You are here

Home » Content

Prácticas de mejora continua, con enfoque Kaizen, en empresas del Distrito Metropolitano de Quito: Un estudio exploratorio

Continuous improvement practices with Kaizen approach in companies of the metropolitan district of Quito: An exploratory study

Journal Name:

  • Intangible Capital

Publication Year:

  • 2017
DOI: 
https://doi.org/10.3926/ic.901

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author Name
Abstract (2. Language): 
Purpose: The purpose of this article is to evaluate the practice of continuous improvement in medium and large manufacturing companies and services of the Metropolitan District of Quito (DMQ); examine the benefits and difficulties in sustaining continuous improvement; and, to study the participation of the different hierarchical organizational levels in the practice of continuous improvement. Design/methodology: An exploratory study was conducted. They were selected, medium and large companies, both manufacturing and services of the DMQ. Qualitative methods used to obtain the data were: direct observation, document analysis and interviews with semi-structured depth.Findings: The results show a preference for the use of simpler techniques to identify and solve problems such as the seven basic quality tools. Within this article describes in detail the enhancers and barriers that are presented in the maintenance of continuous improvement. Research limitations/implications: This article uses a qualitative methodology, so their results cannot be generalized, can only be referenced using the specific context of the companies studied. Practical implications: The study aims to have an analytical contribution. The results show economic benefits and for the human resource, considering mainly the minimization of unnecessary processes and the opportunity of professional development that is offered to the personnel, important data for those people involved in projects of continuous improvement in DMQ companies. Social implications: The conclusions have important implications for research. Continuous improvement should take into account not only economic benefits but also human factors, same that can influence the quality of life of workers. Originality/value: The paper presents empirical contributions for the literature by exposing of the implementation of the Kaizen concept in the Latin American context, Quito - Ecuador.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Objeto: El propósito de este artículo es evaluar la práctica de mejora continua en medianas y grandes empresas de manufactura y servicios del Distrito Metropolitano de Quito (DMQ); examinar los beneficios y dificultades en el sostenimiento de la mejora continua; y, estudiar la participación de los diferentes niveles jerárquicos organizacionales en la práctica de mejora continua. Diseño/metodología/enfoque: Se condujo un estudio exploratorio. Se seleccionaron medianas y grandes empresas de servicios y de manufactura del DMQ. Los métodos cualitativos utilizados para obtener los datos fueron: observación directa, análisis documental y entrevistas a profundidad semi-estructuradas. Aportaciones y resultados: Los resultados muestran una preferencia por el uso de técnicas más sencillas para identificar y solucionar problemas como las siete herramientas básicas de calidad. Dentro de este artículo se describen a detalle los elementos potenciadores y las barreras que se presentan en el mantenimiento de la mejora continua.Limitaciones: Este artículo utiliza una metodología cualitativa, por lo que sus resultados no se pueden generalizar, sólo se pueden referenciar utilizando el contexto específico de las empresas estudiadas. Implicaciones prácticas: El estudio pretende tener una aportación analítica. Los resultados evidencian beneficios económicos y para el recurso humano, considerando principalmente la minimización de procesos innecesarios y la oportunidad de desarrollo profesional que se ofrece al personal, datos importantes para aquellas personas involucradas en proyectos de mejora continua en empresas del DMQ. Implicaciones sociales: Las conclusiones tienen importantes implicaciones para la investigación. La mejora continua debe tener en cuenta no sólo los beneficios económicos, sino también los factores humanos, mismos que pueden influir en la calidad de vida del trabajador. Originalidad / Valor añadido: El trabajo presenta aportes empíricos a la literatura mediante la exposición del funcionamiento del término Kaizen en el contexto latinoamericano, Quito - Ecuador.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-practicas-de-mejora-continua-con-enfoque-kaizen-en-empresas-del-distrito-metropolitano-de-quito-un-estudio-exploratorio.pdf
  • 2
479
497
  • Turkish

JEL Codes:

REFERENCES

References: 

Alukal, G., & Manos, A. (2006). Lean Kaizen: A simplified approach to process improvements. Milwaukee: ASQ
Quality Press.
Bessant, J., Caffyn, S., & Gallagher, M. (2001). An evolutionary model of continuous improvement
behavior. Technovation, 21(2), 67-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(00)00023-7
Breyfogle, F. III (1999). Implementing Six Sigma: Smarter Solution Using Statistical Methods. New York, NY:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Bond, T.C. (1999). The role of performance measurement in continuous improvement. International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, 19(2), 1318-1334.
https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579910294291
Brunet, A.P., & New, S. (2003). Kaizen in Japan: An empirical study. International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, 23(12), 1426-1446. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570310506704
Dankbaar, B. (1997). Lean production: Denial, confirmation or extension of socio-technical systems
design?. Human Relations, 50(5), 567-583. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016991803180
Davenport, T., & Short, J. (1990). The new industrial engineering: Information technology and business
process redesign. Sloan Management Review, 31 (4), 11-27.
De Haan, J., Yamamoto, M., & Lovink, G. (2001). Production planning in Japan: Rediscovering lost
experiences or new insights?. International Journal of Production Economics, 71(1-3), 101-109.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(00)00110-9
De Tréville, S., & Antonakis, J. (2006). Could lean production job design be intrinsically motivating?
Contextual, configurational, and levels-of-analysis issues. Journal of Operations Management, 24(2),
99-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/Ehie, I., & Sheu, C. (2005), Integrating six sigma and theory of constraints for continuous
improvement: a case study. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 16(5), 542-553.
https://doi.org/10.1108/17410380510600518
Emiliani, M.L. (2005). Using kaizen to improve graduate business school degree programs. Quality
Assurance in Education, 13(1), 37-52. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880510578641
García, C., Dueñas, R., Rainusso, M., Diez, E., & García, J. (2010). Sostenibilidad de los sistemas de
mejora continua en la industria: Encuesta en la Comunidad Autónoma Vasca y Navarra. Intangible
Capital, 6(1), 51-77.
Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. California, Mill Valler. CA: Sociology Press.
Glaser, B.G. & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New
York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Goldratt, E., & Cox, J. (1992). The Goal (2nd revised ed.). Croton-on-Hudson, NY: The North River
Press.
Hammer, M. (2004). Deep Change. How Operational Innovation Can Transform your Company.
Harvard Business Review, 82(4), 84-93. https://doi.org/10.1109/emr.2004.25106
Hino, S. (2006). Inside the Mind of Toyota. New York: Productivity Press.
Imai, M. (1986). Kaizen: The Key to Japan’s Competitive Success. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Imai, M. (1989). Kaizen: La clave de la ventaja competitiva japonesa. México: Grupo Editorial Patria.
Imai, M. (1997). Gemba Kaizen: A Commonsense Low-cost Approach to Management. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Ishikawa, K. (1985). What is Total Quality Control? The Japanese Way. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Janesick, V. J. (1998). Stretching exercises for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Liker, J. (2004). The Toyota Way. New York: Simon & Schuster Inc.
Liker, J., & Meier, D. (2006). The Toyota Way Fieldbook. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lillrank, P. (1995). The transfer of management innovations from Japan. Organization Studies, 16(6),
971-989. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069501600603
Lillrank, P., & Kano, N. (1989). Continuous Improvement-Quality Control Circles in Japanese Industry.
The Journal of Asian Studies, 50(2), 416-418. https://doi.org/10.2307/2057250
Linderman, K., Schroeder, R., Zaheer, S., & Choo, A. (2003). Six sigma: A goal – theoretic perspective.
Journal of Operations Management, 21(2), 193-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(02)00087-6 Neuman, L. (2009). Understanding research. Boston: Pearson Education.
Newitt, D.J. (1996). Beyond BPR & TQM - Managing through processes: Is kaizen enough?. Institution of
Electric Engineers (Eds.). London, U.K: Industrial Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1049/ic:19960785
Nonaka, I. (1995). The recent history of managing for quality in Japan. In J. Juran (Ed.), A History of
Managing for Quality (pp. 517-552). Milwaukee: ASQC Quality Press.
Oropesa Vento, M., Garcia Alcaraz, J.L., Maldonado M., Aidé A., & Martínez Loya, V. (2016). The
impact of managerial commitment and Kaizen benefits on companies. Journal of Manufacturing
Technology Management, 27(5), 692-712. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-02-2016-0021
Ortiz, C. (2009). Kaizen and Kaizen event implementation. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Pettigrew, A.M. (1997). What is a processual analysis?. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13(4), 337-348.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0956-5221(97)00020-1
Prajogo, D.I. & Sohal, A.S. (2004). The sustainability and evolution of quality improvement
Programmes- an Australian case study. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 15(2), 205-220.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1478336032000149036
Philips, J. (1981). Assessing measurement error in key informant reports: A methodological note on
organizational analysis in marketing. Journal of Marketing Research, 22(5), 395-415.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3151333
Recht, R., & Wilderom, C. (1998). Kaizen and culture: On the transferability of Japanese suggestion
systems. International Business Review, 7(1), 7-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-5931(97)00048-6
Ritchie, J., & Lewis, J. (2003). Qualitative Research Practice. London: Sage Publications.
Salgueiro, A. (1999). Cómo Mejorar los Procesos y la Productividad. Madrid: Asociación Española de
Normalización y Certificación, AENOR.
Sawada, N. (1995). The Kaizen at Toyota production system. Quality Control Course, 6, 1-38. Nagoya:
CHU-SAN-REN.
Singh, J., & Singh, H. (2015). Continuous improvement philosophy – literature review and directions.
Benchmarking: An International Journal, 22 (1), 75-119. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-06-2012-0038
Stake, R. (2000). The case study method in social inquiry. In R. Gomm, M. Hammersley & P. Foster
(eds.), Case Study Method. New York: Sage Publications.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. Denzin, N. & Y.
Lincoln (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 273-285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Suárez-Barraza, M.F. (2007). El Kaizen: La filosofía de Mejora Continua e Innovación Incremental detrás de la
Administración por Calidad Total. México: Panorama Editorial.
Suárez-Barraza, M.F., & Dávila, J. (2011). Implementación del Kaizen en México: Un estudio
exploratorio de una aproximación gerencial japonesa en el contexto latinoamericano. Revista:
INNOVAR. Revista de Ciencias Administrativas y Sociales, 21(41), 19-37.
Suárez-Barraza, M.F., & Miguel-Dávila, J.A. (2009). En la búsqueda de un Espacio de Sostenibilidad:
Un estudio empírico de la aplicación de la Mejora Continua de Procesos en Ayuntamientos
Españoles. INNOVAR Journal of Administrative and Social Sciences, 19(35), 47-64.
Suárez-Barraza, M.F., & Ramis-Pujol, J. (2012). An exploratory study of 5S: A multiple case study of
multinational organizations in Mexico. Asian Journal on Quality, 13(1), 77-99.
https://doi.org/10.1108/15982681211237842
Van Scyoc, K. (2008). Process safety improvement: Quality and target zero. Journal of Hazardous
Materials, 159(1), 42-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.02.036
Wittenberg, G. (1994). Kaizen—The many ways of getting better. Assembly Automation, 14(4), 12-17.
https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000004213
Womack, J., & Jones, D. (1996). Lean Thinking. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
Yin, R. (1994). Case Study Research, Design and Methods. Thousands Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com