
for adherence.
2. Every Monday, the SWC/ 5S/ Process Confirmation/
SWC Actions and CCAR Actions would be collected
from each zone and inputted into a separate Excel
spreadsheet by a member of the IPS team
3. The spreadsheet would then be shared via email with
the Process Leaders, Senior Process Leader and
Assembly Manager.

There are generally nine Industry 4.0 pillars, which are:

Industrial Internet of Things (IoT), Cloud Computing, Big
Data, Simulation, Augmented Reality, Additive
Manufacturing, Horizontal and Vertical System Integration,
Autonomous Robots and Cybersecurity [27]. This research
intersects Systems Integration, Big Data and Cloud Computing.
Communicating the Lean data with all decision makers,
utilising the cloud computing and integrating multiple systems.
According to the World Economic Forum, providing real-time
data to all decision makers improves overall collaboration and
decision- making quality, which is in line with this study [28].
Fig. 3. Original Lean Adherence Process.
Furthermore, recent research on Industry 4.0 adoption
highlights that technology is an essential driver of digital
There are many disadvantages to this original Lean
transformation and Industry 4.0 is more technology centric.
adherence process. Firstly, by only checking the LAM
Nevertheless, organisations should consider the human aspects
adherence on the following Monday, if any of the Team
related to Industry 4.0 and the need for supporting business and
Leaders have missed a LAM input, it is too late to remind them
management models and approaches, to achieve enduring
to complete it.
competitiveness. Hence, the present study contributes to that
end by focusing on the continuous improvement process
One of the biggest disadvantages is that the data collected is
supported by Industry 4.0 and how to improve people
not communicated with the Team Leaders. It is only
engagement for its application [29].
communicated with the Process Leaders, Senior Process
Leader and Assembly Manager. This therefore raises a number
2. Methodology
of issues:
This research looks to combine Industry 4.0 practices with
a people engagement approach, based on motivation, to  The Team Leaders cannot see data on how they are
improve Lean Manufacturing Systems and Tools adherence in performing each week.
an EMC.  They have no visibility of the data to see how they
compare to other zones.
Industry 4.0, as mentioned, has become a buzzword, used to  Because they are not on the email to the managers,
describe digitalisation in any phase of the value chain of an they cannot see who the data is being shared with.
enterprise [26]. In this research a Microsoft® SharePoint® site
 The Management didn’t use positive engagement to
was created that allowed the 15 assembly zones and
recognise the zones with the best Lean adherence.
management team direct access to view their performance on
the Lean practices. It also allowed for effective two-way There are two separate spreadsheets one of which was a
communication between the Integrated Production Systems Google® sheet which collected the LAM data and one which
6 M. G. McKie et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2021) 000–000

was located on a local drive that collected the overall Lean

adherence data.

After using this process for a few weeks, and utilising a

continuous improvement mindset, the authors identified that
there was definitely room for improving communication by
utilising technology. It was agreed that by having all the
documents stored in a centralised location, and by promoting a
transparent approach, this would quickly improve the
motivation and communication to the adherence of the Lean
practices.

2.2 New Lean Adherence Process:

1. Daily, the Team Leaders on the zones would input the

LAM data into an embedded spreadsheet on the
SharePoint® site. This data was then checked every
day by a member of the IPS team for adherence to
LAM and regular two-way communication was used
via the SharePoint® site to remind Team Leaders to
complete the LAM, ensuring that adherence to the
LAM was high.
2. Every Monday, the Lean adherence data for SWC/ 5S/
Process Confirmation/ SWC Actions and CCAR
Actions would be collected from each zone and
inputted into another embedded spreadsheet by a
member of the IPS team. The Lean adherence results
therefore were transparent and visible to all of the
Team Leaders, Process Leaders, Senior Process
Leader, Assembly Manager, Assembly Senior
Manager, Other IPS Teams from across the EMC and
the IPS Manager.
3. The Lean adherence results would then be shared with
the SharePoint® site, embedded in an email for ease
of access. This email would then be shared with not
only the operations team within the assembly hall but
with other operations teams, Quality and IPS Teams
from across the sites.
4. The zone with the best Lean adherence would be
recognised as Zone of the Week and added to a league
table, which was also on the SharePoint® site.
5. Once a month the zone with the best Lean adherence
for the month i.e. Zone of the Month would receive a
certificate from the Assembly Senior Manager,
Assembly Manager, Process Leaders and IPS
Manager in recognition for achieving the best Lean
adherence for the month.
6. A monthly email would then be communicated
showing the Lean adherence month on month and
communication to all about the winners of Zone of the
Month.
Fig. 4. New Lean Adherence Process.
The main advantages with the new process are that the data
is collected in one location i.e. LAM, Lean adherence and all
historical data is accessible via the SharePoint® site.
Unlike the original process, the data is available via the
SharePoint® site 24/7 and is communicated out to the whole
operations team, quality and the other IPS teams and managers.
This is important for two reasons. Firstly, the Team Leaders
can see how they compare with one another. The operations
management team i.e., Process Leaders and Managers can see
who is performing the best via the Zone of the Week. Secondly,
it is important because the IPS teams in the other halls can see
how well the assembly hall is performing in comparison to their
assembly hall. The quality team can also see how the hall is
performing which is important from a SWC point of view.
From a motivation and recognition point of view, the Team
Leaders with the best Lean adherence are being recognised
weekly and monthly by the Assembly Senior Manager, who
they wouldn’t directly liaise with on a regular basis. It is also
enforcing the importance of the Lean practices and showing
that it is not only important to the IPS Team to have excellent
Lean adherence, but it is important to the operations team who
are the direct managers of the Team Leaders.
The new process is designed to link new technology and
Lean techniques together, which has been carried out in other
manufacturing organisations as identified by Nabhani, F. et. al.,
2012. In the EMC, the team looked at the various systems and
tools utilised and looked at how they could be integrated
together from an Industry 4.0 point of view
 M. G. McKie, et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2021) 000–000
Fig. 5. Industry 4.0 Digitisation and Streamlining.
In Fig. 5. the Team Leaders would need to be able to utilise
all of the systems and tools i.e., open different processes to be
able to carry out the activities. Having the embedded LAM
spreadsheet and Lean adherence data, linking Jaguar Land
Rover (JLR) Way documents, SuccessFactors assessments and
having two-way communication options within the
SharePoint® site allows the authors to combine the six separate
processes into one location, with easy access to all information,
streamlining and integrating the processes.
3. Results
After implementing the new SharePoint® site in week 35
and the Zone of the Week recognition along with weekly
communication the following results were achieved.
3.1 Leadership Achievement Measure (LAM)
Fig. 6. shows the adherence to the old LAM process between
weeks 19 to 34. Which shows a decreasing trend in LAM
adherence and also engagement. From week 35 the new
SharePoint® process was introduced along with Zone of The
Week and Month. Almost immediately there was an
improvement in the LAM adherence as well as an improvement
in communication between the IPS Team and the Team Leader)
in each of the zones. Note: from week 2 of 2020 a new LAM
process was introduced. Also Note: Shutdown on the graphs
refer to the plant shutdown, when the EMC is not producing
engines.
3.2. Standard Work Confirmation
Fig. 7. shows the adherence prior to the introduction to the
SharePoint® site which was 104.16%. Note: It is over 100%
because some zones go above and beyond and carry out more
SWC’s than is required. However, in the 14 weeks data prior
to the introduction of the SharePoint® site and recognition
initiative at least 100% adherence to SWC was missed on 8
occasions. After the introduction of the new process, it wasn’t
missed for 25 weeks, consecutively.
7
In Fig. 8 the number SWC actions raised prior to the
introduction of the SharePoint® site and recognition initiative
was on average 4.92 per week. After the introduction, this rose
to 20.25 per week and, from the start of 2020 until around
March, rose to 30.27 per week. This demonstrates that the
Industry 4.0 technology approach, improved communication
and recognition initiative allowed the operations team to
identify more issues and essentially close out more issues
utilising the SWC and CCAR process.
3.3. Concern and Corrective Actions Report
Fig. 9. shows that prior to the research implementation, on
average 14.91 CCAR issues were being raised across the
assembly hall on a weekly basis. Post-implementation this
increased to an average 31.37 actions raised per week. From
2020 when the process was mature, on average, the number of
issues raised increased to 42.36. This demonstrates that the
Industry 4.0 technology approach tied to improved
communication and a recognition initiative has had a positive
impact on the number of CCARs being raised across the
assembly hall. The more issues found and raised, the more that
can be resolved.
3.4. Process Confirmation Adherence
The Process Confirmation adherence data shown in Fig. 10.
shows that there was large process variation prior to the
improvements. However, after the introduction of the Industry
4.0 SharePoint® solution, improved communication and
recognition process, Process Confirmation increased and
became more stable. In the 13 weeks prior to the
implementation, 100% adherence was achieved 3 times in a 13-
week period. After the implementation from week 36, 2019 to
week 11, 2020, 100% adherence to process confirmation was
achieved 21 times in a 26-week period.
.
8 M. G. McKie et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2021) 000–000

3.5. Kaizen

Fig. 11. shows the Kaizen adherence for the Module 4 That equates to a 54.76% increase in the number of Kaizens
Assembly hall. raised and a 69.52% increase in the number of Kaizens closed
 In the 7 months prior to the introduction of the within this particular assembly hall.
SharePoint site, improved communication and
recognition initiative, Module 4 Assembly raised 787
and closed 699
 In the 6.5 month following the introduction of the
SharePoint® site and recognition initiative, Module 4
Assembly raised 1218 and closed 1185

Fig. 6. The adherence to the Leadership Achievement Measurement in the engine assembly hall.

Fig. 7. Standard Work Confirmation Adherence in the engine assembly hall.

Fig. 8. Standard Work Confirmation actions raised in the engine assembly hall.
 M. G. McKie, et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2021) 000–000 9

Fig. 9. CCAR Actions raised in the engine assembly hall.

Fig. 10. Process Conformation Adherence in the engine assembly hall.

7 Months – Feb 2019 - August 2019 – Pre-process Improvement

Fig. 11. Number of Kaizens raised and closed prior to process improvement and post process improvement.
10 M. G. McKie et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2021) 000–000
4. Discussion
The results have shown that implementing Industry 4.0
methodology, improving communication and implementing a
recognition process has had a positive impact on the Lean
adherence. Table 2 below shows that, once the improvements
were embedded, there was a 515% increase in the number of
SWC actions raised. There was also a 184% increase in the
number of CCARs raised. Capturing SWCs and CCARs
ensures the identification and robust resolution of concerns
raised in the assembly hall. There were also improvements in
Process Confirmation, LAM, SWC, and Kaizens raised and
closed in the hall. When comparing the original process to the
new process, the number of Kaizens raised increased by 108%
and the number of Kaizens closed increased by 182%. This
initial increase however was not maintained, but there was still
an improvement on the original process versus the embedded
process of 32.5% in the number of Kaizens raised and 76.4%
increase on the number of Kaizens closed.
Table 2. Overall Improvements in the Lean Adherence Metrics.
Table 3. Original Process versus Improved Process.
Tab. 3. Original Process versus Improved Process
Utilising the SharePoint® site and drawing together all of
the information into one location has not only improved
accessibility to the key systems, tools and data, but it also
improved communication between the IPS Team and the
Operations Team. Table 2 shows that there were a number of
improvements in communication. Communication was
improved by utilising the SharePoint site, communicating the
data, utilising positive engagement, blending and soft words. It
was also improved by including the Team Leaders in the
communication channels on a weekly and monthly basis.
Previously there was no recognition process, one of the big
improvements made was to recognise the zones with the best
Lean adherence on a weekly and monthly basis. This creates a
competitive environment and increases the interest in utilising
the systems and tools.
%
%
 M. G. McKie, et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2021) 000–000
One of the major keys to success with this project is the
cross utilisation of Industry 4.0, Improved Communication and
Recognition. Used individually they would not have had the
same impact. Therefore, it is important to cross utilise the
systems [3]. The challenge going forward is to sustain the
improvements. The adherence to CCAR and SWC Actions has
improved, but the next stage will look at the quality of the
actions being raised. Are they being raised correctly and are
they being closed out in a timely manner, for example? This
might mean that new metrics need to be added to the weekly
communication and included as a metric to achieve Zone of the
Week. For example, tracking the CCARs closure and
identifying CCARs not closed out in a timely manner. Other
things to consider are utilising the systems and tools in the other
assembly halls and in the machining halls on the plant. Each
hall has a different operations team and are at different stages
of maturity in terms of the product. In machining in particular,
the organisational structure is different, and the machinery and
environment are different so the process will need to be altered
to suit.
5. Conclusion
This research has shown that improvements to the adherence
of Lean practices can be achieved by utilising Industry 4.0
practices, improving communication channels and language
through the use of positive engagement, soft words and
blending. Additionally, the adherence can also be improved
through the utilisation of a Lean practices recognition process
within the assembly hall.
Improvements made: Original Process vs New Embedded
Process:
Problem Solving:
 184.10% increase in CCARs Raised
Continuous Improvements (CI):
 76.35% increase in the number of Kaizens closed
 32.53% increase in the number of Kaizens raised
Problem Solving / CI:
 14.84% increase in Standard Work Confirmations
 515.24% increase in SWC Actions
Standardised Working Improvements
 16.29% increase in Leadership Achievement Measure
 11.15% increase in Process Confirmation
Not only has adherence to the Lean practices been
improved, but employee engagement has also increased along
with the number of issues being identified and resolved through
the problem-solving tools. Another positive aspect of the
research is an increase in the number of continuous
improvement ideas being generated and implemented in the
assembly hall.
In the broader context, the authors need to carry out a SWOT
analysis examining the Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities
and Threats of the current implementation. Based on this data
the authors need to create an improved plan to implement the
improvements in the other assembly halls. One of the
limitations is that this study has been carried out in Assembly
which has a different organisational structure to the machine
11
halls. Therefore, the authors will need to develop a bespoke
plan for the machine halls which also aligns the data input and
output so that the data is comparable to the assembly halls.
The immediate challenge for the authors will be to maintain
the engagement and adherence to the Lean practices in the
assembly hall. The authors will also look to implement the
changes in the other assembly and machine halls within the
EMC. Following a staged approach to Industry 4.0 within
EMC, after implementing this research into the other assembly
and machine halls, the authors will examine a homogenous
solution to bring all of the Lean adherence data together. Then
develop a digital solution to inputting, collecting, analysing and
distributing the Lean practices data.
CRediT author statement
Martin McKie: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software,
Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing-Reviewing
and Editing, Visualization, Supervision. Ricky Jones: Writing-
Reviewing and Editing, Visualization. Julia Miles:
Investigation. Ian Jones: Project Administration.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Operations Team within
Module 4 Assembly but in particular Jason Evans who has
supported the implementation of Lean practices in Module 4
Assembly and now in the machining halls.
The authors would also like to acknowledge Natalie McKie
for proof reading, amending and providing valuable feedback
on this research article.
References
[1] Nabhani. F., McKie, M. G., Hodgson, S. (2012). Development and
distribution of a questionnaire to evaluate technology within the UK
Foundry Industry. FAIM 2012, 22nd International Conference on Flexible
Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing, June 10th-13th, 2012, Helsinki,
Finland, Volume 2, Pages. 909-918.
[2] Nabhani. F., McKie, M. G., Askari, V. (2012). Implementation of a
Sustainable Technology Improvement Model for the UK Foundry Industry.
FAIM 2012, 22nd International Conference on Flexible Automation and
Intelligent Manufacturing, June 10th-13th, 2012, Helsinki, Finland,
Volume 2, Pages. 909-918.
[3] McKie, M. G. (2015). Research and Development of a Sustainable
Technology Improvement Model for the Foundry Industry, Doctoral
Dissertation, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, England,
10.13140/RG.2.2.23201.25443.
[4] Vuksic, V.B., Spremic, M., (2005), ERP System Implementation and
Business Process Change: Case Study of a Pharmaceutical Company,
Journal of Computing and Information Technology, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 11–
24.
[5] Zhang, L., Lee, M. K. O., Zhang, Z., Banerjee, P., (2003), Critical Success
Factors of Enterprise Resource Planning Systems Implementation Success
in China, 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems
Sciences, January 6-9, (Big Island, Hawaii, United States of America).
[6] Womack, J.P. and Jones, D.T. (1996), Lean Thinking – Banish Waste and
Create Wealth in your Corporation, Simon & Schuster, London).
[7] Ayoub Elkhairi, Faycal Fedouaki, Semma El Alami, (2019). Barriers and
Critical Success Factors for Implementing Lean Manufacturing in SMEs,
IFAC-PapersOnLine, Volume 52, Issue 13, Pages 565-570, ISSN 2405-
8963,
 View publication stats
12 M. G. McKie et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2021) 000–000
[8] Nabhani. F., McKie, M. G., Hodgson, S., (2013), A case study on a
sustainable alternative to the landfill disposal of spent foundry sand,
International Journal of Sustainable Manufacturing, Volume 3, No. 1, pp.
1-19.
[9] Womack, J.P., Jones, D. T., (2003). Lean Thinking: banish waste and create
wealth in your corporation, Simon and Schuster. New York, USA.
[10] Womack, J.P., Jones, D. T., Ross, D., (1990). The Machine That Changed
The World, Macmillan Publishing Company, Canada.
[11] Ohno, T., (1988). Toyota Production Systems: Beyond Large Scale
Production, Productivity Press, (New York, United States of America).
[12] Imai, M. (1986), Kaizen – The Key to Japan’s Competitive Success,
Random House, New York, NY.
[13] Imai, M. (1997), Gemba Kaizen, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
[14] Fonseca, L.M. (2015). ISO 9001 quality management systems through the
lens of organisational culture. Quality - Access to Success, 16 (148), 54-
59.
[15] Pakdil, F., Leonard, K.M., (2015). The effect of organizational culture on
implementing and sustaining lean processes. Journal. Manuf. Technol.
Manage. 26 (5), Pages 725–743.https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-08-2013-
0112.
[16] Graham-Jones, J., Al Muhareb, T.M., (2015). Using lean six-sigma in the
improvement of service quality at aviation industry: case study at the
departure area in KKIA using lean six-sigma in the improvement of service
quality at aviation industry: case study at departure area KKIA Int. J.
Social, Manage. Econ. Business. Eng. 8 (1)
[17] Cadden, T., Millar, K., Treacy, R., Humphreys P. (2020). The mediating
influence of organisational cultural practices in successful lean
management implementation., International Journal of Production
Economics, Volume 229, 107744,ISSN 0925
5273,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107744.
[18] Güngör, P. (2011). The Relationship between Reward Management
System and Employee Performance with the Mediating Role of Motivation:
A Quantitative Study on Global Banks, Procedia - Social and Behavioural
Sciences, Volume 24, Pages 1510-1520, ISSN 1877-0428.
[19] Kazaz, A., Manisali, E., ULubeyli, S. (2008). Effect of basic motivational
factors on construction workforce productivity in Turkey. Journal of Civil
Engineering and Management. 14. 95-106. 10.3846/1392-3730.2008.14.4.
[20] Wum, W. (2012). The Relationship between Incentives to Learn and
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, Journal of Physics Procedia, Volume 24,
Part B, Pages 1335-1342,
[21] Maslow, A.H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation: Psychological
Review, 50(4) (1943):370-396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0054346
[22] Proverbs, D. G., Holt, G. D., Olomolaiye, P. O., (1998). A comparative
evaluation of reinforcement fixing productivity rates amongst French,
German and UK construction contractors, Engineering, Construction,
and Architectural Management 5(4): 350–358.
[23] Alpenberg, j., Scarbrough, P. (2016). Exploring communication practices
in lean production, Journal of Business Research, Volume 69, Issue 11,
Pages 4959-4963, ISSN 0148-2963,
[24] Marzano, G., Martinovs, A. (2020). Teaching Industry 4.0. Society.
Integration. Education. Proceedings of the International Scientific
Conference. 2. 69. 10.17770/sie2020 vol 2. 4833.
[25] Azmi, A. N., Kamin, Y., Noordin, M. K. (2018). Towards Industrial
Revolution 4.0: Employers' Expectations on Fresh Engineering Graduates.
International Journal of Engineering and Technology. 7. Pages 267-272.
10.14419/ijet.v7i4.28.22593.
[26] Hermann, M., Pentek, T. and Otto, B. (2016) Design Principles for
Industrie 4.0 Scenarios. Proceedings of 49th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences HICSS, Koloa, 5-8 January 2016, 3928-
3937. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2016.488
[27] Lorenz, M.; Rüßmann, M.; Waldner, M.; Engel, P.; Harnisch, M.; Justus,
J. Industry 4.0: The Future of Productivity and Growth in Manufacturing
Industries. Boston Consulting Group. 2015. Available online:
https://www.bcg.com/publications/2015/engineered_products_project_bu
siness_industry_4_future_productivity_growth_manufacturing_industries
[28] World Economic Forum. 2018. Available online:
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Future_of_Jobs_2018.pdf
[29] Fonseca, L.; Amaral, A.; Oliveira, J. Quality 4.0: The EFQM 2020 Model
and Industry 4.0 Relationships and Implications. Sustainability 2021, 13,
3107. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063107