Overview of research on tensions and paradoxes in integrating digital technologies and LP
| Authors | Focus | Purpose | Research approach | Main findings | Gap related to our study |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maalouf and Gammelgaard (2016) | LP (Lean Production) and Paradoxes | Managing paradoxical tensions in LP implementation | Case study (n = 3 companies) | Identified three types of organisational paradoxes in LP implementation: organising, performing and belonging, and suggested managerial actions to address paradoxes | Integrating digital technologies in LP implementation is not studied or not part of the focus |
| Erthal and Marques (2022) | LP and Paradoxes | Use paradox theory to investigate the interplay of organisational culture and LP implementation | Single case study | Identified four categories of cultural paradoxes (learning, organizing, belonging and performing) that emerged from the clashes between companies’ prior organizational culture (OC) and the LP culture. OC acts as antecedent to both defensive mechanisms and managerial actions | |
| Secchi and Camuffo (2019) | LP and Paradoxes | Explore the determinants of LP implementation failures | Single case study | How LP implementation tasks are allocated between LP specialists and office managers (the degree of structural versus contextual ambidexterity built in the implementation process) led to failure. The way of organizing in the process can generate variation in LP implementation outcomes and create conditions for failure | |
| Dieste et al. (2022) | I4.0 (Industry 4.0) and Paradoxes | Identify main organisational tensions during the I4.0 implementation | Systematic literature review and workshop with experts | Identified 23 tensions and 18 related resolution strategies in I4.0 implementation. The three core domains of resolution strategies are “technological”, “managerial-internal” and “managerial-external”, and further differentiated into four types of paradox resolution strategies: contextualisation, structural separation (spatial and temporal) and synthesis, where the most prominent strategy used was synthesis | Industry 4.0 context is general, not related to LP practices |
| Putra et al. (2023) | I4.0 (digital opportunities) and Paradoxes | Framing exploration of digital opportunities at the interfaces of organisational hierarchy | Single case study | Top management teams (TMTs) adopt a paradoxical framing of exploration, thereby creating a liminal space with unstable boundaries between exploration activities aligned with core resources (i.e. convergent) and those perceived as divergent. Middle management (MMs) role is crucial in (re)defining the boundaries of exploration in order to find a balance between promoting and constraining the exploration of digital opportunities | Explored I4.0 from organizational hierarchy and leadership perspective, but no consideration of LP |
| Smith and Beretta (2021) | I4.0 (Digital transformation) and Paradoxes | Investigate how incumbent firm organized and managed its digital transformation journey from a micro-level perspective | Longitudinal, exploratory qualitative single case study | The adopted hybrid organizing model by the firm led to the emergence of three paradoxes at the micro- level (paradoxes of organizing, attention, and knowledge sharing). The organizational members, through their coping with these paradoxes, ended up affecting the hybrid organizing model in both positive and negative ways | No consideration of LP-practices in studying the digital innovation in incumbent firm |
| Mishra et al. (2022) | I4.0 (Digital transformation) and Paradoxes | Identify the central paradoxical tensions in developing resilience in organisations and the role of digital transformation in this process | Single case study | Proposed a conceptual framework representing paradoxes (learning, organizing, belonging, performing) in building resilience during the implementation of digitalisation techniques. Proposed five resolution strategies (goal congruence, adaptive culture, revising business plan and strategies, customer relation management, digitalisation) to manage paradoxes associated with resilient operations | No consideration of LP-practices in analysing paradoxes |
| Holmemo and Korsen (2023) | I4.0 (digital tools) and LP | Examine relationship between LP and digitalisation within Industry 4.0 | Single case study | Despite agile development, digitalisation is still characterised by centralisation and programmatic planning. Lean production is decentralised, with long-term and continuous change processes. This creates challenges for coordination between digitalisation and Lean. Also, the findings indicate a paradoxical relationship between digitalisation and LP and how the two needs to go hand in hand. Two main explanations of why digital lean tools lag behind lean production are provided: 1) Digitalisation is agile, but centralised and programmatic, and 2) Digital tools are standardised but locally optimised and asynchronous | Utilise a process theory perspective, rather than paradox theory to provide a discussion on the lean-digitalisation paradox and on why digital LP tools stagnate |
| Rosin et al. (2020) | I4.0 and LP | A characterisation of the impacts of I4.0 technologies on LP principles | Conceptual | There is a strong support for I4.0 technologies for Just-in-time and Jidoka, but little or no support for waste reduction and People and Teamwork. Technologies from I4.0 do not seem to cover the integratedness of Lean principles but can reinforce the efficiency of these principles. However, I4.0 does not replace Lean management principles, which must be pursued in companies | Identifying paradoxes in I4.0 and LP is not a focus of this study |
| Sanders et al. (2017) | I4.0 and LP | Study the influence of lean management tools on I4.0 through interaction plot matrix | Conceptual | There exist numerous synergies between the Lean management (LM) tools and I4.0 design principles. LM tools like TPM, Kanban, production smoothing, autonomation and waste elimination benefit the most by the introduction of I4.0. Real-time capability, decentralisation and interoperability design principles offer highest support to the LM tools. The concept of LM is likely to become more important for successful implementation of I4.0 | |
| Tortorella et al. (2019) | I4.0 and LP | Examine I4.0 technologies on the relationship between LP and operational performance improvement | Survey (n = 147 manufacturing companies) | I4.0 moderates the effect of Lean practices on operational performance improvement, but in different directions. Process-related technologies negatively moderate the effect of low setup practices on performance, whereas product/service-related technologies positively moderate the effect of flow practices on performance | Although cultural aspects mentioned, paradoxes are not explicitly discussed |
| Tortorella et al. (2021) | I4.0 and LP | Identify the pairwise relationships between LP-practices and Industry I4.0 technologies | Survey (n = 147 manufacturing companies) | I4.0 technologies are positively correlated with LP-practices A proposed Lean automation framework to guide the integration of I4.0 into LP implementation based on the relationship level between practices and technologies from both approaches. The framework can potentially overcome traditional barriers and challenges faced in a usual LP implementation | Identifying paradoxes in I4.0 and LP is not a focus of this study |
| Buer et al. (2021) | I4.0 (digitalisation) and LP | Investigate relationships between LP use, factory digitalisation, and operational performance | Survey (n = 75) | Lean manufacturing and factory digitalisation individually contribute to improved operational performance. When used together, they have a complementary (or synergistic) effect that is greater than their individual effects combined | Identifying paradoxes in I4.0 and LP is not a focus of this study |
| Rossini et al. (2019) | I4.0 and LP | Examine the impact of the interrelation between I4.0 and LP production practices on the operational performance | Survey (n = 108) | Higher adoption levels of I4.0 may be easier to achieve when Lean production practices are extensively implemented in the company. In opposition, when processes are not robustly designed and continuous improvement practices are not established, companies’ readiness for adopting novel technologies may be lower | |
| Mokudai et al. (2021) | I4.0 (Digital technologies) and LP | Explore how production systems characterised by the LP principle addresses digital transformation | Case studies (n = 7) | Japanese automotive manufacturers selectively adopted digital technologies to enhance the existing Lean production system, labelled as Lean augmentation. There is a potential of digitalisation to limit kaizen, the roles of human involvement and organisational coordination in digitalised manufacturing, and there are potential risks such as “Lean traps” | Although some challenges such as Lean traps identified, studying paradoxes is not a focus of this study |
| Kumar et al. (2023) | I4.0 and LP | Analyse research works on the integration of LP and I4.0 techniques | Systematic literature review | Identified three clusters of research work: development of conceptual models and frameworks for integrating Lean and I4.0, analysing the compatibility between the two techniques for better implementation of one another, and the techniques' combined impact on operational performance | Identifying paradoxes in I4.0 and LP is not a focus of this study |
| Von Haartman et al. (2021) | I4.0 (digital technologies) and LP | Explore the relationship between three types of LP-practices and the digital technologies | Survey (n = 548) | Three types of Lean practices – Lean flow, Lean work organisation and Lean human resource management – are strongly associated with firms’ adoption of digital technologies in production by manufacturing firms. A firm’s experience of Lean may act as an absorptive capacity when adopting digital technologies | |
| Bittencourt et al. (2021) | I4.0 and LP | Identify the synergy between I4.0 approach and the role of LP | Systematic literature review | Lean is seen as an important agent in the implementation I4.0, and Lean concepts such as work standardisation, organisation and transparency are fundamental in supporting the implementation and consolidation of the I4.0. Management, processes and people are key players in the companies’ transformation |
| Authors | Focus | Purpose | Research approach | Main findings | Gap related to our study |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LP (Lean Production) and Paradoxes | Managing paradoxical tensions in LP implementation | Case study ( | Identified three types of organisational paradoxes in LP implementation: organising, performing and belonging, and suggested managerial actions to address paradoxes | Integrating digital technologies in LP implementation is not studied or not part of the focus | |
| LP and Paradoxes | Use paradox theory to investigate the interplay of organisational culture and LP implementation | Single case study | Identified four categories of cultural paradoxes (learning, organizing, belonging and performing) that emerged from the clashes between companies’ prior organizational culture (OC) and the LP culture. OC acts as antecedent to both defensive mechanisms and managerial actions | ||
| LP and Paradoxes | Explore the determinants of LP implementation failures | Single case study | How LP implementation tasks are allocated between LP specialists and office managers (the degree of structural versus contextual ambidexterity built in the implementation process) led to failure. The way of organizing in the process can generate variation in LP implementation outcomes and create conditions for failure | ||
| I4.0 (Industry 4.0) and Paradoxes | Identify main organisational tensions during the I4.0 implementation | Systematic literature review and workshop with experts | Identified 23 tensions and 18 related resolution strategies in I4.0 implementation. The three core domains of resolution strategies are “technological”, “managerial-internal” and “managerial-external”, and further differentiated into four types of paradox resolution strategies: contextualisation, structural separation (spatial and temporal) and synthesis, where the most prominent strategy used was synthesis | Industry 4.0 context is general, not related to LP practices | |
| I4.0 (digital opportunities) and Paradoxes | Framing exploration of digital opportunities at the interfaces of organisational hierarchy | Single case study | Top management teams (TMTs) adopt a paradoxical framing of exploration, thereby creating a liminal space with unstable boundaries between exploration activities aligned with core resources (i.e. convergent) and those perceived as divergent. Middle management (MMs) role is crucial in (re)defining the boundaries of exploration in order to find a balance between promoting and constraining the exploration of digital opportunities | Explored I4.0 from organizational hierarchy and leadership perspective, but no consideration of LP | |
| I4.0 (Digital transformation) and Paradoxes | Investigate how incumbent firm organized and managed its digital transformation journey from a micro-level perspective | Longitudinal, exploratory qualitative single case study | The adopted hybrid organizing model by the firm led to the emergence of three paradoxes at the micro- level (paradoxes of organizing, attention, and knowledge sharing). The organizational members, through their coping with these paradoxes, ended up affecting the hybrid organizing model in both positive and negative ways | No consideration of LP-practices in studying the digital innovation in incumbent firm | |
| I4.0 (Digital transformation) and Paradoxes | Identify the central paradoxical tensions in developing resilience in organisations and the role of digital transformation in this process | Single case study | Proposed a conceptual framework representing paradoxes (learning, organizing, belonging, performing) in building resilience during the implementation of digitalisation techniques. Proposed five resolution strategies (goal congruence, adaptive culture, revising business plan and strategies, customer relation management, digitalisation) to manage paradoxes associated with resilient operations | No consideration of LP-practices in analysing paradoxes | |
| I4.0 (digital tools) and LP | Examine relationship between LP and digitalisation within Industry 4.0 | Single case study | Despite agile development, digitalisation is still characterised by | Utilise a process theory perspective, rather than paradox theory to provide a discussion on the lean-digitalisation paradox and on why digital LP tools stagnate | |
| I4.0 and LP | A characterisation of the impacts of I4.0 technologies on LP principles | Conceptual | There is a strong support for I4.0 technologies for Just-in-time and Jidoka, but little or no support for waste reduction and People and Teamwork. | Identifying paradoxes in I4.0 and LP is not a focus of this study | |
| I4.0 and LP | Study the influence of lean management tools on I4.0 through interaction plot matrix | Conceptual | There exist numerous synergies between the Lean management (LM) tools and I4.0 design principles. LM tools like TPM, Kanban, production smoothing, autonomation and waste elimination benefit the most by the introduction of I4.0. | ||
| I4.0 and LP | Examine I4.0 technologies on the relationship between LP and operational performance improvement | Survey ( | I4.0 moderates the effect of Lean practices on operational performance improvement, but | Although cultural aspects mentioned, paradoxes are not explicitly discussed | |
| I4.0 and LP | Identify the | Survey ( | I4.0 technologies are positively correlated with LP-practices | Identifying paradoxes in I4.0 and LP is not a focus of this study | |
| I4.0 (digitalisation) and LP | Investigate relationships between LP use, factory digitalisation, and operational performance | Survey ( | Lean manufacturing and factory digitalisation individually contribute to improved operational performance. | Identifying paradoxes in I4.0 and LP is not a focus of this study | |
| I4.0 and LP | Examine the impact of the interrelation between I4.0 and LP production practices on the operational performance | Survey ( | Higher adoption levels of I4.0 may be easier to achieve when Lean production practices are | ||
| I4.0 (Digital technologies) and LP | Explore how production systems characterised by the LP principle addresses digital transformation | Case studies ( | Japanese automotive manufacturers selectively adopted digital technologies to enhance the existing Lean production system, labelled as Lean augmentation. There is a potential of digitalisation to limit kaizen, the roles of human involvement and organisational coordination in digitalised manufacturing, and there are potential risks such as | Although some challenges such as Lean traps identified, studying paradoxes is not a focus of this study | |
| I4.0 and LP | Analyse research works on the integration of LP and I4.0 techniques | Systematic literature review | Identified three clusters of research work: development of conceptual models and frameworks for integrating Lean and I4.0, analysing the | Identifying paradoxes in I4.0 and LP is not a focus of this study | |
| I4.0 (digital technologies) and LP | Explore the relationship between three types of LP-practices and the digital technologies | Survey ( | Three types of Lean practices – Lean flow, Lean work organisation and Lean human resource management – are strongly associated with firms’ adoption of digital technologies in production by manufacturing firms. | ||
| I4.0 and LP | Identify the synergy between I4.0 approach and the role of LP | Systematic literature review | Lean is seen as an important agent in the implementation I4.0, and Lean concepts such as work standardisation, organisation and transparency are fundamental in supporting the implementation and consolidation of the I4.0. |
Source(s): Authors' own creation
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.