Improving Business Excellence Culture A Case Study of SKF Gothenburg Master’s thesis in Quality and Operations Management KEVIN DORNER FREDRIK GUSTAFSSON DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL AND MATERIALS SCIENCE CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Gothenburg, Sweden 2023 www.chalmers.se www.chalmers.se Master’s thesis 2023 Improving Business Excellence Culture A Case Study of SKF Gothenburg KEVIN DORNER FREDRIK GUSTAFSSON Department of Industrial and Materials Science Division of Engineering Materials Chalmers University of Technology Gothenburg, Sweden 2023 Improving Business Excellence Culture A Case Study of SKF Gothenburg KEVIN DORNER FREDRIK GUSTAFSSON © KEVIN DORNER & FREDRIK GUSTAFSSON, 2023. Supervisor: Peter Hammersberg, Industrial and Materials Science Examiner: Peter Hammersberg, Industrial and Materials Science Master’s Thesis 2023 Department of Industrial and Materials Science Division of Engineering Materials Chalmers University of Technology SE-412 96 Gothenburg Telephone +46 31 772 1000 Cover: Full Complement CARB Toroidal Roller Bearing © SKF Group (2023). Typeset in LATEX Printed by Chalmers Reproservice Gothenburg, Sweden 2023 iii Abstract With the increasing popularity of Business Excellence (BE) and Lean, many companies have engaged in implementing one or several of these concepts. SKF Gothenburg is one such company that aims to achieve a Lean transformation in the context of a long journey with BE efforts. This history provides the company with both advantages and challenges in its journey towards excellence, hereby creating a unique context for BE. In this qualitative research, a case study of SKF Gothenburg was conducted with an inductive approach. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews with 22 employees, unstructured and semi-structured observations, and review of company documents. Company interviewees spanned a wide range of functions, most of them being functional managers related to the factory management. For improved contextual understanding, interviewees also included some central roles in the SKF Group organization, as well as factory employees with supportive, and more operational roles. Based on the company’s needs, and the identified gaps in literature, two research questions were formulated. Through these questions, the challenges with the current Business Excellence culture have been identified, and improvements have been suggested. Problematic areas were linked to four topics. The first improvement area was the implementation approach and organizational context of the company’s Lean implementation through the SKF Production System. Related to this was also the company’s approach towards strategy creation and deployment. Furthermore, people related aspects were found to be in need of improvement regarding the state and management of knowledge, motivation, culture, and collaboration. Leadership was the last identified improvement area, where issues with prioritization, leadership style, and ownership were described. For these areas, improvement suggestions were derived from the current literature in related scientific fields. Suggestions regarding the SPS implementation were related to increasing the understanding, ownership, and improving the clarity of the vision. Hoshin Kanri implementation, as well as improved communication and visibility of the strategy were suggested to improve strategy aspects. To improve people related aspects, better training, increased cross-functional collaboration and knowledge sharing, and improved HR approaches were suggested. Lastly, to address leadership improvements, it was suggested to increase knowledge and use of transformational and lean leadership, to improve focus on proactiveness and continuous improvement, and to increase the time spent with strategic matters. Through this report, SKF Gothenburg can reach a better understanding regard- ing issues with its BE culture. These issues, as well as their implications, were well-described based on the collected data. The high variety of the potential areas for improvements identified were addressed with a multifaceted literature review, whereby appropriate solutions or approaches towards developing solutions have been suggested. Keywords: Business Excellence, EFQM, Employee Engagement, Hoshin Kanri, Intrinsic Motivation, Lean, Organizational Learning, Transformational Leadership iv Acknowledgements This research project has been a great learning opportunity, not only through the ac- quired knowledge, but also through the countless challenges encountered. Therefore, we would like to thank everyone who has made this journey possible, always helping along the way. We are especially grateful for the research opportunity that SKF Gothenburg has provided, as well as everyone at the Gothenburg factories, and at SKF Group who have helped make this study possible. Your honesty and openness have been invalu- able in getting a good understanding of SKF. We would like to especially thank Cecilia Lack, our supervisor at the case company, for her endless help and patience. Thank you for introducing us to SKF, and thank you for believing in our research effort and always finding time to support us. Furthermore, we would like to thank the 22 employees who have taken the time to talk with us about the topics related to our project. Without you, we could not have gotten such an extensive understanding of our findings. We are privileged to have discussed with researchers whose extensive work we have discovered through our study, and whom we quickly grew to appreciate and respect. We would like to thank Su Mi Dahlgaard-Park, Anders Fundin, and Folke Höglund for everything you do for advancing excellence, and for taking the time to discuss with us about it. We would like to thank Peter Hammersberg, our supervisor at Chalmers University of Technology, for his support and helpful guidance. Your socratic questions and wise remarks have been very important in developing our thinking and approach throughout this project, as well as for validating our assumptions. Thank you for often teaching us how to find our own path, instead of focusing only on the destination. Most importantly, we would like to thank our families and friends for their eternal support and encouragement, not just in our latest adventure at SKF, but also during our life-long educational journey. Kevin Dorner and Fredrik Gustafsson, Gothenburg, December 2023 v Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.2 Aim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.3 Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.4 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.5 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2 Theory 8 2.1 Previous Studies at the Case Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.2 The Journey of Quality Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.2.1 Arrival of TQM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.2.2 Interaction of Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.3 Business Excellence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.3.1 Comparison of BE Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.3.2 Critical Success Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2.3.3 Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2.4 People Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.4.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.4.2 Employee Engagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.4.3 Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.4.4 Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 2.5 Lean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.5.1 Tools and Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2.5.2 Critical Success Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 2.5.3 Hoshin Kanri (Policy Deployment) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.5.4 Lean Organizational Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 2.5.5 Cultural Shift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 2.6 Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.1 Leadership Styles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 2.6.2 Lean Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 3 Methodology 39 3.1 Research Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 3.2 Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 3.2.1 Research Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 3.3 Research Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 3.3.1 Semi-structured Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 3.3.2 Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 3.3.3 Written Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 3.4 Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 3.4.1 Grounded Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 3.5 Quality of the Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 vi Contents 3.5.1 Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3.5.2 Replicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 3.5.3 Validity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 3.6 Ethical Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 4 Empirical Findings 48 4.1 Company Background on Improvement Efforts . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 4.2 Employee Perspectives on Business Excellence . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 4.3 Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 4.4 People . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.4.1 Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.4.2 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 4.4.3 Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 4.4.4 Collaboration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 4.5 Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 4.5.1 Leadership Priorities & Focus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 4.5.2 Leadership Style . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 4.5.3 Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 5 Discussion 62 5.1 Business Excellence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 5.2 Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 5.3 People . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 5.3.1 Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 5.3.2 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 5.3.3 Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 5.3.4 Collaboration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 5.4 Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 6 Recommendations 70 6.1 Business Excellence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 6.2 Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 6.3 People . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 6.4 Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 7 Conclusion 75 vii List of Figures 2.1 The Business Excellence Pyramid (Patel, 2016, p. 7) . . . . . . . . . 12 4.1 The SKF Bridge of Business Excellence (Graux, 2014, sl. 6) . . . . . 48 4.2 The SKF Business Excellence Triangle (Höglund, 2019, sl. 6) . . . . . 50 viii List of Acronyms BE Business Excellence BEM Business Excellence Model CSF Critical Success Factor EEA European Quality Award EFQM European Foundation for Quality Management HR Human Resources HRM Human Resource Management KPI Key Performance Indicator MBQM Malcolm Baldrige Quality Model PX People Experience QM Quality Management SIQ Swedish Institute for Quality SPS SKF Production System TPS Toyota Production System 1 1 Introduction This chapter introduces the research conducted as part of a master’s thesis for the Quality and Operations Management program, conducted at the Industrial and Materials Science department at Chalmers University of Technology, supervised by Peter Hammersberg. The study was performed as a single case study at SKF Gothenburg, aiming to identify potential improvement areas with the company’s current state of BE, and to suggest recommendations towards these. First the research and company background are presented, followed by a description of the research’s aim. Thereafter, the research questions are presented, followed by a statement of the paper’s limitations. Lastly, an overview of the current gap in literature is described, which the research aims to address. 1.1 Background Organizations strive to improve, some striving further to achieve excellence (Liker & Convis, 2012). Since the turn of the millennium, Business Excellence models (BEMs) have increased in popularity (Dahlgaard et al., 2013), likely in part due to the competitive advantages they offer (Carvalho et al., 2021). There are several different approaches towards becoming excellent, and as emphasized by Dahlgaard-Park and Dahlgaard (2008), striving for excellence is associated with a development journey that is continuously ongoing. Moreover, striving with passion in every aspect, over time (Dahlgaard et al., 2013). Therefore, not defining excellence as a stage or a one-time achievement, further emphasizing on the importance for companies to con- tinuously develop their organization with a long-term perspective (Dahlgaard-Park, 2008; Rizzardo, 2020; Sampaio, 2017). From the reasonable assumption that organizations strive to improve their capabili- ties, the journey of improvement can be described as the gap between the current state of the organization, and the improved future state, which the organization is trying to reach. Furthermore, the challenge lies in identifying how these gaps should be closed, as well as in what way this should be done (Rizzardo, 2020). Therefore, it is important the organizations find a balance between improvement and operations (Gremyr et al., 2020). However, finding this balance between strategy, daily operations and development often proves to be challenging for organizations (Giordani da Silveira et al., 2017). Several frameworks and methodologies have been developed to aid organizations towards their improvement, however there is disagree- ment in research regarding which such approach is best suited for an organization to become excellent. In Europe a common excellence framework used is EFQM, that 2 1. Introduction was shown to improve results in both short and long term (Boulter & Bendell, 2005). Nonetheless, the most important challenge with excellence is sustaining it throughout time, as highlighted by Eriksson (2004). Some argue that an organization should consider whether it really strives to become excellent or if it is satisfied with being good enough (Liker & Convis, 2012). One of the improvement methodologies often adopted is Lean, which some appreciate for its practicality through easy to understand tools and methods, which can give the impression of an easy implementation. Nonetheless, it was shown that the most significant challenge is sustaining it (Rizzardo, 2020). Several authors point towards the challenges with successful Lean implementation, arguing that historically the majority of Lean initiatives fail (Ledbetter, 2018; D. Mann, 2017; Rizzardo, 2020). According to Nicholas (2016), successful implementation of Quality Management (QM) and Lean practices is dependent on creating a culture of quality within the organization. Hence, research points towards the importance of developing a company culture which also puts a strong focus on employees and soft factors (Dahlgaard-Park & Dahlgaard, 2007). Research has shown that a company culture is embedded into the organization’s behaviors and beliefs, which develop over time (Ledbetter, 2018; Liker & Convis, 2012; D. Mann, 2017). Furthermore, it is described as the decision organizations take in the areas and the approach they have towards systems and concepts they adopted over time. Impacting an organization’s culture is more than adopting a training program and communicating an idea, it has to be embedded in the beliefs and values the company possesses, and should be developed over time(Ledbetter, 2018; Liker & Convis, 2012; D. Mann, 2017). SKF’s journey with quality management has followed a familiar journey from in- spection, to process control, followed by robust design as well as other proactive approaches. This has shifted focus from single operations, towards a focus on flow and methods, and recently on culture oriented focus on improvement and people. The journey towards proactiveness started with the initial attempts of Total Quality Management (TQM) implementation in early 1990s, during the heydays of the framework. Following, with the rising popularity of the Six Sigma methodology, SKF adopted a strong Six Sigma organization. Thereafter, in the beginning of the 2010’s, the company started to shift towards a more holistic approach of Business Excellence. More recently, the company has shifted its focus towards a Lean transformation, with the development of the SKF Production System (SPS). However, the recent shift towards SPS was widely welcomed by the organization through its clear focus on pro- cess description and standardization, while being also more hands on. With a change of CEO in 2021, the company established a new business strategy. This strategy has an increased focus on individual responsibility and empowerment, which creates a favorable context for the master’s thesis, through raised awareness regarding the soft aspects required for a cultural change towards improved BE culture. Moreover, the good reception of SPS creates an incentive for this project to encompass the system and try to seek synergies with its implementation. 3 1. Introduction The need for this project was raised by the Quality Manager of SKF Gothenburg at the time. The motivation for the research was a perceived lack of integration of the QM system with organizational culture, since this appeared to function somewhat parallel to the organization’s daily activities. After initial analysis of the company, based on interviews and observations, it was clear that there is a relatively high level of QM understanding. This is reflected by the well defined quality management system, QM certifications, as well as through the extensive availability and awareness of quality management tools and methodologies. However, it was apparent that there is a perceived gap between the available theo- retical knowledge and understanding, and the practice of applying and using tools. Moreover, through the company’s intensive focus on Lean transformation, which was initiated through the implementation of SPS, it is questionable whether the company as well as lean values got lost in translation. Moreover, there is a perceived relative lack of proactivity in the attitude of employees. After initial identification of improvement areas, the project focus was further expanded to address the lack of vision and limited strategic thinking, the perceived short-term focus, and possible issues with leadership, motivation, and education. Furthermore, by analyzing the approach towards the Lean transformation, a tendency of high focus on tools and methods was observed, while cultural shift and lean attitudes received less attention. 1.2 Aim The aim of this report is to increase the understanding of how SKF Gothenburg is approaching its journey towards Business Excellence and to describe the current state from an external perspective. It further aims to identify possible gaps with its SPS implementation and perceived reality of its current state of BE, and to challenge this to identify possible areas of improvement. Furthermore, the aim is to support a proactive attitude towards BE in context of its lean journey and SPS deployment. Therefore, a broad analysis of the company’s potential improvement areas with BE was done, verifying the alignment between the perceived way of working and the reality. Moreover, suggestions were presented regarding how these areas could be addressed and improved; This was done in hope of aiding the company in its journey towards excellence, by achieving a BE culture we would like to suggest guidelines towards addressing possible misalignments and improving the company’s work with BE culture, as well as raising quality mindfulness towards becoming an integral part of the culture. 4 1. Introduction 1.3 Research Questions Based on the identified focus areas, and the initial exploratory research, the research questions were defined as follows: I. What are potential improvement areas with the current state of Business Excellence at SKF Gothenburg?, and II. How can the Business Excellence culture at SKF Gothenburg be improved?. The first research question aims to present an impartial view of the perceived way that the company is working with BE. This is considered important since there is an observed gap between the reality perceived by the company and the actual state of BE. Through interviews and observations, an objective perception of potential problem areas with the current state of BE can be identified and addressed. The second research question aims to identify improvements and suggest recommen- dations on how the company can improve its BE culture and facilitate its journey towards quality mindfulness. 1.4 Limitations There are several limitations to be addressed in this research, firstly the study covers the perspective of SKF Gothenburg and its three factories. Addressing their journey towards BE, focusing on the SKF production system and its implementation at factory level. However, semi-structured interviews were conducted at SKF group level, for increased contextual support of the thesis. The research further aims to take a holistic approach, therefore focusing on neither in-depth analysis nor detailed description of its processes or functions. Instead, the paper serves to contribute to the perspective at an aggregated level of the company. This wide perspective and approach could generate wide generalizations and therefore not provide the complete or correct representation of all individual functions within SKF Gothenburg. The research covering a large area of expertise and knowledge also inhibits the opportunity to study a specific area in depth. By choosing a wide scope, and through time limitation, it becomes problematic to validate observations with all functions and at all levels of organizational hierarchy. In the data gathering process, it was decided to exclude areas mostly related to the TQM principle of customer focus, such as product development, logistics, sales, or business development. Furthermore, the observations will create a partial account of the organizational reality and hence can introduce bias towards the perceptions of the selected subset of individuals. Since interviewee selection is primarily focused on individuals with rather good understanding of the research topic, as well as purposive sampling approach, it introduces a bias towards accounts of people who have a higher probability of contributing to the research. 5 1. Introduction Moreover, through the selection process, a selection bias is likewise introduced by the researchers, which arguably shifts the observed reality towards what is considered relevant or interesting by the researchers instead of its impartial relevance to the research. This draws a valid parallel to survivorship bias. While traditionally survivorship bias is associated with optimistic shifts in conclusions, in case of the research it could be argued that this phenomena introduces bias towards pessimistic accounts. Since researchers seek to identify problem areas and discuss with people who are familiar with issues, these could receive an unfair amplification. Hereby, the observed reality could be perceived as much more pessimistic than a completely impartial view would be, since negative aspects naturally receive more attention than positive ones. Besides the bias introduced through interviewee selection, the focus of research questions on problem areas accentuates this effect. While the interview guides are created with an intention of having impartial questions, through the limited interview time, a focus will inadvertently be on the problematic areas as these were considered more interesting by the authors. 1.5 Motivation According to Deleryd and Fundin (2020), the new generation of quality should aim towards measuring societal satisfaction in order to ensure sustainable success. Furthermore, current management models need to be further developed to better handle today’s fast changing and unpredictable business environments. Fundin et al. (2021) also highlight how QM is considered to have reached a high level of maturity in research and practice, however challenges remain regarding its integration with operations. Fundin et al. (2018) have identified the main challenges experienced by QM profes- sionals being characterized by creating strategic focus on quality by top management, transferring ownership of quality from the functional organization towards general management, and increasing the agility of companies when adapting to changes. Moreover, there is a call for future research to explore how organizational context influences the application of QM, as well as how the strategic importance of quality could be improved. This paper partially addressed the call for research by Fundin et al. (2018), who highlighted several propositions for research in the field of Quality Management, based on the challenges identified by QM professionals. Proposition III represents the need for understanding how different contexts influence QM implementations. The present study approaches this proposition through the study of the case company’s Lean implementation in the context of a long history of working with BE initiatives. Proposition IV calls for research to investigate how QM can improve organizational learning. This is partially addressed by the current study through description of focus areas for organizational learning, especially in the context of Lean. The call for research to explore how QM values could be better embedded in organi- zations was presented in Proposition VI, which is partially addressed through the 6 1. Introduction present research describing how cultural aspects of BE can be achieved. • Proposition III: Future research should investigate how different contexts influence the outcomes associated with QM implementation • Proposition IV: Future research should focus on how QM can enhance organi- zational learning and innovation • Proposition VI: Future research should explore how QM principal values could be better integrated into organizations 7 2 Theory In this section the theory will be presented, firstly presenting previous studies performed at the case company. Secondly, contextual background on the journey of Quality Management is described. Thereafter, business excellence is introduced whereby a comparison of models is also presented. Moreover, critical success factors and challenges are described. Following, a section is introduced covering theory on topics of motivation, employee engagement and involvement. Lastly, Lean theory is presented with a concluding section on leadership and leadership styles. 2.1 Previous Studies at the Case Company There have been several studies conducted at SKF over the years with a variety of topics. One of these was performed by Jarskär and Stiblert (2016), their study focusing on the challenges connected with implementing and understanding BE efforts for a specific function within the business unit SKF Actuation System. They studied the finance function focusing on two aspects of BE, processes and people. Their findings showed that there was insufficient understanding of processes within the studied function, and that there was a lack of standardized work and descriptions of roles and responsibilities. Another finding was the short-term focus on prob- lem solving, rather than focusing on the long-term benefits of solving root causes. Therefore, recommendations addressed increasing the understanding of the business process, and underlined the importance of connecting employee activities towards BE. Moreover, it was highlighted that the company should increase employee involvement and empowerment, to address motivation and commitment for proactive problem solving. Furthermore, they emphasized an increased understanding of BE in general and improved cross functionality between functions to better utilize the benefits of a holistic approach of BE. Additionally, limiting the span of control, connecting to clearer role descriptions, and ownership of different processes were also mentioned. Therefore, recommending for future studies to increase the scope and covering more than two aspects of BE. Moreover, it was suggested to further increase the scope covering multiple functions or alternatively compare several case companies. Lastly, the authors suggested investigating and studying the manufacturing processes, to deepen the knowledge and understanding for the specific subject and areas related to BE (Jarskär & Stiblert, 2016). 8 2. Theory Götbrant and Karlsson (2010) studied how leadership perspectives can describe and improve quality management systems and lead to continuous improvements. Their conclusion was that leaders must act and support initiatives of employee engagement and be supportive of employee involvement for companies to utilize the benefits from QMS. Furthermore, they highlighted the importance of delegating from leadership, when it comes to quality responsibility, throughout the organization. Another study performed by Cedén (2008) highlighted the possible benefits a company can achieve by utilizing a combination of Six Sigma and Lean production, if these initiatives are implemented and understood properly throughout the organization. Among other studies related to SKF, S. Lagrosen (2002) studied how TQM values are related to cultural differences and impact the view on quality depending on nationality. Furthermore, S. Lagrosen (2003) studied how quality fundamentals of TQM are viewed in different cultural settings. Lastly, S. Lagrosen (2004) studied leadership commitment and important aspects for companies and highlighted the importance of creating a foundation of values to serve as a basis for companies. 2.2 The Journey of Quality Management Quality was described as having gone through four generations throughout the history of humanity. The first generation until the 16th century is characterized by the survival of the fittest. In an era where producers and consumers were often the same, being represented by sustenance farmers who attempted their best to maximize output. Towards the 18th century, individuals started to specialize into trades either through talent, availability of materials, or simply following family tradition. Here started the clearer distinction between user and producer, whereby craftsmen took pride in providing their clients with the best products possible, often fit to custom needs (Deleryd & Fundin, 2020). With the industrial revolution in the beginning of the 19th century came serial production with increased need for standardization. This led to the rise of industrial engineering, which through scientific methods targeted at measuring and improving production effectiveness. Through statistical process control, an era of quality control was established, which was characterized by standardization through meeting of specifications. While these approaches significantly improved product quality, it also increased the gap between customer needs and product offering. Sometime following the second world war came the fourth and current generation of quality, whereby the term became synonymous with customer satisfaction. This gave rise to methodologies such as TQM, Lean production, Six Sigma, among others. Herewith, there was an increased focus on defining and understanding operational excellence as a necessary facilitator of the customer experience, which modern business excellence models attempted to define and measure (Deleryd & Fundin, 2020). While many of the core principles were initially described by Deming, Juran, and others, a major shift in attitudes came later. Crosby is considered to be one of the first to highlight the people-focus and proposing the importance of cultural and 9 2. Theory behavioral aspects of the QM process (Saraph et al., 1989). With Japanese training in these quality tools and values, came the Japanese wave of quality management. Herewith, they have further developed these practices and formed the Japanese quality management principles well known today. This led to the western world then turning towards Japanese principles and studying these (Gremyr et al., 2020). How- ever, Dahlgaard-Park (2011) highlights how these new methods were often treated as alternative solutions instead of recognizing their innovativeness. (Cho et al., 2017) describes how QM practices can be distinguished as being of technical or behavioral nature. Technical practices encompass process management, information and its analysis, benchmarking, as well as strategic planning. When it comes to behavioral practices, these are characterized by employee involvement, customer focus, top management commitment, and collaborative supplier management. Nowadays a new shift in QM can be observed. Hyun Park et al. (2017) underline the transition of quality towards a focus on design, service, and brand. Moreover, he describes the need of QM shifting to address industry 4.0 needs through tighter collaboration with data experts. Quality 4.0 is described by Sony et al. (2020) as representing the quality management in the era of Industry 4.0. This is focused on the use of digital tools in order to better support an organization towards delivering high quality. Furthermore, Psarommatis et al. (2020) highlight how the evolution of Industry 4.0 leading to data-driven innovation better facilitates the implementation of the Zero Defects concept through data availability and advanced techniques such as machine learning. 2.2.1 Arrival of TQM An important principle which forms the basis of modern QM approaches is TQM. It is described that TQM in its core relies on a set of key values, the implementation of which requires a cultural transformation of an organization (S. Lagrosen, 2003). According to Hellsten and Klefsjö (2000), TQM could be viewed as consisting of three different levels. In the first level it consists of practical tools for quality im- provement, next level is connected to techniques or models. This is based on the third level which implies that certain values are used. Therefore, to be successful in quality management different values need to be considered within the organization. There are different interpretations of TQM values depending on authors, however for this paper the cornerstones of quality as defined by Bergman and Klefsjö (1994) were chosen as the basis. These are described as being customer focus, leadership commitment, full participation and commitment, business process focus, continuous improvement, and focus on measurement and fact-based decision-making. S. La- grosen (2001) describes that these values can be seen both as the outcomes of a successful TQM implementation as well as the ingredients for implementing the methodology itself. When studying Swedish companies, Y. Lagrosen and Lagrosen (2005) has shown that adoption of TQM values correlates with successful quality management. However, it was highlighted that successful TQM implementation requires an organizational culture which adheres to these values, as supported by further research emphasizing the importance of values and culture. 10 2. Theory It is estimated that third or more TQM implementations fail (Candido & Santos, 2011). Roadblocks highlighted for TQM implementation can be summarized as lack of senior management participation, lack of vision and planning, lack of clarity in measurement systems, and lack of involvement from people (Beer, 2003; Nicholas, 2016; Soltani et al., 2005). S. Lagrosen (2001) also describe that TQM failures are also often attributed to improper introduction, and lack of management commitment. TQM in its current usage is considered insufficient for comprehensive customer satisfaction, as it is suggested that beyond customer focus organizations should strive for customer understanding (S. Lagrosen, 2001). Steiber and Alänge (2013) describes that TQM is required to change in order to adapt to a broader context of modern organizations that includes a focus on continuous innovation. When looking at the evolution of TQM in research, it appears that it has only received superficial attention during its boom around the beginning of the 20th century. Based on more recent studies however, it appears that TQM has reached a more mature phase, whereby there is no longer only a focus on methods and tools but rather on core values required for its implementation. Herewith the aim is to reach a quality and BE culture at the organization. Moreover, there is an important difference in western and eastern attitudes, as Japanese HR and management have a strong focus on employee participation towards continuous improvement. However, western companies tend to have a short-term focus on achieving fast results, where mostly only managers participate in improvement activities (Dahlgaard et al., 2019). 2.2.2 Interaction of Approaches While the attitude towards QM application and its maturity level has been linked to company size by Mihajlović et al. (2021), it is important to look for common approaches which all organizations could benefit from. Friesen and Johnson (1995) highlighted how important it is for an organization’s strategic process to be linked with its quality improvement processes. Furthermore, organizational alignment of employee outlook with direction in the form of a success paradigm is crucial for an effective strategy. Watkins (2006) suggests for quality professionals to widen their perspective from their current role with a heavy operational focus towards a more strategic approach. Furthermore, Psarommatis et al. (2020) expresses the need for quality improvement to be coupled from a performance point of view, whereby methodologies like Lean, Six Sigma, TQM, and others should support this. Andersson et al. (2006) describe how TQM, Six Sigma, and Lean differ in theory, approaches as well as criticisms. However, as these concepts are complementary, an organization can benefit from combining these effectively. For instance, process efficiency and waste are well targeted by Lean, whereas Six Sigma targets variation and design. Furthermore, these two concepts are good roadmaps for reinforcing TQM values in an organization. Moreover, Klefsjö et al. (2001) underline that six sigma should be considered as a methodology within the framework of TQM, due to it supporting all six values of the framework. 11 2. Theory A good overview of the interaction and differentiation between several major quality concepts is also presented by Patel (2016), as can be seen in figure 2.1. The authors highlight how business excellence strategies should create an integration of tools and methods towards comprehensively targeting quality goals. On the other hand, quality programs like Lean Six Sigma are often applied due to leadership hoping that training of employees towards delivering a good service will inherently improve the organization’s output. However, this approach does not consider in which way the current organizational system is interacting with employee behaviors and attitudes. Nonetheless, there seems to be no agreement in research regarding the relationship between TQM and business excellence. Some consider the two concepts to be the same, while others see them as being separate. However, several scholars have expressed the need for the concepts to coexist, with the view that excellence models are based on TQM while being more generalizable (Carvalho et al., 2021). The benefits of these models however, were clearly shown in research. For instance, the models of the Swedish Quality Award, the European Quality Award and ISO 9000 were shown to improve the functioning of quality management (Y. Lagrosen & Lagrosen, 2005). Furthermore, recipients of the Swedish Quality Award were shown to outperform their respective branch indices, as well as comparable competitors on most studied indicators (Eriksson, 2003). Lean Management systems SixSigma Operational level Tactical level System level LSS+Business excellence LSS+ Strategic level Enterprise-Wide Deployment Model Showing Key Concepts and Tools Key Concept Tools and Techniques System level Management systems Operational level Lean Tactical level Six Sigma Strategic level MBQNA, EFQM, and other business excellence models Figure 2.1: The Business Excellence Pyramid (Patel, 2016, p. 7) 12 2. Theory 2.3 Business Excellence “The pursuit of excellence comes from doing our best with a view of growing and improving in terms of realizing one’s potential. [. . . ] It is a never ending journey. Excellence is not a stage, but a way of doing, way of living, a process of becoming” (Dahlgaard-Park, 2008, p. 30). Carvalho et al. (2021) describe that several principles, tools and initiatives have been developed for improvement of quality, over the past decades. All these have proven useful in increasing organizational performance, with many having persistent use also nowadays. Excellence became popular mostly following the TQM movement. The structured excellence frameworks and QM awards have helped in the development of the Excellence movement since the late 1980s. Nowadays, Excellence has achieved a worldwide spread through numerous excellence models, awards, and less structured approaches. However, the motivation for many companies engaging in excellence has also been criticized as aiming purely to receive recognition instead of aiming for improve- ment. According to Dahlgaard et al. (2013), Business Excellence models (BEM) have gained increased popularity since the turn of the millennium, and studies have shown the financial and non-financial benefits for companies implementing these. However, these benefits do not necessarily last long term without active efforts. As described by Bou-Llusar et al. (2009), as early as 1990, organizations have started using models in support of quality prizes for TQM initiatives. The most prominent models have been the Japanese Deming Prize model, the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) model in the United States of America (USA), and the European Foundation for Quality Management’s (EFQM) model for the European Quality Award. EFQM is the most applied model in Europe for TQM (Uygur & Sümerli, 2013). A comprehensive overview of BEMs can be found in (Dahlgaard-Park & Dahlgaard, 2007). The author highlighted that the models generally recognize the importance of soft aspects, as well as the importance of people, however often these aspects get lost in implementation, due to a mechanistic approach. The general success factors for BEMs were described as being people, customer focus, contin- uous improvement, and leadership which supports and connects the first three factors. However, lately it appears that the number of awards recognizing excellent organi- zations without a quality framework supporting their assessment is growing, while the number of companies applying for major excellence awards seems to decline. Nonetheless, it is important for excellence not to be viewed as a state that can be achieved in the short-term, but instead a path that helps organizations achieve the best results in the medium and long term, by using a set of concepts and principles and a focus on continuous improvement (Sampaio, 2017). The benefits of BEMs were shown by studies in Sweden (Klefsjö & Eriksson, 2004), other countries in the west (Link & Scott, 2006), as well as in the east (R. Mann et al., 2011). Organizations pursuing excellence have gained a large competitive ad- 13 2. Theory vantage against competitors (Carvalho et al., 2021). Results of Klefsjö and Eriksson (2004) have shown benefits of the Swedish Institute for Quality (SIQ) model through improvements to the process orientation, customer orientation, and improvement work. Eriksson (2004) has shown that companies participating in the process for SIQ awards showed increased customer orientation, more comprehensive understanding of the business, as well as increased focus on improvements, quality, and processes, among others. These benefits were also in line with the results from Eriksson (2003)’s study on in-company quality awards, which also showed improved participation and engagement of employees as well as a more systematic approach to initiating improvements. Boulter and Bendell (2005) have shown how EFQM implementation leads to improvements in company results in both short and long term. In their study of historical applicants for the SIQ BE award, Raharjo and Eriksson (2017) have shown that the effect of strategic planning on creating business results was inconclusive, however other studies showed conclusive positive correlation between the two. Furthermore, the authors confirmed other studies’ findings, whereby leadership had an impact on strategic planning, human resource development, and management of processes, among others. Human resource development had a significant positive impact on results, which in turn was positively affecting customer satisfaction. 2.3.1 Comparison of BE Models For the current study, the Business Excellence models of SIQ, EFQM, and MBNQA were considered. These models have been thoroughly covered by research, having received both a significant amount of criticism as well as praise. Criticism for the MBNQA was highlighted by Loomba and Johannessen (1997) in the areas of super- ficiality, publicity, and lack of fairness. Enquist et al. (2015) have also questioned the validity of the BE models regarding future challenges faced by organizations. The authors concluded that the BE models were rather outdated. Nonetheless, the MBNQA and EFQM were considered as having the best coverage of aspects relevant to the new business landscape, these being value, creativity, innovation, business ethics and sustainability. Furthermore, the EFQM was shown to place highest importance on the environmental and social aspects (Enquist et al., 2015, p. 329). Sampaio (2017) also highlighted that while the EFQM has attempted to address concepts related to agility, BEMs have still seen little development since its early days. Carvalho et al. (2021) also expressed criticism of BEMs through their inability to deal with a business environment which is changing fast, and its questionable ability to address disruptive changes to the market. With a new era of industrialization and industry 4.0, these challenges are expected to worsen. In the context of the changing trends in the industry, there is a changing need for requirements from quality and excellence. Eriksson et al. (2016) have found that the MBNQA and SIQ had the most extensive coverage of quality-related organizational challenges, which were highlighted by professionals as being most important. Due to the case company’s Swedish location, the SIQ model could be the most relevant reference model, with consideration to 14 2. Theory the possibility of the company applying for the SIQ excellence award in the future. However, the study of Eriksson et al. (2016) also shows that the EFQM has a rather high coverage of the studied challenges. Furthermore, it can be argued that the challenges highlighted by quality professionals are not necessarily a good overlap with the challenges which the case company is facing. Therefore, it could be more beneficial to consider BE models also with regard to how much emphasis they place on the areas of improvement highlighted by the current study. A different consideration would be the emphasis on financial and critical business results, which is described as being strongest in the EFQM, with some emphasis also highlighted by the MBNQA, while the SIQ model did not emphasize these aspects (Enquist et al., 2015). Moreover, the authors highlight the lack of the notion of prod- ucts in the SIQ model, which could make it problematic for a manufacturing company. Taking these aspects into consideration, it was deemed that the EFQM model would be the most suitable reference for analyzing the case company. The SIQ model, being a national excellence award, has less research regarding the model, while there is also limited information available regarding guidelines for a company planning to apply for this BEM. The MBNQA could likewise be a good contender as a choice of BEM. However, due to the issues described above, and since the model is targeting US companies, it was considered less appropriate for the case company to use as a reference. The EFQM model is structured in three categories of Direction, Execution, and Results. These categories are further split in criteria. Direction represents the purpose of the organization, and it is split in the two criteria of Purpose, Vision & Strategy, and Organizational Culture & Leadership. Execution is the second category, which represents the approach towards delivering on its purpose. This covers the criteria of Engaging Stakeholders, Creating Sustainable Value, and Driving Performance & Transformation. The last category of Results, covers the current and future outcomes of the company, and covers the criteria of Stakeholder Perceptions, and Strategic & Operational Performance (EFQM, 2022). 2.3.2 Critical Success Factors Brown (2014) describes that quality management and Business Excellence can be implemented in mainly two ways, mechanistic and organic, the latter one being most commonly associated with sustainability. The organic approach is most no- tably differentiated through the decision-making being value-based instead of being guided by policies, through leadership being more interactive and visionary instead of focusing on control. Furthermore, quality specific functions receive a reduced focus, by delegating quality responsibility organization-wide through employee en- gagement with quality. Brown (2013a) also highlights that successful companies address implementation issues through frequent communication and support for principles and strategy of excellence, consistent use of continuous improvement and assessments, linking strategy to key performance indicators (KPIs), visible leadership, and communication in the organization. 15 2. Theory Dahlgaard et al. (2013) showed that in order to achieve long-lasting results with Business Excellence implementation, cultivating an appropriate organizational cul- ture is likely the most important in a BE journey, an aspect which is often ignored by organizations. Furthermore, for a successful implementation, companies need to focus their work on three parts, namely the chosen BEM, suitable tools and techniques, as well as suitable core values for creating the desired organizational culture. Eriksson (2004) has also highlighted the challenge with sustaining excellence; To achieve this, research has highlighted the importance of leadership commitment, engagement, human resource management, education, and customer focus. Lasrado and Kassem (2021) showed in his study of an excellent organization how besides the management support highlighted by other literature, it is also crucial to focus on the people dimension and on involving employees for a successful quality management journey. Carvalho et al. (2021) also found that strong predictors of companies’ operational performance were soft aspects of leadership, managing human resources(HR), among others. For an integrated and aligned approach to improve- ment, it is also important to consider Business Excellence as a wider framework that covers other improvement initiatives of the organization (R. Mann et al., 2011). Black and Porter (1996) have highlighted factors critical for the success of TQM implementation, as being corporate quality culture, people management, teamwork structures, and communication of improvement information were highlighted, among others. Furthermore, Nicholas (2016) has highlighted the importance of involvement of employees. Brown (2013b) has also described the success factors for TQM implementation as related to management understanding of the principles and purpose, leadership education, and use of performance indicators related to quality objectives, among others. For sustained implementation, important factors identified were achieving a transformational change, a culture of continuous improvement & learning, focus on balanced measurement, management drive and monitoring of progress, audits & assessments, use of quality frameworks, and continuity of leadership, among others. K. M. Snyder et al. (2020) have described critique regarding BEMs as being resource intensive with criteria that are too specific and detailed. Possibly a simpler approach with better progress measurement could be the Management Index, developed by the SIQ to provide a tool for management teams in order to support quality improvement processes. This tool helps management better prioritize areas for improvement, with reduced time and complexity compared to traditional BEMs. The authors highlight how BE measurement systems are usually a single point assessment when the company applies to be audited by a BE body. Therefore, there is a need for a simpler approach to BE, which is integrated with the daily activities of organizations, as highlighted by many business leaders. The authors further described K. Snyder et al. (2016)’s framework for integrating a performance measurement system with a cultural analysis to reach the core of the organization through a focus on communication. As described by K. Snyder et al. (2016), for organizations to achieve quality, leaders are required to build open cultures based on a shared identity. 16 2. Theory An important consideration is also the current state of a company, as management in stable and turbulent periods can require different approaches. Hence, sustainable Business Excellence approach is likely appropriate, to facilitate a dual management mode that addresses challenges of both stable as well as turbulent times. Such a framework should be a conceptual model on the base assumption of organizations as a living system instead of a mechanical one, whereby it should be an extension of the traditional BEMs. In a constantly changing environment, companies cannot assume that previous strategies will work seamlessly, or that the experience of other companies can be translated to that of others. Therefore, a mechanistic approach to leadership which makes choices purely on a bottom-line basis, where profits are the dominant criterion of success, could face difficulty when assumptions based on an old environment are no longer valid due to turbulence (Dervitsiotis, 2003). 2.3.3 Challenges While BEMs are attractive frameworks for guiding an excellence journey, there are also several challenges with these. Beer (2003) has expressed the issue with dilution of QM programs through senior leadership’s inability to set a sufficiently strong footing for them. This could be due to the difficulty of getting everyone on the same wagon. Following their study of excellent organizations, Brown (2013b) grouped challenges with sustaining excellence efforts, into the categories of strategy, leadership, people, processes, data & information. Strategy challenges were identified in three areas of developing strategy, commu- nicating it, and achieving people’s engagement with the strategy. For developing strategy, successful organizations considered it important to convey the meaning of their strategy in a simple and compact way, in order to make it more accessible. Linking strategy to key pillars (e.g. people, technology, customers) is a common approach of organizations, while it was also mentioned that managers discussing strategic issues with employees on a daily basis is important. When it comes to communication, it is important to communicate the topics which are considered important by employees to avoid overwhelming them with details. Furthermore, to facilitate engagement, companies have linked their strategic targets with individual performance targets, so that everyone sees how they are contributing to the bigger picture. Some organizations also involve a cross-section of employees from the entire organization in the creation of their strategy, in order to ensure a variety of ideas. Lastly, prioritizing strategic goals or focusing on an important few was also deemed important to support engagement through focus, while the balance between strate- gic and operational plans was also deemed important (Brown, 2013b). To engage employees from operational levels, it is important to show the links between strategy and operations, as described by Brown (2013a). When it comes to leadership challenges, these consist of the need for support and drive from higher management, establishing the support of middle managers, and the consistency of communication throughout the organization. To address these, the importance of a supportive and passionate leader was expressed by the companies, 17 2. Theory besides the need to have regular self-assessments to ensure accountability. It is likewise important to reach a critical mass of leaders supportive of the Business Excellence effort, while middle management commitment to BE was shown to take up to five years. Managerial support was also facilitated by a clear plan for culture change as well as an improved focus on the BE effort organization-wide. To address the consistency of communication, excellent organizations used management by walking around, whereby managers try to increase their visibility to employees and try to improve communication. It is also important to bring the leadership team together regularly, which likewise improves communication and engagement (Brown, 2013b). Brown (2013a) described how regular interaction with employees such as review meetings were a means to ensure communication and management visibility. Furthermore, the author described that senior leadership’s focus and drive of contin- uous improvement is a critical success factor (CSF). This is especially important in large organizations with several sites, in order to ensure that the importance of the BE effort is also transferred to other locations of the organization. People challenges revolved around engagement of employees and leaders, effective communication and performance management of processes and systems. Most ex- cellent organizations faced challenges with people’s involvement as well as ensuring their time commitment to Business Excellence efforts, and ensuring a correct bal- ance between strategic and operational plans. One approach through which the studied organizations addressed these challenges was by fostering an open culture that facilitates collaboration and contribution. These organizations also had career development programs in place, and found that employees most often sought out additional training. Improved introduction training, and ensuring a good founda- tional knowledge regarding BE organization-wide were likewise seen as important. To avoid employees being taken away from operational duties, shorter but more frequent periods of training were used. Furthermore, the previously described approaches towards more frequent meetings and communication was also deemed important (Brown, 2013b). Challenges regarding processes were rather limited, with most issues being related to silos. These were addressed by cross-functional continuous improvement teams, as well as increased emphasis on process improvements that spanned multiple processes. Issues related to data and information revolved around the abundance of data that makes it difficult to have a clear overview, a challenge that was addressed through exception based reporting. The importance of capturing implicit knowledge was also highlighted as being important towards ensuring its sustainment. Challenges regard- ing customers were rather limited, however most excellent organizations expressed the importance of understanding who the customers of the organization are, as well as correctly understanding and addressing their needs (Brown, 2013b). 18 2. Theory 2.4 People Aspects Human resource management (HRM) approaches have gone through a transforma- tion regarding its views towards people as a resource. During the first period of industrialization (1900-1945), the main focus was on people as muscle power. In the following period (1945-1975), through contributions to research on human motivation, heart power was added to the understanding of human resources. The following period (1975-2000) came with an increased focus on knowledge work, therefore concepts such as the learning organization and knowledge management had become popular. Herewith came the appreciation for brain power as an important human resource. In the last period (2000-now) the increased importance of sustainability and corporate social responsibility, among others, have led to an increased ethical and spiritual awareness. Thus, the appreciation of humans as spiritual beings was added to our understanding of human resources. Through this transformation in our understanding came also a transformation towards more human-centric management approaches. While in the beginning people were seen as an instrument that an organization utilized to fulfill its needs, this shift has led to the understanding that organizations are also instruments in fulfilling the needs of people and developing them in the process (Dahlgaard-Park, 2012). 2.4.1 Motivation Human motivation theories can mostly be split into two considerations of human nature, namely that of the human as a biological being and that of the human as a mental or psychological being. The biological view focuses on the psychological needs of nourishment, avoidance of pain, hunger, and natural disasters, as well as the general need for safety. On the other hand, the view on humans as a mental or psychological being, is characterized by the emphasis on needs of belonging, identity, learning, achievement, power, recognition, creativity, and self-actualization, among others (Dahlgaard-Park, 2012). Depending on the driving force behind completing an action, motivation can be divided into intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation. Intrinsic motivation is considered as the internal drive to perform an action, through inherent enjoyment of the activity, a link to values, or an internal sense of purpose. This is usually characterized by the positive feelings of an individual performing an action through their interest in the activity, their curiosity for the effort, as well as individuals seeking new stimuli and challenges to tackle. When external forces are driving will, such as fear of punishment, rewards, pressure through expectations, or need to satisfy a requirement, then the motivation can be considered as extrinsic. Extrinsic motivation is characterized by engagement in an activity, due to this engagement leading to a specific outcome. Amotivation, however, represents the lack of intention to perform an action, which is represented by individuals acting without intent, or not acting. This mostly results from people not valuing an activity, not feeling competent to carry it out, or expecting it to yield an undesirable outcome (Deci & Ryan, 2008; Ryan & Deci, 2000). 19 2. Theory Self-determination theory is a motivation theory, which recently became popular through books like (Deci et al., 2017; Fowler, 2014), among others. This was first introduced by Ryan and Deci (2000), who studied the drivers and inhibitors of intrinsic motivation. The authors identified three underlying psychological needs, the fulfillment of which enables intrinsic motivation. These are autonomy, relatedness, and competence. The need for the opportunity of choice, as well as control over one’s actions is characterized by autonomy. The need for relatedness is represented by needing to care for and being cared for by others. This need is also manifested through the desire for a sense of connection with others, and a sense of individuals contributing to a greater good. The third psychological need of competence is represented by the desire to feel successful and effective at facing challenges, while also having the opportunity of developing oneself (Baard et al., 2004; Ryan & Deci, 2000). The importance of core values towards human satisfaction was raised by Dahlgaard- Park (2012), who argued that these satisfy the spiritual or ethical needs of people, which is not addressed by the current theoretical frameworks on motivation. The author presented in her research, that the majority of studied Danish companies face issues with practicing the companies’ values. The author also found that desire and psychological well-being are drivers of passionate people. Furthermore, people who feel worthy are strongly motivated, hence values are a strong driver or intrinsic motivation (Dahlgaard-Park, 2012). When the psychological needs for intrinsic motivation are not satisfied, most often this results in negative consequences to mental and physical health (Nienaber & Martins, 2020). Multiple other theoretical approaches towards motivation were presented by Dahlgaard-Park (1999). 2.4.2 Employee Engagement Employee engagement was defined by Shuck and Wollard (2010, p. 103) as “an indi- vidual employee’s cognitive, emotional, and behavioral state directed toward desired organizational outcomes”. Engagement can also be considered as the state of an energetic and effective involvement with one’s work. This is considered as the positive antithesis of burnout. While in burnout, employees feel stressed and overwhelmed by their work, in an engaged state, the work is rather perceived as challenging. Another interesting antithesis between the two concepts is their psychological effect. Engage- ment was shown to have a positive effect on life satisfaction, and a negative effect on depression; the reverse has been shown to be the case for burnout (Schaufeli, 2012). Kahn (1990) has conducted some of the earliest research on employee engagement. However, the term started to become a popular concept in the industry during the early 2000s, being discussed by managers and consultants, among others; Academical interest has become prevalent mainly after 2006, when researchers extended em- ployee engagement to new fields of work engagement, and organizational engagement (Anitha, 2014). 20 2. Theory While there is limited research on engagement (Wollard & Shuck, 2011), Schaufeli (2012) has expressed that only 20% of employees are highly engaged, the majority being moderately engaged. According to the authors, the main motivation for en- gaged employees seems to be the perception of their work as being challenging and fun. A valid question in this context is whether employee engagement is a risk factor for burnout, however, research has shown that employee engagement levels are not related to future burnout levels (Schaufeli, 2012). While there are conceptual similarities between employee engagement, job satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment, these concepts are still distinct (Shuck et al., 2013). Saks (2006) has shown that job and organization engagement were also statistically different concepts, however there was a moderate correlation between the two. Furthermore, both of these aspects were positively related to job satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behavior, while being negatively correlated with turnover intention. 2.4.2.1 Benefits Multiple other benefits of employee engagement have been highlighted in research. Nienaber and Martins (2020) describe engaged employees as being available to the work, to others and to themselves. Engaged employees were also shown to outper- form satisfied employees, likely due to the activation factor of engagement present through enthusiasm and elation, while satisfaction is often related to contentment (Schaufeli, 2012). Nienaber and Martins (2020) highlighted the reasons for failed strategy implementation as being ineffective communication, lack of interpersonal and leadership skills, as well as disengaged employees. Thus, engagement can be considered an important facilitator of strategy implementation and organizational effectiveness. Employee engagement is linked to lower turnover intention and higher availability to engage in work effort (Shuck et al., 2011), enhanced job performance, organizational citizenship behavior, productivity, and affective commitment, among others. Fur- thermore, employee engagement is linked to reduced incidence of accidents at the workplace as well as a generally safer workplace (Wollard & Shuck, 2011). Ariani (2013) also found a positive relationship between engagement and organizational citizenship behavior, while a negative relation with counterproductive work behavior was found. Among the effects of work engagement, besides job performance, improved health and workplace well-being have also been reported. It has been linked with higher organi- zational commitment, lower absenteeism, and lower turnover intention. Moreover, they typically have higher initiative compared to their counterparts, and a strong motivation to learn and develop. When it comes to performance impact, engaged employees are less prone to errors, accidents and injuries, are more innovative in their work, deliver better service to customers, and typically have highly rated effectiveness and performance by their supervisors (Schaufeli, 2012). 21 2. Theory 2.4.2.2 Supporting Factors While factors enabling engagement differ with organizations, important aspects high- lighted by Schaufeli (2012) were development opportunities, performance feedback, autonomy, task variation, transformational leadership, and a socially supportive work environment. So-called active jobs, which require employees to learn and develop their skills are also linked with high engagement. Furthermore, the authors have shown that employees with more complex roles that have higher autonomy, such as managers, had higher engagement scores than those working in lower skilled jobs with low autonomy, such as blue collar workers. Wollard and Shuck (2011) described the factors contributing to employee engagement as individual antecedents and organizational antecedents. When it comes to the individual factors, the authors have shown these to be employee involvement in meaningful work context, perception of the environment as one that is safe physically, emotionally, and culturally, as well as the connection of an employee’s work to organizational goals. When it comes to organizational antecedents, it was shown that the satisfaction of basic human needs is important. Furthermore, management was highlighted as an important aspect, by creating a supportive environment, exe- cuting the organizational vision on a local level, as well as the role of management expectations. Organizational culture was also described as a facilitator, whereby this should be supportive, authentic, and positive. Schaufeli (2012) also highlighted the importance of job rotations, which create new challenges for employees, stimulating learning and professional development, thereby improving motivation. Furthermore, since engagement is a transient behavior, lead- ership has a powerful role in fostering it. Especially in the case of transformational leadership, which is highly effective for enabling engagement. Gialuisi and Coetzer (2013) supports that varied work roles and growth opportunities also supports em- ployee retention. According to Schaufeli (2012), professional development opportunity is also related to the extent of career development, since systematic improvements in employability of personnel leads to better opportunities for employees to take on new roles, and allows for a higher variety of responsibilities. Albrecht et al. (2015) suggest encouraging and enabling employees to craft their jobs; Herewith, individuals could choose activities of their job, negotiate different job content, and assign meaning to their work. The importance of opportunities for learning, and systematic competence devel- opment for engagement were also supported by Wollard and Shuck (2011). Silva (2016) highlights that managers should create strategies for training and development of leaders to increase the understanding of employee engagement, as well as its importance. According to Shuck and Wollard (2010), organizations should create learning and development programs for all levels of the organization, with a focus on self-awareness, and alignment with the organization’s vision, mission and values. Schaufeli (2012) further elaborates that training programs aiming to improve en- gagement should focus on enabling the feeling of self-efficacy in employees, which improves engagement and performance, leading to a positive reinforcement loop. 22 2. Theory According to Albrecht et al. (2015), by measuring engagement and comparing groups, tailored approaches can be developed to address improvement areas. Possible inter- vention approaches could include transformational leadership training, where leaders could learn how to individually optimize the balance between job demands and personal resources; Personal resources represent an individual’s sense of successfully controlling and influencing their environment. This concept of positive self-evaluation is related to resilience and is shown to be improved through training and development. For performance management, the authors recommend creating performance and development goals, continuous feedback and recognition, employee development management, and creating a climate of trust and empowerment. Shuck and Wollard (2010) emphasized that it should be clearly communicated that performance assess- ment has a constructive intent. Furthermore, managers should be provided with the opportunity to take the time and improve, while the organization should provide resources and training necessary for this improvement. Engagement can be measured using instruments such as the Utrecht Work Engage- ment Scale (Schaufeli et al., 2002), the Intellectual, Social, Affective Engagement Scale (ISA) measurement scale (Soane et al., 2012), or indirect measures such as Gallup’s Q12 (Harter & Schmidt, 2008). Wollard and Shuck (2011) also suggest that engagement could be used as a proxy indicator of intrinsic motivation, which could also be addressed in the review meetings with employees. Herewith both engagement and intrinsic motivation could be improved. Shuck and Wollard (2010) described that selection processes can be developed to create candidate profiles with the consultation of key stakeholders, in order to identify the traits, knowledge and skills needed by a successful candidate. The selection process could also place increased focus on traits such as collaborative development of goals, an approach towards developing people, interest in high performance commu- nication, and being a change agent, among others. Furthermore, the authors suggest for managers to be trained towards their role before taking on their responsibilities, as research has shown that often managers step into influential positions without sufficient preparation. Albrecht et al. (2015) describe that when new hires join the organization, they typically have a high level of excitement, combined with uncertainty-related anxiety. Therefore, the organization should aim to address these by reducing the anxiety and transforming the starting excitement into a high level of engagement. The importance of the work environment was described by Shuck and Wollard (2010), who expressed that people interact with their environments to create engagement or disengagement. In a later study, Shuck et al. (2011) found that the factors correlated with engagement were employee’s fit with their job, affective commitment, and psychological climate. Working environment and team, and coworker relationships were also shown to be correlated with employee engagement by Anitha (2014). Fur- thermore, Andrew and Sofian (2012) have expressed the importance of co-employee support. These aspects are also supported by Nienaber and Martins (2020), who have shown that organizational strategy and implementation, organizational commitment 23 2. Theory and team commitment contribute to employee engagement. Employees’ collective perception of HR use of high-performance practices is shown to have a positive effect on commitment and organizational citizenship behavior, while having a negative effect on absenteeism and turnover intention. This underlines the importance of targeting the aggregate impression of employees regarding HR efforts, since employees are influenced by perceptions of their peers. To address this, besides the implementation of high-performance HR practices, it is recommended for initiatives to be implemented in a consistent and uniform manner throughout the organization. Moreover, these initiatives should be well communicated, to facilitate visibility and understanding of these efforts among employees (Kehoe & Wright, 2013). Saks (2006) suggested that engagement should be viewed as a broad, organization- wide and culture-centric strategy that requires continuous involvement of the entire organization, and consistently clear communication. Furthermore, organizations should focus on employees’ perception of the support they receive. Anitha (2014) also supports this, expressing that the performance of individuals depends on all organizational policies and practices, hence an integrative approach towards strategic human resource management is recommended, taking into account all patterns of HR activities. According to Albrecht et al. (2015), HR needs to move beyond engagement surveys, and create strategies that target employee behavior to enable engagement. Furthermore, engagement should be strategically included and supported in the activities of selection, socialization, performance management, training and develop- ment processes and systems. Employees are shown to seek meaning through their work, hence when organizations do not fulfill this desire through providing meaning, employees are more likely to quit (Anitha, 2014). Nienaber and Martins (2020) suggested companies to structurally enable intrinsic motivation drivers such that psychological presence is improved. Moreover, the authors suggest adopting a participative management style, in order to increase dependence on employee collaboration. Jenkins and Delbridge (2013) express that achieving engaged employees is likely very difficult in practice, due to the organization’s external and internal contextual factors, which should be considered; However, it is clear that employees have a positive response in organizations where individual commitment is valued, and where the people aspects are placed in the center of the organization. 2.4.2.3 Psychological Presence A principle closely related to employee engagement is psychological presence. Kahn (1992) describes psychological presence as the state achieved through engaged be- havior, in which employees can freely express themselves, question assumptions and innovate. Psychologically present employees are likely to reflect and make sugges- tions for improvement. According to Nienaber and Martins (2020), this implies a participative management style which considers inputs of employees and embraces empowerment of employees to autonomously act in the interests of themselves and the organization. 24 2. Theory Psychological presence is enabled by employees experiencing meaningfulness, safety and availability. Meaningfulness represents the perception of the benefit from an individual contributing to an activity, which is facilitated through the type of one’s task, role, and work interactions. Psychological safety entails the opportunity for an individual to show their true self and to act according to their true self without fear of repercussion to their image, status or career. Lastly, availability represents an individual’s willingness to contribute to work, based on their available resources. Therefore, this aspect is affected by the physical and emotional energy, as well as other external factors (Kahn, 1992). 2.4.3 Involvement Employee involvement represents the philosophy regarding how employees’ contribu- tion to continuous improvement is facilitated (Bakotić & Rogošić, 2017). Involvement was highlighted as an important factor in employee engagement, as well as successful BE implementation. However, improved involvement of employees in tasks has several other benefits as well. Bakotić and Rogošić (2017) have suggested that implementation of concepts such as process and systems approach to management, continuous improvement, and fact-based decision-making are positively influenced by employee involvement through training, empowerment, and rewards. Furthermore, the authors found that employee involvement had a positive impact on productivity, integration and alignment of processes, while also increasing the clarity of roles and responsibilities. Likewise, involvement improves the responsiveness and growth of individuals, through which the organization can become more efficient, as well as more successful. To facilitate involvement, several aspects were highlighted as beneficial. Since skilled employees are more productive and have a higher level of involvement, training could likely improve involvement. To improve competitive advantage, training should be seen more broadly than competence development. Training should include con- tinuous learning, which necessitates employees to understand the context of their work, and in which way this contributes to the company’s goal. Communication is another contributor to employee involvement. When informing employees about the company’s mission, aims, and culture, communication plays an important role. Employee involvement can likewise be improved through employee recognition, which is shown to increase motivation. Recognition can be seen as a form of communication which validates the importance of employees striving towards the organization’s goals (Bakotić & Rogošić, 2017). Empowerment is also highlighted as an important facilitator of employee involvement. Empowerment can be described as a tool that aims to aid organizations in creating an environment where all employees can be involved in satisfying customers through their respective aptitudes. Through empowerment, employees have an increased ownership of their work, with increased decision-making, which in turn increases their responsibility for their results. This is enabled by facilitating employees to control their work and decision-making in an autonomous manner. Benefits of empowerment 25 2. Theory are increased awareness of business needs, improved job satisfaction, and increased ownership, among others (Bakotić & Rogošić, 2017). 2.4.4 Learning Learning is a key aspect to a company’s competitiveness, as highlighted by Schein et al. (1992) who expressed organizations’ need to adapt to an ever increasing pace of change. Moreover, Nonaka (1994) was discussing the importance of companies to focus on converting tacit to explicit knowledge. According to J. Argyris et al. (1978), the interaction of tacit and explicit knowledge lead to the creation of organizational knowledge. When it comes to attitudes towards learning, these can be split into two general ap- proaches in which the western and eastern countries differ. When comparing eastern and western views on learning, Dahlgaard-Park (2006a) concludes that both focus on balanced development of people’s physical, intellectual, emotional, and spiritual competences. The identified critical factors for achieving these were intrinsic motiva- tion and enjoyment of learning, a balance between conceptual and practical learning, and continuous and immediate correction of mistakes, among others. Furthermore, the author highlights the importance of having a correct learning environment that facilitates not only the learning but also the development of one’s character in the process. However, most people understand learning purely as a process of obtaining information unfortunately. This makes it difficult to discuss concepts like learn- ing organizations or life-long learning, as such an inhibitive approach to learning would deem them as unimportant. More detailed categorization and description regarding approaches of acquiring knowledge can be found in (Dahlgaard-Park, 1999). An ancient approach to learning is the Socratic method, which Hess (2014) empha- sizes as being crucial for facilitating learning. This represents the reflective approach towards questioning assumptions to uncover fallacies. The Socratic approach of critical inquiry and debate to learning has proven to be a valuable approach through- out time. A relevant consideration to learning are also the System 1 and System 2 thinking, which were presented by Kahneman (2011). He describes System 1 as the fast and instinctive approach to thinking, while System 2 is the slow and logical approach. Hess (2014) emphasizes that cognition is continuously composed of both rational and emotional aspects, thus it is important to keep in mind that a certain emotional influence on decisions is unavoidable. To control this emotional influence on decision-making, it is recommended to slow down one’s emotions, when System 2 thinking is preferred. Therefore, engaging System 2 thinking requires a certain state of mindfulness. Furthermore, as being open to feedback makes a better learner, Hess (2014, p. 62) emphasizes the importance of System 2 conversations, which are described as “delib- erate, nonjudgmental, nondefensive, open-minded exchange”. These conversations are important for challenging beliefs, and are only possible in an environment of mutual trust and psychological safety. Since one’s beliefs and assumptions can be 26 2. Theory inhibitive to learning, it is important to attempt to understand these, in order to enable their validation. This critical thinking towards assumptions is very important for a high performance learning organization, which can only be achieved through System 2 reflective thinking in an environment where one feels safe to be vulnerable. To become an expert, one needs deliberate practice while receiving feedback from a coach. It is important to create an environment of positive emotions, since these improve not only the cognitive capacity of people but also their ability to evaluate. Fear is considered the largest inhibitor to learning, which could partially explain the inherent resistance to learning or change. Since often the brain has an inherently fearful response to learning, it is important to shift this response into a positive one. Therefore, the learning environment should foster this shift in response, while also avoiding other potential sources of fear, such as fear of repercussions due to failure. As failure is a natural part of learning, this should be celebrated as an indicator of learning (Hess, 2014). Moreover, when creating a high-performance learning environment, it is important to remember that employee engagement is crucial. To create an environment fostering employee engagement, it is important for this to be addressing the inherent human need for intrinsic motivation, by focusing on how the fulfillment of the psychological needs are addressed. However, it is likewise important to consider the context of an organization, therefore, when creating a learning system, this should be consistent with the organization’s values and culture, while also taking into consideration the currently present processes and structures (Hess, 2014). Dahlgaard-Park (1999) presented a Japanese training package on motivation, which has proven successful in different Danish professional settings. Most notably, in her study of Robert Bosch, the top management was so satisfied with the program that the decision was taken to implement it organization-wide with the aim of changing organizational culture towards improved attitude regarding continuous improvement, as well as other aspects of TQM. The course involved theoretical and practical elements regarding the disciplines of psychology, human motivation, team behavior, and leadership, among others. She has shown that the Japanese training package which was originally developed in the context of Japanese culture was also applicable in a Scandinavian setting, both context as well as method wise. However, the author highlights that there are some major differences between Scandinavian and western culture regarding learning and education, therefore it is preferred for any training package to be adapted to the target audience. Furthermore, one should also keep in mind other cultural differences which could be present, as has been highlighted by the research of Hofstede (2011) on cultural dimensions. As described by Dahlgaard-Park (1999), Japanese management’s key to success lies in its focus on soft aspects. Furthermore, the human aspect is crucial for successful implementation of TQM. However, she also highlights that there are few practical methods for addressing these, unlike the range of statistical tools available to address the process and systems side of TQM. 27 2. Theory Dahlgaard-Park (1999) describes the necessary building blocks for creating a learning organization as being systems thinking, personal mastery, mental models, shared vision, and team learning. These aspects are interdependent, and should therefore be considered as a comprehensive system instead of individual factors that create a learning organization. A helpful approach towards this could possibly be strategic cross-functional rotations, that Nonaka (1994) describes as facilitating the big-picture understanding of the organization. The authors also highlight the importance of institutionalizing reflection in action to support mindfulness towards learning. The importance of soft skills and emotional intelligence towards a learning organiza- tion is described by Dahlgaard-Park (1999). These are presented as having the five components of self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skill. Schein et al. (1992) highlight the importance of psychological safety in order to facili- tate change, and hence to also allow learning in turn. Nonaka (1994) also emphasizes that mutual trust is crucial for creation and transfer of knowledge. Dahlgaard-Park (2006b) suggests leaders to show the way in learning, by exposing themselves to something new, and having a constant drive for continuous self-improvement. These aspects regarding creation of a learning environment are reflective of the psychological needs described through the motivation theory of self-determination. Deutero learning, or triple loop learning, is another important focus area when creating organizational learning. This is described by J. Argyris et al. (1978) as learning about the context in which proto learning occurs. While proto learning represents acquiring direct knowledge, deutero learning represents the knowledge acquired regarding the environment and the learning context. Deutero learning also builds on double loop learning, which is described as learning resulting in modification of assumptions and approaches towards the theory-in-use, as described by C. Argyris (1991). This process is described as being impossible without having open conversation and being able to acknowledge mistakes in order to learn from them. 2.5 Lean The origin and development of the concept of Lean production were first mentioned in the book written by Womack et al. (1990). The publication was a result of a research program started at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the USA, in 1979. The incentive has been to research the differences between western and eastern car manufacturers. After several years of studying, the program concluded a substantial difference between Toyota and western car manufacturers in terms of production efficiency and quality. To adapt to these circumstances, several companies have tried to adopt Lean to their organizations, which has resulted in both successful and unsuccessful attempts (Ledbetter, 2018; Liker & Convis, 2012; Petersson & Ahlsén, 2009). According to Ledbetter (2018) and Rizzardo (2020), Lean can be described as the ability to utilize resources effectively and efficiently throughout the organization. 28 2. Theory To align the company towards a common purpose and create a common goal, with the customer in focus, within all the company’s processes. The aim is to achieve the highest quality with respect to the lowest cost and the shortest lead times, and continuously improving the processes over time. This implies having tools, methods and defined processes to identify and reduce waste continuously through- out the organization. Furthermore, Liker and Convis (2012) and D. Mann (2017) emphasize that organizations need to utilize their capabilities most effectively and ef- ficiently while continuously improving their business, to reduce waste in their process. Prior to Lean becoming a general concept and being adopted by several organizations in different sectors worldwide, its origins began much earlier with the industrial revolution. Henry Ford’s famous ideas around production were considered revolu- tionary at its time with the moving assembly line. He envisioned a flow around the factory where the assembly line was supplied with material at the right time and the right quantity. These ideas later became the foundation of what is now more widely known as the Toyota Production System (TPS) (Petersson & Ahlsén, 2009). According to D. Mann (2017), one of the reasons companies choose Lean is because it is perceived as easily understood, therefore applicable and easily implemented in the initial steps. Moreover, Rizzardo (2020) further develops on the applicability of Lean, that the implementation has to be adjusted to the current circumstance and to the company context. Despite the fact that lean principles are deeply rooted in the manufacturing principles, the underlying concept of lean thinking is something that is frequently overlooked when applying lean concepts. Therefore, transitioning from the beginning steps of the implementation, requires a different mindset and attitude in the way people think (Rizzardo, 2020). Another study that highlights the relationship between lean practices and operational excellence was done by Fok-Yew (2018). It examined the soft and hard aspects of Lean to identify the possible relationships with operational excellence. It showed that these variables are important for determining and explaining possible achievements of operational excellence. Furthermore, Nicholas (2016) highlights that QM and Lean practices, as well as their success, is dependent on a culture of quality. 2.5.1 Tools and Methods According to Liker and Convis (2012), Lean implementation has a tendency to be tools and methods oriented. The tools and methods in Lean are appreciated for their applicability and one of the reasons why several organizations choose to adopt Lean in the first place. As a result of this, Ledbetter (2018) and Rizzardo (2020) describe that initiatives have a tendency of being too tool oriented, which the authors are critical towards. This approach of a Lean implementation could result in missing the underlying purpose of why the tools are used, in which situa- tions, and how these should be applied. Similarly, Jeffrey and Michael (2008) are critical about Lean implementation becoming a short-term implementation solemnly focusing on reducing cost. Furthermore, Liker and Convis (2012) further argue that the short-term focus from top executives diminish the long-term benefits that a Lean implementation could have, and harms organizations’ culture, and the trust 29 2. Theory of its employees. There are several tools that are associated with Lean, and they aim to build a culture of continuous improvements, reducing waste in the processes (Liker & Convis, 2012). One of the most referred to are the seven wastes, which are overproduction, waiting, transport, extra processing, inventory, motion, and defects (Ledbetter, 2018). According to Rizzardo (2020), some organizations add the eighth waste, employee underutilization. Not being able to utilize people’s talent, creativity, skills, and their ability to further develop which could be considered as the potentially worst waste. Another tool that is commonly referred to is the 5S. In Japanese, they represent seiri, seiton, seiso, seiketsu, and shitsuke. These translate to sort, set in order, shine, standardize and sustain (Ledbetter, 2018). 5S is considered a basic tool, and therefore often one of the first tools to be implemented at organizations. It gives a systematic approach to reduce waste and keep a workplace safe, clean and organized. The first three steps of 5S serve the purpose of standardizing, and the latter two serve the purpose of maintaining and improving. A concern that authors raise is the view of 5S as a housekeeping tool, only focused on the cleaning aspects of 5S (Ledbetter, 2018; Liker & Convis, 2012; Rizzardo, 2020). According to the authors, this view has led to several failed implementations and drawbacks when implementing 5S. Therefore, Rizzardo (2020) emphasizes the importance of viewing it as introducing discipline and an agreed best practice, which will benefit the overall process utilization. Fur- thermore, several authors stress the importance of educating and training personnel in reasons behind why 5S is implemented, as an increased understanding improves the likelihood of success (Ledbetter, 2018; Liker & Convis, 2012; Rizzardo, 2020). It is expressed that some organizations have extended the scope of the 5S, adopting a 6th S or even a 7th S, standing for safety, and employee satisfaction (Rizzardo, 2020). Kaizen is a tool used to develop a culture of continuous improvement throughout the organization (Liker & Convis, 2012). It facilitates aligning and creating the best practice, to current knowledge, or the best process currently possible. Every process can be improved into achieving a higher end result; This emphasizes the imp