Lean Production (LP) can be regarded as a design approach in search of a theoretical foundation. In this paper we show that Lowlands’ Sociotechnical Design Theory (STSL) could function as such a foundation. To reach this goal, we first describe STSL as a system theoretical reformulation of Original Sociotechnical Theory (OSTS). Then, we introduce the Toyota Production System as the origin of LP and the challenge it poses for the academic field of organization design. This academic field should (1) assess LP’s success, (2) generalize it by embedding it in more abstract concepts and theories in order to be able to (3) re-specify it for different manufacturing and non-manufacturing contexts. Next, we give an exposition of STSL as a structural design approach based on developments in system theory. At last, we reformulate lean production in STSL terms and so show that LP is a subcase within the more general theory of STSL. We discuss the merits of both approaches and clarify some misunderstandings of lean both outside and inside the lean community. Embedding LP in the more general language of STSL should enable us to discover similarities and differences, to start a process of mutual learning, to integrate diverse design approaches in a theory of organizational design and to add content to redesign proposals of for example the health care system as proposed by Porter and Teisberg (2006) and Christensen et al. (2009). We quote extensively from the lean literature (to convince our sociotechnical friends) and embed both STSL and LP in the broader literature on organization design. We hope this adds a new perspective to the one given in the Operations Management literature on LP. Again, mutual learning is the goal.
When it comes to hard to solve problems, the significance of situational knowledge construction and network coordination must not be underrated. Professional deliberation is directed toward understanding, acting and analysis. We need smart and flexible ways to direct systems information from practice to network reflection, and to guide results from network consultation to practice. This article presents a case study proposal, as follow-up to a recent dissertation about online simulation gaming for youth care network exchange (Van Haaster, 2014).
In many fields within management and organizational literature there is considerable debate and controversy about key theoretical concepts and their definitions and meanings. Systematic metaphor analysis can be a useful approach to study the underlying conceptualizations that give rise to these controversies and putting them in perspective. It can help identify the different ways a theoretical concept is structured and given meaning, provide insight into the way these different conceptualizations relate to each other, and show how these conceptualizations impact further theorization about the concept. This article describes the procedure for a systematic analysis of the metaphors used to conceptualize key theoretical concepts. To examine its usefulness, the authors apply the approach to the field of social capital, and in particular to the concept of ‘relationships’ in organizations. In the metaphor analysis of three seminal articles on social capital, the authors identify seven metaphoric concepts for relationships. The metaphors are illuminated as important for providing imagery that adds specific meaning in the process of authors theorizing about social capital like ‘tie’, ‘path’ and ‘bridge’. They add dynamics and controllability to the concepts by attributing an array of verbs like ‘to move between’ or ‘to use’ relationships. In addition, the metaphors allow for the attribution of specific characteristics to the concept of relationships that can be used as variables in theory construction, such as the strength of a relationship or the ‘distance’ between people. These insights are useful in exploring and reconciling differences in social capital definitions.
