A comparison of Korean and US continuous improvement projects

Hyun Woong Jin · Toni L. Doolen

21 citations0/0 files storedInternational Journal of Productivity and Performance Management

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Quality and Supply Management Management and Optimization Techniques Management Systems and Quality Improvement

Abstract

Purpose – Quality Circles and Kaizen Events have resulted in productivity and quality improvements for organizations. There is limited empirical research comparing these two approaches. This research study was designed to understand the similarities and differences in the structure and outcomes of these two popular continuous improvement approaches in Korea and the USA. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – A logic model was used to structure a comparative analysis of Quality Circles and Kaizen Events undertaken in six different organizations in Korea and the USA. A logic model framework consisting of four areas (resources, activities, outputs and outcomes) was used to assess the key components of these six improvement projects. Data for three different comparative case study project pairs were collected. Projects were matched on both manufacturer-level and project-level characteristics. Matched projects were similar in size and type of product produced. Findings – Similarities between Quality Circles and Kaizen Events were identified in every component of the logic model. Both mechanisms were effective in driving improvements in performance and in motivating employees, even though significant differences in the project size, type, and industrial sector existed across the six different projects. Originality/value – There was no evidence to support the conclusion that one continuous improvement approach is more or less effective than the other. Both approaches produced improvements in both technical and social system outcomes. Overall, it appears based on this study, that both Quality Circles and Kaizen Events can be successfully deployed in an organization's continuous improvement journey.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 21 citations exist upstream.

References

2009Leading change: why transformation efforts fail 1999Logic models: a tool for telling your programs performance story 2006Japanese production management: An evolution—With mixed success 2007Gemba Kaizen. A Commonsense, Low-Cost Approach to Management 2005Sustainability: the elusive element of process improvement 2008Critical success factors for human resource outcomes in Kaizen events: An empirical study 2008Transferring Japanesekaizenactivities to overseas plants in China 1999Overcoming the improvement paradox

Cited by

2018Critical success factors for Kaizen implementation in the Nigerian construction industry 2017A conceptual continuous improvement implementation framework for UK manufacturing companies 2019A New Model of Continuous Improvement in Total Quality Management from an Islamic Perspective 2023The impact of applying the target cost and continuous improvement (Kaizen) on achieving the sustainable competitive advantage of Palestinian industrial companies 2023Training and continuous improvement: the moderation effect of transfer climate and the mediation influence of self-efficacy

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.