Purpose: Lean remains popular in a wide range of private and public sectors and continues to attract a significant amount of research. However, most of this research is not grounded in theory. This paper presents and discusses different expert viewpoints on the role of theory in lean research and practice and provides guidelines for future research.Design/methodology/approach: Seven experienced lean authors independently provide their views to the question “is Lean a theory?” before Rachna Shah summarizes the viewpoints and provides a holistic outlook for lean research.Findings: Authors agree, disagree and sometimes agree to disagree. However, a close look reveals agreement on several key points. The paper concludes that Lean is not a theory but has plenty of theoretical underpinnings. Many lean-related theories provide promising opportunities for future research.Originality/value: As researchers, we are asked to justify our research drawing on “theory,” but what does that mean for a practice-driven phenomenon such as lean? This paper provides answers and directions for future research.

This paper employs a real-time, open-question qualitative survey method to investigate the past, present, and future of the Lean Industry 4.0 field. A major trend is found in researchers moving from technological backgrounds such as engineering, or other STEM subjects, into more socio-technical departments and developing interests in wider areas such as people, supply chain, and sustainability. A holistic perspective of the field is presented including a call to commonise the researcher-favored term “Lean Industry 4.0.” An inclusive and detailed definition of Lean Industry 4.0 takes into account the different survey responses. A wide range of future research gaps is identified within the context of a first-of-its-type future research framework.

Lean methodologies have been implemented in various sectors, helping to improve the overall efficiency and performance of organisations. The aim of this research is to investigate the relationship between Lean and occupational safety and its impact on people’s behaviour. To this end, a survey was developed and a statistical study carried out. The survey was sent to 4381 companies, from which 289 responses were received from 12 different countries. The Cronbach’s alpha value obtained was greater than 0.86, which indicates that the internal reliability/consistency of the results is very good. Through the statistical study it was possible to conclude that the approaches with the greatest contribution to cultural change in terms of occupational safety are 5S, Standard Work and TPM. It was also concluded that the implementation of Lean practices has a positive impact on people’s behaviour, and that these results differ depending on whether the company is located in Portugal or not. Furthermore, Lean proved to have a very positive impact on performance indicators, especially in companies located in Portugal, regardless of the sector of activity. The results also show that the contribution of Lean management to occupational safety system is very important in different sectors and is influenced by the sector of activity and by the company’s location, and that the impact of the occupational safety system on people’s behaviour was considered very important, with little influence from the company’s location and no influence from the sector of activity. This comprehensive research provides a body of knowledge that is expected to provide positive insights for Lean practitioners, managers and academics.

In this paper, we investigate the relationship between organizational culture (OC) profiles and the adoption of Industry 4.0 (I4.0) design principles. We surveyed 153 middle and senior managers from Brazil and India, whose manufacturing companies have been implementing I4.0. Participants provided answers regarding the perceived OC characteristics that prevail in their companies, which were assessed based on the Competing Values Framework. We also collected data on the adoption levels of I4.0 design principles, whose analysis was conducted through the utilization of multivariate data analysis techniques. Our results indicated that, depending on the I4.0 design principle, OC profiles (Clan, Adhocracy, Market and Hierarchy) may either corroborate or impair its adoption, allowing the verification of the hypothesized relationships. The understanding of the association between OC profiles and I4.0 design principles provides practitioners with arguments to identify possible problems during their digital transformation. As changes in OC require significant efforts and are usually time-consuming, companies that can anticipate those issues might face a smoother transition towards the Fourth Industrial Revolution, hence, obtaining competitive advantages.