Journal of Organizational Change Management

Organizational culture for lean programs

Pedro Ernesto Pereira Paro, Mateus Cecilio Gerolamo,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Pedro Ernesto Pereira Paro, Mateus Cecilio Gerolamo, (2017) "Organizational culture for lean programs", Journal of
Organizational Change Management, Vol. 30 Issue: 4, doi: 10.1108/JOCM-02-2016-0039
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-02-2016-0039
Downloaded on: 08 May 2017, At: 03:20 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 3 times since 2017*
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:333301 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 Organizational culture for lean programs

Abstract
Purpose - Recent studies suggest that the implementation of Lean will only be successful when
aligned with organizational culture. This paper aims to understand an Ideal Lean Culture (ILC) in
the Brazilian context.
Design/methodology/approach - This diagnosis is based on the Competing Values Framework
(CVF), and it is the result of a survey with 51 experts in charge of implementation of Lean
programs in organizations operating in different industry segments in Brazil.
Findings - The results show that and Ideal Lean Culture for Brazilian organizations seems to have
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

the dominant profile of the hierarchy culture, thus characterizing a highly structured and formal
place, with rules and procedures governing the behavior of people.
Research Limitations Some limitations of this study include: although a survey has been
applied, the research cannot be classified as a quantitative study; it brings the opinion of a limited
number of Brazilian experts about lean programs; both the sample size could be increased and the
nationality of respondents could be expanded for future research.
Practical Implication - It is proposed that an organization (or an area of the organization) that
wants to be successful in its lean journey must, firstly, measure its organizational culture and then
promote a cultural profile aligned with the results presented in this paper. By doing so, it is
expected that this lean journey should have a higher probability of long-term success and
sustainability of lean practices, concepts and philosophy.
Originality/value - In the last two decades much has been written about the importance of
organizational culture in the success of lean programs. However, very few studies has mapped and
measured an Ideal Lean Culture in a way that allows researchers, consultants and managers to
evaluate if an organizational culture is close to or distant from an Ideal Lean Culture.
Keywords: Lean Culture; Organizational Culture; Toyota Way; Lean; Cultural Change; Change
Management.
Paper type: Research paper.

Introduction
Since the 1980s, organizations from different sectors and segments, such as manufacture, civil
construction, health, hotel and services, have implemented lean practices, based on the Toyota Way
(Liker, 2004), aiming to improve their operational performance. However, various studies in the
last two decades suggest that few organizations presented sustained results of the lean practices.
 Less than 10% of the organizations in the UK achieved long-term sustainability with the lean
system (Hines et al., 2008; Sim and Rodgers, 2009; Atkinson, 2010). Literature in general indicates
that about 60% to 90% of Lean change initiatives fail (Graham, 1991; Walker, 1992; Atkinson,
2010; Sirkin et al., 2005; Bhasin, 2011b; Bhasin, 2012).
Failure in lean system implementation is mostly associated with barriers to the absorption of
production systems imposed by the Organizational Culture (Bicheno and Holweg, 2009; Atkinson,
2010; Saurin et al., 2011; Bhasin, 2011a; Bhasin, 2011b; Bhasin, 2012). A companys Culture has
strong impact on the organizational performance and maintenance of improvements implemented in
the company (Liker, 2004; Cameron and Quinn, 2006; Cameron and Green, 2004; Gattorna, 2006;
Bhasin, 2012; Ahmad, 2013; Sull, Homkes and Sull, 2015). Organizational improvements
implemented as a result of the lean system will not be successful and sustainable in the long run if
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

not aligned with the organizational culture of a company (Hines et al, 2008; Sim e Rodgers, 2009;
Singh et al., 2010; Bhasin, 2012), whether it is the culture of an entire organization or of a specific
area.
When implementing lean programs in organizations, managers, researchers and consultants
have no measurable parameters to evaluate and identify if a specific organizational culture is close
to or distant from the Ideal Lean Culture. This is extremely important for the long-term success of
such practices, concepts and philosophy. Based on that, the objective of this study is to
understand the Ideal Lean Culture (ILC) in the Brazilian context by using the lens of the
Competing Values Framework (CVF) of Cameron and Quinn (2006).
In a context of development of lean practices and concepts, and with this diagnosis of what
could be an ILC, researchers, consultants and managers can have a reference to evaluate if an
organizational culture is close to or distant from the ILC. This comparison will be important to offer
theoretical basis to the change management process of a lean journey, by helping to:
a. measure if an organizational culture is or is not aligned with lean practices;
b. recognize the presence or absence of compatibilities of the lean system with certain
organization cultures;
c. identify necessary changes in a project of lean system implementation, according to the
characteristics of a certain culture, or also in the organizational culture itself, according
to the lean system needs; and
d. allow, when designing the alignment of the organizational culture with the lean system,
long-term success and sustainability of the lean practices and concepts.

Among the different profiles of organizational culture proposed by literature, this study
developed the following questions:
 (1) What would be the dominant organizational culture profile of an Ideal Lean Culture for
Brazilian organizations?
(2) What profile would not be aligned with this Ideal Lean Culture?

Literature Review

Organizational Culture
Organizational Culture (OC) is a pattern of underlying assumptions that a certain group has created,
discovered or developed during its learning process to deal with its problems of external adaptation
and internal integration, and that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, to
be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think and feel in relation to those
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

problems (Schein, 1984).

An OC can be analyzed at different levels (Schein, 1984): (a) visible artifacts, (b) beliefs
and values, and (c) underlying assumptions. A companys culture is of great importance due to its
impact on the organizational performance (Cameron and Quinn, 2006; Cameron and Green, 2004;
Bhasin, 2011a; Bhasin, 2012). Companies that can closely align their culture with the
organizational strategy have greater and positive impact on their organizational performance
(Cameron and Quinn, 2006; Gattorna, 2006; El-Kouba et al., 2009). In terms or organizational
change, both human aspects (such as beliefs, values and underlying assumptions, as proposed by
Macri et al., 2002) and no-human aspects (as visible artifacts proposed by Langstrand and Elg,
2012) can cause resistance to change.
To evaluate and diagnose an OC, qualitative models (which evaluate a teams perceptions
and experiences of the organization, conduct interviews or analyze documents) or quantitative
models (which collect data about peoples perceptions through questionnaires) can be used. The
literature shows quantitative and qualitative methods to evaluate OC, such as: Inventory of Profiles
of Organizational Values (IPVO) of Oliveira and Tamayo (2004); Competing Values Framework
(CVF) of Cameron and Quinn (2006); Culture Map (C-MAP) of Gattorna (2006) and many others.
The CVF is one of the most frequently used in the literature: Howard (1998) used a sample of 10
organizations located in the USA to test the instrument and Lamond (2003) presented the results of
a study involving 462 managers. Both concluded that the CVF model is indeed a robust and useful
model to evaluate and diagnose an OC.
As this paper aims to understand the Ideal Lean Culture (ILC) by using the lens of the
Competing Values Framework (CVF), the next sections of the literature review present the main
concepts related to lean culture and then the fundamentals of the Competing Values Framework.
 Lean Culture
Lean can be defined as a set of practices whose purpose is to eliminate waste and create value
(Rother and Shook, 2009), in such way to reduce costs and increase productivity and profitability,
for example. People in a lean culture constantly seek to deliver maximum value to the customer,
continually eliminating waste considered as activities that generate excessive process variability or
do not allow the flexibility of the production system (Drew, McCallum and Roggenhoffer, 2004).
Four elements change a culture of mass production into a lean culture (Mann, 2013): (1)
establishing standards and responsibilities for maintenance of these; (2) monitoring the closeness
between production processes and support activities; (3) understanding of variations in process
performance based on data; (4) take action preventive and reactive to minimize performance
variations. Some expected behaviors in a lean culture are: long-term decisions, managers focused
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

on daily activities at the frontline, operators focused on opportunities for improvement in the
production system, managers working to solve system problems with open dialog with all levels of
the organization (Drew, McCallum and Roggenhoffer, 2004).
Based on the definitions provided by Schein (1984), it is possible to summarize the Toyota
Culture proposed by Liker and Hoseus (2008) in the following dimensions:
a) Visible artifacts and behaviors: small teams, problem-solving methodology, 5-Why
analysis, 5S, job rotation, daily meetings at Gemba, fast troubleshooting,
newsletters, kiosks, surveys and motivated leaders.
b) Norms and values: mutual support teams, clearly defined standards, opportunity of
employees can make a difference, concern about physical and psychological security
of employees, problem communication is not seen as a problem, but as an
opportunity for improvement, recreation and daily sport practice, focus on
troubleshooting and not on people.
c) Basic assumptions: the leaders are considered teachers and technicians, thoughts
involve the perspective of the organization, continued commitment to employees
security, the leaders integrate production value maps with people, the leaders
provide support to people who add value.

Toyota successfully developed the Lean philosophy in its Culture, and for this reason,
organizations worldwide basically created their own Lean manufacturing systems based on the
Toyota Production System (TPS) (Ahmad, 2013). For several authors (Drew, McCallum and
Roggenhoffer, 2004; Liker, 2004; Liker and Hoseus, 2008; Ahmad, 2013), the Toyota Culture is the
foundation of a lean culture. A solid executive summary of the culture that supports the TPS are the
14 Principles of the Toyota Way (Liker, 2004; Fullerton and Wempe, 2009). These principles,
 proposed by Liker (2004), should be the objective of a balanced plan focused on continuous
improvement of the organization, able to improve the operational efficiency, promote teamwork
and especially promote an OC in which the lean initiatives are long-lasting and permanent
(Fullerton and Wempe, 2009).
The 14 Principles proposed by Liker (2004) can be introduced as follows: (1) Base
management decisions on a long-term philosophy, even at the expense of short-term financial goals;
(2) Create a continuous flow to bring problems to the surface; (3) Use pull systems to avoid
overproduction; (4) Level out the workload; (5) Build a culture of stopping to fix problems; (6)
Standardized tasks are the foundation of continuous improvement; (7) Use visual controls so no
problems are hidden; (8) Use only reliable, tested technology; (9) Develop leaders who live the
philosophy; (10) Develop exceptional people and teams; (11) Respect your network of partners;
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

(12) See for yourself to understand the situation; (13) Make decision slowly by consensus,
implement them rapidly; (14) Become a learning organization through relentless reflection.
Although the literature presents several studies on lean culture and the Toyota Culture, little
has been done to measure and evaluate the effectiveness and development of actions involving
peoples behavior (Wan and Chen, 2008; Behrouzi and Wong, 2011; Bhasin, 2011a; Ahmad, 2013).
Ferreira and Saurin (2008) analyzed 48 related articles about lean development assessment
in organizations from 1996 to August 2012, and only two methods (Nightingale and Mize, 2002;
Kumar and Thomas, 2002) specifically mentioned satisfaction and viewpoint of employees from
organization with the lean system. Most lean system assessment methods (Bhasin, 2011a; Hofer et
al., 2011; Behrouzi and Wong, 2011; Eswaramoorthi et al., 2011; Seyedhosseini al., 2011; Unver,
2012; Vinodh and Vimal, 2012; Chauhan and Singh, 2012; Anvari, Zulkifli and Yusuff, 2012) do
not address the sustainability and absorption of the lean system by the OC. The lean assessment can
be even broader than just addressing its traditional practices and tools, it can also consider the
human resources, which have both positive and negative impacts on the production system (Liker,
2004; Womack and Jones, 2007; Ferreira and Saurin, 2008). In a theoretical approach, Paro and
Gerolamo (2015) related the organizational culture to the lean system and developed a theoretical
relationship between lean manufacturing systems and organizational culture; they suggested that a
lean culture according to the description of Liker (2004) is most related to a culture of hierarchy
(Cameron and Quinn, 2006). The hierarchy culture is one of the four culture types proposed by
Cameron and Quinn (2006) who present the organizational cultural profile according to a model
firstly developed by Quinn and Rohrbaugh (1981): the Competing Values Framework (CVF) as
described in the next section.

Competing Values Framework (CVF)

 The CVF uses the Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI) survey as a method of
data collection. As the OC has a broad scope, full of complex, interrelated and frequently
ambiguous factors, the CVF uses two analysis dimensions: the first dimension distinguishes
efficacy criteria of flexibility, fast decision making and dynamism versus criteria such as stability,
order and control; the second dimension, distinguishes efficacy criteria of differentiation,
opposition and external orientation from criteria such as integration, group and internal
orientation. The combination of these two dimensions creates four quadrants, which define
essential values of an organization (Cameron and Quinn, 2006).
The conflicting or competing values of this model are represented by the quadrants of
Figure 1, which justify the model name: Competing Values Framework (CVF). As illustrated, each
of these quadrants defines the dominant profile of a certain type of Organizational Culture: (a)
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

Adhocracy Culture, from ad hoc, implying something temporary, specific and dynamic; (b) Market
Culture, characterized by its focus on external transactions with suppliers and customers, aiming to
obtain competitive advantage; (c) Hierarchy Culture, characterized by work standards, rules and
procedures in place to keep the control of internal operations; (d) Clan Culture, which has this name
due its sense of group or family, characterizing an organization focused on the development of
people and teamwork spirit.

Figure 1 Organizational Culture profiles proposed by the CVF

These quadrants, explained in detail in Chart 1, are the result of an analysis of the
organizational efficacy indicators (Quinn and Rohrbaugh, 1981). They combine the main types of
organization profiles and approaches to quality in organizations, leadership styles and managerial
skills, allowing to identify OC profiles in a rich and robust manner (Cameron and Quinn, 2006).

Chart 1 Organizational Culture profiles proposed by the CVF

An assessment of this culture profile, according to the CVF (Cameron and Quinn, 2006) is
conducted using an Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI), which is a quantitative
method that uses a questionnaire to collect data, consisting of six assessment items, which are:
dominant characteristics, organizational leadership, management of people and employee,
organizational glue, strategic emphasis, and criteria for success. These items are described in Chart
2. Based on these six items, an OC assessment is conducted to obtain a visual diagnosis in the CVF.
Figure 2 shows an illustrative example of results obtained with this diagnosis of OC.
 Chart 2 Assessment items of the OCAI (Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument)

Figure 2 Illustrative example of CVF-based Organizational Culture diagnosis

Figure 3 presents the relationship carried out by Paro and Gerolamo (2015) regarding to the
theoretical analysis of how a lean culture described by Liker (2004) could be classified into the
Competing Values Framework. Such a theoretical exercise of association considering the 14
Principles of the Toyota Way with the CVF provided the following results (Paro and Gerolamo,
2015): 57.0 points to Hierarchy, 22.0 points to Clan, 17.0 points to Market and 4.0 points to
Adhocracy Culture. Each culture can obtain a maximum of 100 points.
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

Figure 3 Theoretical relationship between Organizational Culture and Toyota Way

Research Method
The research method was structured so that it could better aid in answering the questions that were
already presented in the Introduction section and motivated this study: (1) What would be the
dominant organizational culture profile of an Ideal Lean Culture for Brazilian organizations? And
(2) What profile would not be aligned with this Ideal Lean Culture?
Therefore, the CVF model was used as the study method, and the OCAI survey was used to
collect data. Cameron and Quinn (2006) argue that their instrument has been used in different types
of organizations by many researchers who tested the reliability and validity of the instrument
(OCAI), as already cited in the Literature Review section regarding the papers of Howard (1998)
and Lamond (2003).
Another study was conducted by Quinn and Spreitzer (1991) to test the reliability of the
instrument. Results present a reliability statistic (measured by the Cronbach alpha coefficients) with
the following coefficients: 0.74 for the clan culture, 0.79 for adhocracy, 0.73 for hierarchy, and 0.71
for the market culture. Tavakol and Dennick (2011) suggest, from different studies, that values of
alpha may be accepted ranging from 0.70 to 0.95. Then, the alpha values found by Quinn and
Spreitzer (1991) give reliability to the use of OCAI as a quantitative analysis of organizational
culture. Yeung, Brockbank and Ulrich (1991) carried out a study with the same purpose: testing the
reliability of the OCAI. They use a sample of 10,300 executives in different business. Results were:
0.79 for the clan culture, 0.80 for adhocracy, 0.76 for hierarchy, and 0.77 for the market culture,
confirming again the reliability of the instrument. Cameron and Quinn (2006) still argue that
numerous additional studies were carried out and, in every case, the reliability of these culture types
has shown patterns consistent with the values previous presented.
 The validity of the instrument was tested by Cameron and Freeman (1991), by Quinn and
Spreitzer (1991), and by Zammuto and Krakower (1991). In all of these studies, the authors found
evidences of validity, which means the extent to which phenomena that are supposed to be
measured are actually measured. Therefore the OCAI is reliable and validated in the literature.
Originally, OCAI has the following steps: Step 1 assessment of the current culture based
on 24 questions; Step 2 analysis of mean scores attributed to each of the four culture profiles; Step
3 answer and assessment of the desired culture; Step 4 same as Step 2, but now related to the
desired culture; Step 5 final results (current culture versus desired culture) are plotted to a graphic
chart, allowing to view any gaps between the entre current culture and the desired culture, as
already illustrated in Figure 2.
In order to measure an Ideal Lean Culture by using the CVF, the authors adapted the
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

original instrument (OCAI): firstly, it was not necessary to assess the current culture of the
interviewees companies; and secondly, rather than answering the desired culture, they were asked
what would be the Ideal Lean Culture based on their past experiences for the implementation and
development of successful lean system. In this way, this adaptation from the OCAI survey allowed
to determine the values of each culture profile based on the CVF for the diagnosis of an Ideal Lean
Culture (ILC) for organizations in the Brazilian context.
The diagnosis of an ILC is the result of an analysis of answers provided via an online
survey, based on the OCAI and CVF. The Survey was answered by 51 Brazilian experts in charge
of implementing lean system implementation. The research was carried out between 2012 and
2014. This study used a non-probability sampling there is no database with information of how
many and who are the Brazilians Lean System experts following the snowball method to select
participants, as cited by Bickman and Rog (1997). The OCAI survey should follow a method
according to the study objectives to have validity and reliability (Freitas et al., 2000). A lean
experts database population in Brazil was not found, so the sample cannot be classified as
appropriate to this population
Even if the impossibility of an accurate quantitative analysis considering the population of
this study, the information gathered from this original survey brings important insights for the lean
practitioners and companies. The value of the research lies on the understanding about the ideal
cultural context in which an organization should operate in order to enable a successful
implementation of a lean program according to the opinion of Brazilian experts.
In total, the study has two groups of respondents: (a) consultants contacted personally by
snowball method, and (b) continuous improvement experts contacted through LinkedIn discussion
groups related to the studied theme.
 (a) Consultants contacted personally: 45 consultants were contacted personally, by
phone or email, who are experts in the development and implementation of lean projects.
Of these, 32 consultants (71.1%) answered the OCAI survey. A high response rate
improves the reliability of the survey results (Shetty, Ali and Cummings, 2010). The initial
participants were selected after recommendations from researchers of the Research Group
on Quality and Change Management of the Sao Carlos School of Engineering at the
University of Sao Paulo, an institution recognized for its reference in the Lean
Manufacturing and Operations Management subjects in Brazil. They recommended eight
consultants specialized in the development and implementation of lean projects, with
masters and/or doctors degrees. The number of participants increased after the contact
with other consultants. The respondents together conducted more than 220 Lean
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

Manufacturing projects in organizations from various industry segments, they have from 3
to 12 years of experience in lean projects, and conducted all their projects in Brazil.
(b) Continuous improvement experts: using Survey Monkey Software, questionnaires
were sent to more than 20 LinkedIn discussion groups related to continuous improvement.
These groups together totaled over 500 users: members of continuous improvement teams,
leaders, supervisors, consultants, professors and researchers participated in these groups.
Of this total, 19 (around 3.8%) answered the OCAI survey. All respondents are from
Brazil.

It should be noted that the results from this study can be associated with the view of these
consultants and experts based on the lean projects that they have already conducted and the
characteristics of their regions. That is, a study bias may exist, related to the factors that the
respondents consider as critical for the success of projects they have conducted.
It is important to observe that the findings are neither a research of Brazilian organizations
culture, nor the situation of the lean culture that the group of experts developed in their projects.
Although this group of lean consultants may probably have a substantial impact on the culture of
the organizations where they implemented the lean system, it is impossible to state that the
organizations have changed their culture to an Ideal Lean Culture as described in this work.
Another research might be carried out for mapping the actual culture of companies which
experienced a lean program. It is not the case in this research, thus the findings presented here
purely present an Ideal Lean Culture based on the common view of the group of Brazilian
consultants, that is, an imaginary organization where, in their opinion, a lean project would have
more probability to be successfully implemented.
 Findings
By using the OCAI and CVF in order to measure an ILC, the researchers expected to reach similar
results as did the theoretical proposal presented by Paro and Gerolamo (2015), based on a
theoretical association of the 14 Principles of the Toyota Way (Liker, 2004) with the CVF
(Cameron and Quinn, 2006). Regardless the fact that the survey was applied only to Brazilian
experts, the authors believed that it would still make sense if both studies with different methods
had similar results since both of them use CVF as basis for measure an ILC.
Consequently, the result of this study is the composition of results from the survey and the
theoretical associations of Paro and Gerolamo (2015). Table 1 shows the results of the CVF for the
Lean Culture diagnosis. The results represent the average of the values obtained with the answers of
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

all the 51 Survey respondents. As the instrument (OCAI) has six dimensions, the final result is the
mean divided by six. In the CVF, for this Ideal Lean Culture, 38.1 points are attributed to
Hierarchy, 29.0 points to Clan, 19.5 points to Market and 13.4 to Adhocracy Culture profile. This is
the general result of the study illustrated in Figure 4, according to the survey results. Figure 4 also
presents again the graphical result obtained by the theoretical exercise associating the 14 Principles
of the Toyota Way with the CVF (Paro and Gerolamo, 2015).

Table 1 Results of the survey answered by the Lean experts

The results are presented in Table 1 (results of the OCAI survey), illustrated in Figure 4 and
summarized in Table 2. Although the results of both analyses are reasonably different, the same
tendency was observed, that is, the culture types presented the same classification order: 1st place or
dominant culture: hierarchy; 2nd place or sub-dominant culture: clan; 3rd place: market culture; and
4th place and less powerful culture: adhocracy. Although neither the results of both researchers
independently, nor the combined analysis are conclusive, it is possible to see evidences that could
be used for future investigation efforts in order to make more explicit what an Ideal Lean Culture
really is.

Figure 4 Profile of the diagnosed Ideal Lean Culture (ILC)

Table 2 Results of the comparison between the theoretical Toyota Culture and the Ideal
Lean Culture (ILC)

Study Contributions and Final Considerations

 The results suggest the hierarchy culture profile, according to the CVF, is more associated with the
Ideal Lean Culture for Brazilian organizations. The survey results, when compared to the theoretical
association of the CVF with the 14 Principles of the Toyota Way indicate clan and market culture
profiles would also be related to the Ideal Lean culture, but less significantly than the hierarchy
culture profile. Then, adhocracy would be less associated with the ideal lean culture, which agrees
with the theoretical foundation of the CVF, since hierarchy and adhocracy are culture types that are
diagonally opposites.
These facts show the possibility of diagnosing an Ideal Lean Culture using the CVF model.
These research results, together with the results of Paro and Gerolamo (2015), which makes a
theoretical association of the CVF with the Toyota Way of Liker (2004), bring new evidences and
stimulate more research and discussion about an Ideal Lean Culture.
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

Therefore, both researches emphasize that the Ideal Lean Culture is more associated with a
Culture of internal focus that continually seeks to improve the stability of processes. Chart 3
presents the conclusions about what characteristics seems to be most related and less related to the
Ideal Lean Culture, that is, the conflicting characteristics. As commented at the beginning of this
paper, an organizational culture can be seen as the entire culture of a company, but also as a culture
of an organizational area such as, for example, the manufacturing area.

Chart 3 Summary of conclusions: characteristics most related and less related to the ideal
Lean Culture (ILC) based on Cameron and Quinn (2006)

As argued by Cameron and Quinn (2006), there is not a better culture profile. In this sense,
the main contribution of this study is that it allows researchers, consultants and managers to
evaluate if an organizational culture is close to or distant from ideal lean practices. It is proposed
that an organization that wants to be successful in its lean journey must, firstly, measure its
organizational culture and then promote a cultural profile aligned with the results presented in this
paper. By doing so, it is expected that this lean journey should have a higher probability of long-
term success and sustainability of lean practices, concepts and philosophy.
As it involves the change management process as a whole, this ILC will not guarantee by
itself a successful development of lean projects. However, this diagnosed organizational culture in
Brazil, considered ideal based on the Toyota Way, is expected to help the development of this
production system, allowing a more successful and sustainable project.
It is important also to point out that this research has some limitations given the scope to
map the organizational culture. The research involved only a study of the perception of Brazilian
lean experts and the data were collected via an online survey. Future studies might use more
 structured quantitative and qualitative approach, and increase the sample size of lean experts. That
would be important, as it would analyze the extension and validity of the diagnosed ILC. In
addition, it would be important to create a dataset of lean experts operating worldwide to help the
development of studies in this area and provide the contact of such professionals. Besides, other
aspects should be addressed: determine and understand the adaptations of concepts, techniques and
tools of a lean system, allowing their development in different types of companies; analyze how to
distinguish changes required in a certain project from changes in the organizational culture to keep
both aligned and achieve successful and sustainable practices; analyze how the alignment process
should be conducted between an organizational culture and the management practices; and measure
the actual culture of companies that implemented lean, or more completely, to conduct a
longitudinal study measuring continuously the organizational culture of companies that experienced
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

a lean journey.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the survey respondents and also the anonymous reviewers of the
Journal of Organizational Change Management for their fundamental suggestions that enriched the
final version of this manuscript.

References
Ahmad, S. A. S. (2013), Culture and Lean Manufacturing Towards a Holistic Framework, Australian
Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 334-338.

Anvari, A., Zulkifli, N. and Yusuff, R. M. (2012), A dynamic modeling to measure Lean performance within
Lean attributes, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 66, No. 5-8, pp.
667-677.

Atkinson, PP. (2010), Lean is a cultural issue, Management Services, Vol. 54, ppp. 35-44.

Behrouzi, F. and Wong, K. Y. (2011), Lean Performance evaluation of manufacturing systems: a dynamic
and innovative approach, Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 3, pp. 388-395.

Bhasin, S. (2011a), Performance of organizations treating Lean as an ideology, Business Process

Management Journal, Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 986- 1011.

Bhasin, S. (2011b), Measuring the Leanness of an organization, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma,
Vol.2, No.1, pp.55-74.

Bhasin, S. (2012), An appropriate change strategy for Lean success, Management Decision, Vol. 50, No. 3,
pp. 439-458.
 Bicheno, J. and Holfweg, M. (2009), The Lean Toolbox - the essential guide to Lean transformation, 4 th
ed., Buckingham, Picsie.

Bickman, L. and Rog, D. J. (1997), Handbook of applied social research methods, Thousand Oaks, Sage.

Cameron, E. and Green, M. (2004), Making Sense of Change Management: a complete guide to the models
tools and techniques of organizational change, 2nd ed., London and Philadelphia, Kogan Page

Cameron K. S. and Freeman, S. J. (1991), Cultural Congruence, Strength, and Type: Relationships to
Effectiveness. Research in Organizational Change and Development, Vol. 5, pp. 23-58.

Cameron, K. S. and Quinn, R. E. (2006), Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: based on the
competing values framework, San Francisco, Jossey Bass, 2006, 242 pp.

Chauhan, G. and Singh, T. P. (2012), Measuring parameters of Lean manufacturing realization, Measuring
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

Business Excellence, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 57-71.

Drew, J., McCallum, B. and Roggenhofer, S. (2004), Journey to Lean - making operational change stick,
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

El-Kouba, A., Roglio, K, Corso, K., and Silva, W. (2009), Programas de desenvolvimento comportamental
influncias sobre os objetivos estratgicos, Revista de Administrao de Empresas, Vol. 49, No. 3, pp. 295-
308.

Eswaramoorthi, M, Kathiresan, G. R, Prasad, P. S. and Mohanram, P. (2011), A survey on Lean practices in

Indian machine tool industries, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 52,
No. 9-12, pp. 1091-1101, 2011.

Ferreira, C. F. and Saurin, T. A. (2008), Avaliao qualitativa da implantao de prticas da produo

enxuta: estudo de caso em uma fbrica de mquinas agrcolas, Revista Gesto e Produo, Vol. 15, No. 3,
pp. 449-462.

Freitas, H., Oliveira, M., Saccol, A. and Moscarola, J. (2000), O mtodo de pesquisa Survey, Revista de
Administrao, So Paulo, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 105-112.

Fullerton, R. and Wempe, W. (2009), Lean manufacturing, non-financial performance measures, and
financial performance, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 29, No. 3,
pp.214-240.

Gattorna, J. (2006), Living Supply Chains: How to mobilize the enterprise around delivering what your
customers want, FT Prentice Hall, London.

Graham, I. (1991), Take your time to Total Quality Success, Works Management, pp. 17-21.

Hines, P., Found, P. Griffiths, G. and Harrison, R. (2008), Staying Lean: thinking not just surviving, London,
Taylor and Francis Group.
 Hofer, A. R., Hofer, C., Eroglu, C. and Waller, M. A., (2011), An institutional theoretic perspective on
forces driving adoption of Lean production globally: China vis--vis the USA, The International Journal of
Logistics Management, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 148-178, 2011.

Howard, L. W. (1998), Validating the Competing Values Model as a Representation of Organizational

Cultures, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol. 6. No. 3, pp. 231-250.

Kumar, A. and Thomas, S. A. (2002), A Software tool for screening analysis of Lean practices,
Environmental Progress, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 12-16, 2002.

Lamond, D. (2003), The Value of Quinns Competing Values Model in an Australian Context, Journal of
Psychology, Vol. 18, No.1, pp. 46-59, 2003.

Langstrand, J. and Elg, M. (2012), Non-human resistance in change towards Lean, Journal of Organizational
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

Change Management, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp. 853-866.

Liker, J. (2004), The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World's Greatest Manufacturer,
McGraw-Hill Education, 1 edition, 330 pp.

Liker, J. and Hoseus, M. (2008), Toyota Culture - the heart and soul of the Toyota Way, McGraw-Hill.

Macri, D. M., Tagliaventi, M. R. and Bertolotti, F. (2002), A grounded theory for resistance to change in a
small organization, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 292-310.

Mann, D. (2013), The Case for Lean Culture: sustain the gains from your Lean conversion, Association for
Manufacturing Excellence, 2nd ed. Toronto, Canada, CRC Press Taylor and Francis Group.

Nightingale, D. J and Mize, J. H. (2002), Development of a Lean Enterprise Transformation Maturity Model,
Information Knowledge Systems Management, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 15-30.

Oliveira, A. F. and Tamayo, A. (2004), Inventrio de perfis de valores organizacionais, Revista de

Administrao, So Paulo, Vol.39, No.2, pp.129-140. 2004.

Paro, P. and Gerolamo, M., (2015), Diagnosing and understanding the ideal Lean Culture - based on the 14
principles of the Toyota Way, Global Journal on Humanities & Social Sciences, Vol. 02, pp 50-59, 2015

Quinn, R. E. and Rohrbaugh, J. (1981), A competing values approach to organizational effectiveness, Public
Productivity Report, Vol. 5, No.2, pp. 122-140, 1981.

Quinn, R. E. and Spreitzer, G. M. (1991). The Psychometrics of the Competing Values Culture Instrument
and an Analysis of the Impact of Organizational Culture on Quality of Life. In Richard W. Woodman and
William A. Pasmore (eds.), Research in Organizational Change and Development, Vol. 5. Greenwich,
Conn.: JAI Press.

Rother, M. and Shoock, J. (2009), Learning to See Value Stream Mapping to Add Value and Eliminate
MUDA, Lean Enterprise Institute.
 Saurin, T., Marodin, G. and Ribeiro, K. (2011), A framework for assessing the use of Lean production
practices in manufacturing cells, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 46, No. 23, pp. 32-51.

Schein, E. (1984), Coming to a new awareness of Organizational Culture, Sloan Management Review, Vol.
25, No. 2, pp. 3-16.

Seyedhosseini, S. M., Taleghani, A., Bakhsha, A. and Partovi, S. (2011), Extracting Leanness criteria by
employing the concept of Balanced Scorecard, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 38, No. 8, pp. 10454-
10461.

Shetty, D., Ali, A. and Cummings, R. (2010), Survey-based spreadsheet model on Lean implementation,
International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 310-334.

Sim, K. and Rodgers, J. (2009), Implementing Lean Production Systems - barriers to change, Management
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

Research Excellence, Vol. 32, No.1, pp. 37-49.

Singh, B., Garg, S. and Sharma, S. (2010), Development of index for measuring Leanness, Measuring
Business Excellence, Vol. 14, No. 14, pp. 46-59.

Sirkin, H. L., Keenan, P.; Jackson, A. (2005), The Hard Side of Change Management, Harvard Business
Review, October, 2005.

Sull, D., Homkes, R., Sull, C. (2015), Why Strategy Execution Unravels and what to do about it, Harvard
Business Review, March.

Tavakol, M. and Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbachs alpha, International Journal of Medical
Education, Vol. 2: pp. 53-55.

Unver, H. O. (2012), An ISA-95-based manufacturing intelligence system in support of Lean initiatives, The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 65, No. 5-8, pp. 853-866.

Vinodh, S. and Vimal, K. (2012), Thirty criteria based Leanness assessment using fuzzy logic approach, The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 60, No. 9-12, pp. 1185-1195.

Wan, H. and Chen, F. (2008), A Leanness measure of manufacturing systems for quantifying impacts of
Lean initiatives, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 46, No. 23, pp. 6567-6584.

Walker, T. (1992), The contributions of Total Quality Management to a theory of work performance,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19, pp. 510-536.

Womack, J., Jones, D. and Roos, D. (2007), The Machine That Changed the World, Free Press, Reprinted
edition.

Yeoung, A. K. O., Brockbank, J. W. and Ulrich, D. O. (1991). Organizational Culture and Human Resources
Practices: An Empirical Assessment. In Richard W. Woodman and William A. Pasmore (eds.), Research in
Organizational Change and Development, Vol. 5. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.
 Zammuto, R. F., Krakower, J. Y. (1991). Quantitative and Qualitative Studies of Organizational Culture. In
Richard W. Woodman and William A. Pasmore (eds.), Research in Organizational Change and
Development, Vol. 5. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)
 Figure 1 Organizational Culture profiles proposed by the CVF
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

Source: Adapted from Cameron and Quinn (2006)

 Figure 2 Illustrative example of CVF-based Organizational Culture diagnosis
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

Source: Adapted from Cameron and Quinn (2006)

 Figure 3 Theoretical relationship between Organizational Culture and Toyota Way
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

Source: Adapted from Paro and Gerolamo (2015)

Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

Figure 4 Profile of the diagnosed ideal Lean Culture

 Table 1 Results of the survey answered by the interviewees
Respondent Adhocracy Market Hierarchy Clan
1 10 110 255 225
2 0 210 360 30
3 40 70 275 215
4 10 100 430 60
5 0 10 390 200
6 60 50 200 290
7 160 125 95 220
8 115 20 295 170
9 0 10 390 200
10 90 130 145 235
11 85 210 170 135
12 50 90 320 140
13 110 70 190 230
14 50 50 310 190
15 140 150 50 260
16 105 85 190 220
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

17 120 190 165 125

18 0 70 340 190
19 0 255 240 105
20 65 105 230 200
21 85 35 250 230
22 195 80 175 150
23 0 40 410 150
24 190 75 85 250
25 0 210 330 60
26 50 60 350 140
27 65 105 230 200
28 0 70 370 160
29 60 60 200 280
30 5 210 355 30
31 55 25 280 240
32 0 255 240 105
33 120 140 180 160
34 85 175 215 125
35 145 135 200 120
36 70 130 270 130
37 176 142 113 169
38 145 135 145 175
39 80 140 170 210
40 130 120 170 180
41 100 170 180 150
42 110 250 115 125
43 135 155 150 160
44 120 210 160 110
45 50 140 260 150
46 50 70 260 220
47 135 70 105 290
48 110 170 140 180
49 135 140 210 115
50 95 75 185 245
51 185 73 102 240
Mean 80.2 117.2 228.3 174.3
StDev 57.8 65.0 93.4 62.2
Minimum 0 10 50 30
Maximum 195 255 430 290
Mean / 6 13.4 19.5 38.1 29.0
 Table 2 Results of the comparison between the theoretical Toyota Culture and the Lean Culture

Theoretical Toyota
Lean Culture
Culture profile Culture (Paro and
(survey)
Gerolamo, 2015)
Hierarchy 57.0 38.1
Clan 22.0 29.0
Market 17.0 19.5
Adhocracy 4.0 13.4
Total points 100.0 100.0
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)
 Chart 1 Organizational Culture profiles proposed by the CVF
CLAN
The organization is an open and friendly place to work,
where people share what they have. The leaders are
considered mentors or family members. The loyalty
between groups and the sense of tradition are strong.
Long-term benefits are obtained with emphasis on
employee development. Great importance is given to
cohesion of groups. The organization awards teamwork,
participant and consensus.
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)
HIERARCHY
A highly structured and formal place. Procedures and
rules govern employee behaviors. Leaders seek
efficiency and make efforts to be good coordinators.
Keeping operations without any problems is the most
critical aspect. Formal policies keep groups united.
Stability, performance and efficiency are long-term
goals. Success means reliable deliveries, feasible
planning and low cost. The management wants security
and foreseeability.
Source: Adapted from Cameron and Quinn (2006)
ADHOCRACY
A dynamic, entrepreneurial and creative place.
Innovation and risk taking are common practices. The
commitment to reflecting about distinct aspects unifies
the organization. The long-term goal is growth and
acquisition of new resources. Success means uniqueness
and new products and services. It is important to be the
leader in innovation in the sector. Initiatives and freedom
are encouraged.
MARKET
The organizations results are focused on work
execution. Employees are competitive and goal-oriented.
Leaders are demanding, productive and hard. The
emphasis on winning unifies the organization. Reputation
and success are common concerns. Long-term focus is on
competitiveness and measurable results. Success means
insertion and market share. Competitive prices and
market leadership are important.
 Chart 2 Assessment items of the OCAI (Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument)

Item Description

Dominant Level of teamwork spirit and union, level of creativity and dynamism, focus on goals
1
characteristics and competition, concern about systems and emphasis on efficiency.

Dominant leadership style in the organization. In a prior study, Quinn and Rohrbaugh
Organizational
2 (1981) described eight leadership styles incorporated in the OCAI: mentor, facilitator,
leadership
innovator, broker, producer, director, coordinator and monitor.

Management of
How employees are treated, what is the level of participation and consensus, what the
3 people and
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

work environment is like.

employees

What are the mechanisms that unify employees and the organization, the cohesion
between people, the commitment and loyalty with the organization, the level of
4 Organizational glue
employee entrepreneurship and flexibility, rules and policies, orientation to goals and
competitiveness.

Strategy triggers: employee development, innovation, stability and competitive

5 Strategic emphasis
advantage, growth and acquisitions, and goal setting.

How success is defined: market penetration, market share, innovation, sensitivity for
6 Criteria for success customer, concern for people, development of new products and services, dependent on
the cost of products and services, cost reduction, and productivity.
Source: Adapted from Cameron and Quinn (2006)
 Chart 3 Summary of conclusions: characteristics most related and less related to the ideal Lean Culture based
on Cameron and Quinn (2006)

Item Ideal Lean Culture Conflicting with the ideal Lean Culture

Highly structured and formal Dynamic and entrepreneurial place, where

Dominant
1 organization, whose procedures and people are willing to take risks.
characteristics
rules govern peoples behavior.

The leaders seek operational efficiency, The leaders are usually considered
Organizational direct efforts to be good coordinators and entrepreneurs and innovators or individuals
2
leadership keep processes operating without any who accept challenges.
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 03:20 08 May 2017 (PT)

problem.

The management style in the organization The managerial style is characterized by

Management of
is characterized by security of employment, accepting risks individually, innovation,
3 people and
conformity, predictability, and stability in freedom and uniqueness.
employees
relationships.

The organization is united by the

Organizational Formal policies are responsible for keeping commitment to innovation and
4
glue the groups united. development. Emphasis on leading market
innovation.

The organization emphasizes new resources

Strategic Long-term goals are based on stability, and new challenges. Experiencing new
5
emphasis operational performance and efficiency. things and seeking opportunities are valued
actions.

Success is based on the most recent and

Criteria for Success means offering reliable delivery,
6 differentiated launches of the market.
success feasible planning and low operational cost.
Innovation leadership is a key concept.