{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.032090199479618386, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004336513443191674, 'mean_word_length': 5.041884816753926, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Lean-as-imagined differs from lean-as-done: the influence of complexity

Abstract Lean production has been more and more applied in systems with various levels of complexity, which tends to create a gap between Lean-as-Imagined (LAI) in design and Lean-as-Done (LAD) in practice. This paper presents a framework for investigating the influence of complexity on that gap. The framework was applied in a nine-month study in a large plant of a transnational auto-parts manufacturer in Brazil. Three main sources of data were used: 21 interviews, around 196 hours of observations, and documents. Twenty-two examples of the gap are presented; each example is analysed in terms of what LAI and LAD look like, lean principles involved, mechanisms by which complexity influences the gap, and practical implications. Findings suggest that resilience arising from the self-organization of employees, which is a manifestation of complexity, plays an important role for the implementation of lean production. In addition, the framework’s contribution to leanness assessment is discussed. Four research propositions to be tested in future studies are also presented.