Lean production is commonly associated with a small number of hierarchical layers – the lean organization is supposedly a flat one. The belief that ‘flatter is better’ appears to have become a truism in many academic and managerial circles. However, several empirical studies point to a completely different conclusion – namely that the prototypical supervisory hierarchy under lean production is characterized by narrow spans of control. This article reviews the empirical literature on the lean supervisors, and based on that, offers a functional analysis of the prototypical supervisory hierarchy. Findings suggest that narrow control spans support core practices of lean production, such as just-in-time, multi-skilling and, particularly, continuous improvement. Managers who implement lean production are discouraged from simultaneously pursuing de-layering of the supervisory hierarchy. Alternatively, they need to develop functional equivalents to fulfil ‘supervisory’ functions.
AchterberghJVriensD (2010) Organizations: Social Systems Conducting Experiments. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.
2.
AdlerPS (1993) The learning bureaucracy: New United Motors manufacturing. In: StawBMCummingsLL (eds.) Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 15. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 111–194.
3.
AdlerPSColeRE (1993) Designed for learning: a tale of two auto plants. Sloan Management Review34(3): 85–94.
4.
AdlerPSGoldoftasBLevineDI (1999) Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota Production System. Organization Science10(1): 43–68.
5.
AnandGWardPTTatikondaMV. (2009) Dynamic capabilities through continuous improvement infrastructure. Journal of Operations Management27(6): 444–461.
6.
AppelbaumEBattR (1993) High Performance Work Systems: American Models of Workplace Transformation. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
7.
BadhamRJürgensU (1998) Images of good work and the politics of teamwork. Economic and Industrial Democracy19(1): 33–58.
8.
BellGD (1967) Determinants of span of control. American Journal of Sociology73(1): 100–109.
9.
BendersJ (1996) Leaving lean? Recent changes in the production organization of some Japanese car plants. Economic and Industrial Democracy17(1): 9–38.
10.
BendersJMoritaM (2004) Changes in Toyota Motors’ operations management. International Journal of Production Research42(3): 433–444.
BendersJVan BijsterveldM (2000) Leaning on lean: the reception of a management fashion in Germany. New Technology, Work and Employment15(1): 50–64.
13.
BendersJVan HootegemG (1999) Teams and their context: moving the team discussion beyond existing dichotomies. Journal of Management Studies36(5): 609–628.
14.
BendersJVan VeenK (2001) What’s in a fashion? Interpretative viability and management fashions. Organization8(1): 33–53.
15.
BerggrenC (1993) Lean production – the end of history?Work, Employment & Society7(2): 163–188.
16.
BundersonJSBoumgardenP (2010) Structure and learning in self-managed teams: Why ‘bureaucratic’ teams can be better learners. Organization Science21(3): 609–624.
17.
BurawoyM (1979) Manufacturing Consent: Changes in the Labor Process Under Monopoly Capitalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
18.
CappelliPRogovskyN (1994) New work systems and skill requirements. International Labour Review133(2): 205–220.
19.
ColeRE (1971) Japanese Blue Collar: The Changing Tradition. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
20.
CummingsTG (1978) Self-regulating work groups: A socio-technical synthesis. The Academy of Management Review3(3): 625–634.
21.
Cutcher-GershenfeldJNittaMBarrettB. (1994) Japanese team-based work systems in North America: explaining the diversity. California Management Review37(1): 42–64.
22.
DaftRLMurphyJWillmottH (2010) Organization Theory and Design. Andover: South-Western Cengage Learning.
23.
De SitterLHertogJDankbaarB (1997) From complex organizations with simple jobs to simple organizations with complex jobs. Human Relations50(5): 497–534.
24.
De TrevilleSAntonakisJ (2006) Could lean production job design be intrinsically motivating? Contextual, configurational, and levels-of-analysis issues. Journal of Operations Management24(2): 99–123.
25.
DelbridgeRLoweJOliverN (2000) Shopfloor responsibilities under lean teamworking. Human Relations53(11): 1459–1479.
26.
DoreR (1973) British Factory – Japanese Factory: The Origins of National Diversity in Industrial Relations. London: Allen & Unwin.
27.
DurandJPStewardPCastilloJJ (eds) (1999) Teamwork in the Automobile Industry: Radical Change or Passing Fashion?London: Macmillan Business Press.
28.
EdmondsonA (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly44(2): 350–383.
29.
EndoK (1998) ‘Japanization’ of a performance appraisal system: a historical comparison of the American and Japanese systems. Social Science Japan Journal1(2): 247–262.
30.
EvansWRDavisWD (2005) High-performance work systems and organizational performance: the mediating role of internal social structure. Journal of Management31(5): 758–775.
31.
ForzaC (1996) Work organization in lean production and traditional plants: What are the differences?International Journal of Operations & Production Management16(2): 42–62.
32.
FujimotoT (1999) The Evolution of a Manufacturing System at Toyota. New York: Oxford University Press.
33.
GittellJH (2000) Organizing work to support relational co-ordination. The International Journal of Human Resource Management11(3): 517–539.
34.
GittellJH (2001) Supervisory span, relational coordination, and flight departure performance: a reassessment of postbureaucracy theory. Organization Science12(4): 468–483.
35.
GittellJHSeidnerRWimbushJ (2009) A relational model of how high-performance work systems work. Organization Science21(2): 490–506.
36.
GodardJ (2004) A critical assessment of the high-performance paradigm. British Journal of Industrial Relations42(2): 349–378.
37.
GouldnerAW (1954) Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. New York: Free Press.
38.
HackmanJROldhamGR (1980) Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
39.
HassardJMorrisJMcCannL (2011) ‘My brilliant career’? New organizational forms and changing managerial careers in Japan, the UK, and USA. Journal of Management Studies49(3): 571–599.
40.
HerbstPG (1976) Alternatives to Hierarchies. Leiden, the Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
41.
HinesPHolwegMRichN (2004) Learning to evolve: a review of contemporary lean thinking. International Journal of Operations & Production Management24(9–10): 994–1011.
42.
HolwegM (2007) The genealogy of lean production. Journal of Operations Management25(2): 420–437.
43.
InamizuNFukuzawaMFujimotoT. (2014) Group leaders and teamwork in the over-lean production system. Journal of Organizational Change Management27(2): 188–205.
44.
IngvaldsenJARolfsenM (2012) Autonomous work groups and the challenge of inter-group coordination. Human Relations65(7): 861–881.
45.
KarlssonCÅhlströmP (1996) Assessing changes towards lean production. International Journal of Operations & Production Management16(2): 24–41.
46.
KrafcikJF (1988) Triumph of the lean production system. MIT Sloan Management Review30(1): 41–52.
LikerJK (2004) The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles From the World’s Greatest Manufacturer. New York: McGraw-Hill.
49.
LikerJKConvisGL (2012) The Toyota Way to Lean Leadership. New York: McGraw-Hill.
50.
LoweJ (1993) Manufacturing reform and the changing role of the production supervisor: the case of the automobile industry. Journal of Management Studies30(5): 739–758.
51.
LoweJDelbridgeROliverN (1997) High-performance manufacturing: evidence from the automotive components industry. Organization Studies18(5): 783–798.
52.
LoweJMorrisJWilkinsonB (2000) British factory, Japanese factory and Mexican factory: An international comparison of front-line management and supervision. Journal of Management Studies37(4): 541–562.
53.
MacDuffieJP (1995) Human resource bundles and manufacturing performance: Organizational logic and flexible production systems in the world auto industry. Industrial and Labor Relations Review48(2): 197–221.
54.
MacDuffieJP (1997) The road to ‘root cause’: Shop-floor problem-solving at three auto assembly plants. Management Science43(4): 479–502.
55.
ManzCCSimsHPJr (1980) Self-Management as a substitute for leadership: A social learning theory perspective. The Academy of Management Review5(3): 361–367.
56.
ManzCCSimsHPJr (1987) Leading workers to lead themselves: the external leadership of self-managing work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly32(1): 106–129.
57.
MarsdenD (1999) A Theory of Employment Systems: Micro-Foundations of Societal Diversity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
58.
MeyerMW (1968) Expertness and the span of control. American Sociological Review33(6): 944–951.
59.
MorrisJHassardJMcCannL (2006) New organizational forms, human resource management and structural convergence? A study of Japanese organizations. Organization Studies27(10): 1485–1511.
60.
NelsonRRWinterSG (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
61.
NomuraMJürgensU (1995) Binnenstrukturen des japanischen Produktivitätserfolges: Arbeitsbeziehungen und Leistungsregulierung in zwei japanischen Automobilunternehmen. Berlin: Sigma.
62.
NonakaI (1994) A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science5(1): 14–37.
63.
OhnoT (1988) Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. New York: Productivity Press.
64.
OlivellaJCuatrecasasLGavilanN (2008) Work organisation practices for lean production. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management19(7): 798–811.
65.
OrtmannG (1995) Formen der Produktion: Organisation und Rekursivität. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
66.
PardiT (2007) Redefining the Toyota Production System: the European side of the story. New Technology, Work and Employment22(1): 2–20.
PilFKFujimotoT (2007) Lean and reflective production: The dynamic nature of production models. International Journal of Production Research45(16): 3741–3761.
69.
ProcterSRadnorZ (2014) Teamworking under lean in UK public services: Lean teams and team targets in Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs (HMRC). The International Journal of Human Resource Management25(21): 2978–2995.
70.
PruijtH (2003) Teams between neo-Taylorism and anti-Taylorism. Economic and Industrial Democracy24(1): 77–101.
71.
SeyA (2000) Team work in Japan: Revolution, evolution or no change at all?Economic and Industrial Democracy21(4): 475–503.
72.
ShahRWardPT (2003) Lean manufacturing: Context, practice bundles, and performance. Journal of Operations Management21(2): 129–149.
73.
ShahRWardPT (2007) Defining and developing measures of lean production. Journal of Operations Management25(4): 785–805.
74.
SimonHA (1946) The proverbs of administration. Public Administration Review6(1): 53–67.
75.
SloanTFitzgeraldAHayesKJ. (2014) Lean in healthcare – history and recent developments. Journal of Health Organization and Management28(2): 127–134.
76.
SpearS (2004) Learning to lead at Toyota. Harvard Business Review82(5): 78–86.
77.
SpearSBowenHK (1999) Decoding the DNA of the Toyota Production System. Harvard Business Review77(9/10): 97–106.
78.
Suárez-BarrazaMFSmithTDahlgaard-ParkSM (2012) Lean service: a literature analysis and classification. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence23(3–4): 359–380.
79.
TaylorFW (1967) The principles of scientific management. New York: Norton.
80.
ThirkellEAshmanI (2014) Lean towards learning: Connecting lean thinking and human resource management in UK higher education. The International Journal of Human Resource Management25(21): 2957–2977.
81.
ThompsonPWallaceT (1996) Redesigning production through teamworking: Case studies from the Volvo Truck Corporation. International Journal of Operations & Production Management16(2): 103–118.
82.
TomerJF (2001) Understanding high-performance work systems: The joint contribution of economics and human resource management. The Journal of Socio-Economics30(1): 63–73.
83.
TristE (1981) The evolution of socio-technical systems: A conceptual framework and action research program. Occasional Paper no. 2. Ontario: Ontario Quality of Working Life Centre.
84.
UrwickLF (1956) The manager’s span of control. Harvard Business Review34(5–6): 39–47.
85.
VidalM (2011) Reworking postfordism: Labor process versus employment relations. Sociology Compass5(4): 273–286.
86.
WiltonN (2011) An Introduction to Human Resource Management. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
87.
WinfieldI (1994) Toyota UK Ltd: Model HRM practices?Employee Relations16(1): 41–53.
88.
WomackJPJonesDT (1996) Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation. New York: Simon & Schuster.
89.
WomackJPJonesDTRoosD (1990) The Machine That Changed the World. New York: Simon & Schuster.
90.
YoungSM (1992) A framework for successful adoption and performance of Japanese manufacturing practices in the United States. The Academy of Management Review17(4): 677–700.
