A practical Continuous Improvement implementation framework for UK manufacturing companies Richard Scott McLean Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Heriot-Watt University Department of Business Management August 2018 The copyright in this thesis is owned by the author. Any quotation from the thesis or use of any of the information contained in it must acknowledge this thesis as the source of the quotation or information. Abstract Continuous Improvement initiatives continue to report high failure rates. This research initially aims to explore the reasons for implementation failure and then address the identified themes through the development of a new framework. The research is focussed on a specific sector and region in order to provide findings tailored to that audience. Several stages of research have been completed. Initially, a Systematic Literature Review identified eight main themes that most contribute to the failure of Continuous Improvement initiatives in manufacturing organisations. These eight themes were subsequently validated and ranked by influence towards initiative failure. The next phase centred around the creation of a new implementation framework. This involved firstly the evaluation of current implementation guides through a Critical Literature Review to understand both the strengths and weaknesses of each. This identified that there is not currently an implementation framework or model that fully satisfies the objectives of this research. This is the main research gap. A new conceptual framework for implementing Continuous Improvement in UK manufacturing companies was therefore developed by incorporating the strengths of current offerings as well as the findings of the previous research phases. An important element of this research is the desire to bridge the gap between academic findings and real world application. This translation of theory into practice should be the objective of any operations management research. To achieve this the conceptual framework required extensive evaluation by the intended user groups. This was achieved through a two stage Delphi study. Through this approach consensus was reached on the content and structure of the updated framework. Finally, a focus group was organised to allow a separate group of individuals, not previously involved in the research, to discuss the framework. This served to further validate the framework. Whilst being of practical use, the new framework also contributes to theory; specifically change management, motivation and organisational learning theory. As with any research, limitations exist. These have been identified throughout and where practical have been addressed to ensure robust research methods are employed. The main limitation of the research is the absence of practical application of the final framework. This was due to the absence of opportunity to do so, as well as the extended timeframe associated. A future research direction is to complete this action research or case study research in order to provide a final validation of the framework. Keywords Continuous Improvement, implementation, framework, manufacturing, UK Acknowledgements Firstly, and probably most importantly, I would like to thank my former manager Euan Birrell. Whilst working for him I decided I wanted to pursue a PhD and he is the person that secured company support at that time to allow me to do so. Had he not, I probably would not have been able to pursue this ambition further. He has undoubtedly also been the biggest influence on my work life to date as I learned a great deal from him; not least in terms of the work ethic required to succeed in the world of work and the integrity you can retain whilst doing so. The other companies for whom I have worked for since have also both supported my studies through the sponsoring of my tuition fees. For that I am grateful. When I started my PhD I had no point of reference of what was involved, or how to achieve it. From a young age I have just always wanted to be ‘Dr. McLean’. For this reason, the guidance provided by my supervisor, Jiju Antony, has been invaluable. Thank you especially for pushing me to publish my work. I have found that a great source of pride and a valuable method of validation during the research process. During this process I have moved out from home, got engaged and then married (and bought a dog), and moved house again. My wife Emma has always supported my studies, as have my family. I look forward to finally getting to celebrate my achievement with them. Finally, I particularly appreciate all those who have taken the time to contribute to my research. Without the input of academic or industry experts the output of the research would not have been possible. The process of interviewing over 20 people from industry I found hugely interesting and have applied many of the findings already to enhance my day-to-day work. Overall, what started as an academic exercise has also enhanced my practical application of Continuous Improvement immeasurably. All contributions to that process are appreciated. ACADEMIC REGISTRY Research Thesis Submission Name: Richard Scott McLean School: Department of Business Management, Edinburgh Campus Version: (i.e. First, First Degree Sought: Doctor of Philosophy Resubmission, Final) Declaration In accordance with the appropriate regulations I hereby submit my thesis and I declare that: 1) the thesis embodies the results of my own work and has been composed by myself 2) where appropriate, I have made acknowledgement of the work of others and have made reference to work carried out in collaboration with other persons 3) the thesis is the correct version of the thesis for submission and is the same version as any electronic versions submitted*. 4) my thesis for the award referred to, deposited in the Heriot-Watt University Library, should be made available for loan or photocopying and be available via the Institutional Repository, subject to such conditions as the Librarian may require 5) I understand that as a student of the University I am required to abide by the Regulations of the University and to conform to its discipline. 6) I confirm that the thesis has been verified against plagiarism via an approved plagiarism detection application e.g. Turnitin. * Please note that it is the responsibility of the candidate to ensure that the correct version of the thesis is submitted. Signature of Date: 07/08/18 Candidate: Submission Submitted By (name in capitals): Signature of Individual Submitting: Date Submitted: For Completion in the Student Service Centre (SSC) Received in the SSC by (name in capitals): (Handed in to Method of Submission SSC; posted through internal/external mail): E-thesis Submitted (mandatory for final theses) Signature: Date: Publications Journal publications McLean, R. and Antony, J. (2014), “Why continuous improvement initiatives fail in manufacturing environments? A systematic review of the evidence", International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 63 Issue: 3, pp. 370 - 376. McLean, R.S., Antony, J. and Dahlgaard, J.J. (2017), “Failure of Continuous Improvement initiatives in manufacturing environments: a systematic review of the evidence”, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 28 Iss 3-4, pp. 219 - 237. McLean, R.S. and Antony, J. (2017), “A conceptual Continuous Improvement implementation framework for UK manufacturing companies”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 34 Iss. 7, pp. 1015 - 1033. Professional/Trade Magazines McLean, R. and Antony, J. (2016), “Breaking the Chain”, Quality World, Jan 2016, pp. 28 - 33. Conference Papers McLean, R. and Antony, J. (2016), “Towards the development of a practical and strategic framework for the implementation of Continuous Improvement in UK manufacturing companies: The EDDIE framework”, 6th International Conference on Lean Six Sigma, 30th and 31st May, Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK. Contents Chapter 1 Introduction ............................................................................... 1 1.1 Rationale ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 The Significance of this Study ............................................................................................ 3 1.3 Structure of the thesis .......................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 2 Systematic Literature Review ..................................................... 5 2.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Defining Continuous Improvement .................................................................................... 5 2.3 Literature Review Approaches .......................................................................................... 12 2.4 Systematic Literature Review ........................................................................................... 14 2.4 Literature review findings ................................................................................................. 18 2.4.1 Theme 1: Motives and Expectations .......................................................................... 19 2.4.2 Theme 2: Organisational culture and environment .................................................... 20 2.4.3 Theme 3: The Management Leadership ....................................................................