Are all aspects of lean production bad for workers? An analysis of how problem‐solving demands affect employee well‐being

• Published date: 01 November 2018
• Author: Meng‐Long Huo,Peter Boxall
• Date: 01 November 2018
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12204

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Are all aspects of lean production bad for workers?

An analysis of how problem‐solving demands

affect employee well‐being

Meng‐Long Huo

1

|Peter Boxall

2

1

Taylor's Business School, Taylor's University,

Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia

2

Department of Management and

International Business, The University of

Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

Correspondence

Meng‐Long Huo, Taylor's Business School,

Taylor's University, 1 Jalan Taylors, Subang

Jaya, Selangor 47500, Malaysia.

Email: m.huo@auckland.ac.nz

Abstract

This study is concerned with the debate around employee

well‐being in the environment of lean production. It applies

the job demands–resources model to examine the effects of

problem‐solving demands and job resources (training, par-

ticipation in decision‐making, and line manager support) on

employee engagement and exhaustion in a Chinese manu-

facturer. It examines previously untested interactions and

shows that these job resources created a “buffering effect”

in the relationship between problem‐solving demands and

exhaustion. It also shows a “coping effect”because the rela-

tionship between resources and engagement was strength-

ened as problem‐solving demands increased. Rather than

being uniformly positive or negative, the results suggest

that the overall impact of lean production on worker well‐

being is likely to depend on the ways in which managers

create scope for worker involvement in decision‐making,

target resources to the specific job demands, and adjust

resource levels to the degree of these demands.

KEYWORDS

employee well‐being, exhaustion, job demands–resources model,

lean production, problem‐solving demands, work engagement

1|INTRODUCTION

The implementation of lean production is extensive in the world's manufacturing plants, but researchers remain

concerned that working conditions in lean settings lead to negative employee outcomes (e.g., Cullinane, Bosak,

Flood, & Demerouti, 2014; Delbridge, 2007; Vidal, 2007a). This includes a concern with work intensification and

its impacts on stress and also relates to the nature of the demands brought about by the typical lean implementation.

Vidal (2007a) argues that the lean principle of continuous improvement leads to an increased requirement for

Received: 29 November 2017 Revised: 3 July 2018 Accepted: 5 July 2018

DOI: 10.1111/1748-8583.12204

Hum Resour Manag J. 2018;28:569–584. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltdwileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/hrmj 569

problem solving by employees. Similarly, Jackson and Mullarkey (2000) observe that problem‐solving demands are

particularly high for lean workers as a result of the elimination of buffer stocks—a fundamental principle of lean

production (Womack, Jones, & Roos, 1990). Under such circumstances, production output is more vulnerable to

fluctuation according to the quality of raw materials and variation in worker performance and machine efficiency.

Therefore, in order to maintain the stability of production flow, shop‐floor workers are required to shoulder greater

responsibility for anticipating and preventing problems that could interrupt production (Jackson & Mullarkey, 2000).

As argued by MacDuffie (1995), “workers must have both a conceptual grasp of the production process and the

analytical skills to identify the root cause of problems”because they are required in the lean production environment

to “identify and resolve problems as they appear on the line”(p. 201).

Prior research has generated mixed results on the relationship between problem‐solving demands and employee

well‐being. Outside the lean work environment, Schmitt, Zacher, and Frese (2012) have shown a connection between

problem‐solving demands and increased fatigue, whereas others have found nonsignificant results in terms of job sat-

isfaction, strain, anxiety, and depression (e.g., Holman, 2002). Inside the lean context, two contrasting perspectives

have emerged from previous studies. One proposes an inverse relationship between problem‐solving demands and

positive employee outcomes because dealing with this type of demand costs effort and consumes energy (Bouville

& Alis, 2014; Cullinane et al., 2014; Vidal, 2007b). For example, in a survey of machinists working in lean and nonlean

contexts in a British clothing manufacturer, Jackson and Mullarkey (2000) found that the level of problem‐solving

demand was significantly higher in lean teams and was related to greater job anxiety and depression. In contrast,

Cullinane, Bosak, Flood, and Demerouti (2013) develop the view that problem‐solving demands in lean production

are positive challenges that can be motivational for employees. However, no quantitative studies have tested this

proposition. This leaves a major gap in our knowledge regarding what kind of impact problem‐solving demands are

having on employee well‐being. Are they as bad as critics suggest or a positive source of motivation? If the process

of implementing lean methods is unstoppable and a high level of problem‐solving demand is inherent in such environ-

ments, how can management improve the outcomes for workers?

Located within the debate on the impact of lean demands on employee well‐being, we address these questions

in this paper, using survey data from a Chinese lean manufacturer of transportation equipment. Existing studies in

China, which is the world's largest contributor to manufacturing output, show evidence of a negative lean implemen-

tation‐to‐well‐being relationship (e.g., Chan, Chen, Xie, Wei, & Walker, 2014; Zhang, 2015). In order to enhance

worker outcomes in China, we need studies of the types of job resources that may counterbalance the lean job

demands being faced by the workforce. Our study contributes to this objective.

The paper's analysis is anchored in the job demands–resources (JD‐R) model (Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, &

Schaufeli, 2001), which enables us to examine the factors that predict employee engagement and exhaustion and to

examine the interactions among them. In applying the JD‐R framework to the lean environment, we used a set of

workplace interviews to identify the prominent job characteristics in our specific setting and, thus, to customise

our hypotheses. Overall, the study contributes to the literature in two respects. First, empirical evidence is identified

for the first time to support Cullinane et al.'s (2013) prediction that problem‐solving demands under lean settings

have motivational properties, and our study advances this work by detecting complementary job resources necessary

to alleviate the health‐impairing potential of problem‐solving demands. Our findings support the argument that

research should move away from the idea that lean production, per se, has negative or positive well‐being implica-

tions and towards the question of how to implement it in ways that enhance its positive potentials and reduce its

negative possibilities (Hasle, Bojesen, Langaa Jensen, & Bramming, 2012). Second, we confirm previously untested

interaction effects between job resources and problem‐solving demands, which indicate how resources can enhance

the benefits of problem‐solving demands for workers in lean production. This result suggests that management has

valuable options to improve the impact of lean production on employee well‐being.

The paper is structured as follows. We begin with a review of the relevant literature and develop our hypotheses

through the theoretical framework of the JD‐R model. The research context and methods are then reported. This

leads to a description of the analytical procedures and results, followed by our discussion and conclusions.

570 HUO AND BOXALL