A Systematic Literature Review of Poka-Yoke and Novel Approach to Theoretical Aspects

Abstract

For many years, Poka-Yoke (PY) has been used as one of the means to overcome challenges that can affect errors and defects in process.It is a widely accepted concept-a way of thinking, which undoubtedly contributed to significant results in a struggle against the occurrence of errors in various work processes.However, although PY seems to be well understood in theory, there are a large number of scientific papers and books that still seek to clarify and redefine PY, in order to finally implement its application at full capacity.Many authors, as it seems, want to emphasize inconsistencies in current theoretical and practical experiences.This claim is supported by the fact that over 50 similar and different PY definitions have been found in literature.It seems that most researchers do not sufficiently perceive generally accepted attitudes in the field of PY, as well as differences and inconsistencies in some of them.Due to a sense of confusion during the process design stage, an effort to predict locations of possible sources of error is a direct consequence of the diffuse knowledge in the field, which imposes the need to change that state.This paper summarizes the latest studies and definitions in the field of PY applications, in order to propose a comprehensive and generally acceptable definition of PY.In order to find what is common to the most important attitudes in the field of PY, a systematic literature review has been undertaken, with the goal to identify the areas of disagreement, to recognize any gaps that exist and outline personal experiences and attitudes in the field.The novel approach to the types of PY presented in this paper should provide a solid foundation for the creation and development of PY model and a systematic approach to the application of PY in production and service systems.Finally, some conclusions and prospective future research directions are presented.

Cite this work

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

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 32 citations exist upstream.

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