Total Quality Management, 2014

Vol. 25, No. 9, 1002 1025, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2012.746194

The Kaizen approach within process innovation: findings from a

multiple case study in Ibero-American countries
Manuel F. Suarez-Barrazaa and Tricia Smithb
a
Tecnologico de Monterrey, EGADE Business School, Mexico; bESADE Ramon Llull
University, Spain

Processes and process innovation remains important in the management of todays

organisations. In management and academic circles in Europe, Asia and the USA,
the subject of processes and their innovation continue to be the basis of discussions
regarding organisations operations. The relevance of process innovation has gained
weight as a result of various well-publicised failures by some major firms to operate
new processes, leading to clients receiving low-quality goods and services.
However, regarding the Iberian countries, academic references are few and far
between regarding process innovation and Kaizen. Thus, it seems that previous
studies represented in the literature show Kaizen from the angle of implementation
of process innovation methods, and so the aim of this paper is to understand how
these methods of process innovation are applied in the context of Kaizen in
organisations operating in Ibero-American countries. This research has reported the
results of a multiple case study, showing and providing empirical evidence grounded
in the application of process innovation and the impact this has on the management
of the organisation. In our study, we found that the application of process innovation
basically can begin to help Ibero-American companies to understand (wake-up or
become aware of) the deeper meaning of the term process (theme of
understanding); also, to begin to inspire (theme of synchronisation) the sense
of managing from the point of view of process innovation and the philosophy of
Kaizen in continuous improvement.
Keywords: process innovation; Kaizen; multiple case study; Ibero-American countries

1. Introduction
The concept of processes and their innovation and redesign continues to be as relevant as
ever within academic and practitioner circles. In a recent book by Page (2010), it is said
that the power of business process improvement (BPI) is such that had Vince Lombardi
(legendary coach of the American football team the Green Packers) been running a
business rather than coaching a football team, his famous saying winning isnt everything,
its the only thing would have been modified to read process isnt everything, its the
only thing. As an illustration of this new focus, a recent search of Amazons e-library
showed that of the first 12 books that headed the search list for the term process improvement, 9 had been published between 2005 and 2012. In the same vein, in the academic
conferences in this field, such as the International Conference of Quality and Service
Science, at least two tracks per year have been opened, with no less than
12 papers from different parts of the world, which are devoted to the study of this
sub-field of total quality management and continuous improvement. In a recent study,

Corresponding author. Email: manuelfrancisco.suarez@itesm.mx

# 2012 Taylor & Francis

Total Quality Management 1003

Dahlgaard-Park, Chi-Kuan, Yiu-Jin, and Dahlgaard (2012, p. 471) found that articles concerning continuous improvement were fewer than might be expected from such a trendy
topic and it is noteworthy that there is less research on the subject than 10 years ago.
However, there is still strong interest in the subject as the 21 articles in 2010 and 23 articles
in 2011 testify.
Similarly, the relationship between Kaizen and process innovation has been studied in
detail since the earliest books by Imai (1986, 1997a). Other authors have studied this
specific relationship (Childe, Maull, & Bennet, 1994; Harrington, 1995; MacDonald,
1995; McKay & Radnor, 1998; Jackson & Sloane, 2003; Galgano, 2003). However, the
academic references of Iberian countries are few and far between regarding process innovation and Kaizen (Suarez-Barraza, Ramis-Pujol, & Estrada, 2012). Thus, it seems that
previous studies represented in the literature show Kaizen from the angle of implementation of process innovation methods, and so the aim of this paper is to understand how
these methods of process innovation are applied in the context of Kaizen in organisations
operating in Ibero-American countries. More specifically, we will try to answer the main
research question of this study which is: how does Kaizen present itself when process
innovation methodology is applied? This is answered through the study of three specific
sub-questions:
RQ1.1: Which specific characteristics of the application of process innovation can be
observed in the organizations studied in Iberoamerican countries?
RQ1.2: What are the differences in the application of these methods in countries described in
the literature (US, UK, Japan and China) and their application in Iberoamerica?
RQ1.3: What kind of impact does the application of the methods of process innovation have on
the work processes in the organisations of the study?

In order to answer the main research question and the sub-questions, the first step was
to conduct a literature review relating to Kaizen and process innovation. The second step
was to conduct a qualitative study using the strategy of a multiple case study in 12 organisations in four Ibero-American countries (Mexico, Peru, Ecuador and Spain). The structure of the paper is as follows: following this section, there is a literature review of Kaizen
and process innovation. Then there is a section which describes the methods of the study
and fourthly, a section setting out the results, including the qualitative empirical evidence.
Finally, Section 5 draws some conclusions arising from the study and managerial implications of the research.

2.

Literature review

2.1 Kaizen and process innovation

In an interview granted to the newspaper La Vanguardia of Barcelona, Masaaki Imai,
father of the term Kaizen, is quoted as saying en una empresa lo que no suma resta
(Imai, 2007). In English, this would read literally as: In a company, what does not contribute (add something) is not required (subtract something). This phrase sums up the
importance of eliminating any activity in the workplace that does not contribute to the
value of the work processes in an organisation and is what the Japanese term muda connotes, under the umbrella of Kaizen. For Imai (1997b), the mechanism of process innovation always has to be related directly to the context of Kaizen. Kaizen is understood
to signify an

1004 M.F. Suarez-Barraza and T. Smith

Kaizen means ongoing improvement involving everybody, without spending much money
(Imai, 1997b, p. 1) . . . Everybody in the company should be seeking a better way of doing
their job all the time by constantly eliminating muda (non value-adding activities) and streamlining the work processes. (Imai, 1997b, p. 2)

Focusing on the processes and not on the results during the cycle of plan, do, check, act
(PDCA) and the elimination of muda is one of the principle pillars of the application of the
Japanese Kaizen approach.
There is a profound difference between this approach and that of business process
re-engineering (BPR). Kaizen generates small, incremental and gradual improvements
in the workplace, while BPR drives changes that are urgent, dramatic and costly. Imai
(1997b) sums up this vision in the following way during an interview when he published
his second book:
Re-engineering normally refers to a drastic, dramatic process improvement in certain areas of
management utilizing computer technologies. However, re-engineering addresses only a
limited area o f problems in the company and brings about limited improvement, no matter
how dramatic. Reengineering probably will always have its place as an organisational
change process. But it is relevant in limited circumstances because, ultimately, it produces
short term and static results. Reengineering is like innovation: we expect innovation to
occur all the time, yet we know it doesnt happen. Its unrealistic to expect reengineering
to be applicable all the time. That would cause chaos. Kaizen is a more lasting improvement
process. (p. 1)

On another front, during the nineties, there was a development of the traditional ideas
behind total quality management (TQM) which turned towards the new technologies and
methods, with a combination of words and terms associated with process thinking that
inundated the global market with articles and books which became well-known in management circles (Grover, Kettinger, & Teng, 2000). Due to changes in the management field,
research studies focussed on developing process innovation and identifying its strategic
and operational importance (Elzinga, Horak, Lee, & Bruner, 1995; Hammer, 1996;
Zairi, 1997; Lee & Dale, 1998). The chief aim of these new authors was related to the
development of a perspective on the centralised, incremental improvements to solve
specific problems of processes at the limits of organisational frontiers Kaizen-type (continuous improvement) in order to reach a better integration of work processes that could
cross organisational limits and bring immediate, visible and solid benefits (Sirkin & Stalk,
1990; Majchrzak & Wang, 1996; De Toro & McCabe, 1997; Lee & Chuah, 2001).
These studies showed that process innovation was used as a way to improve and redesign business processes with the aim of impacting client satisfaction and generally upgrading the efficiency and effectiveness of the organisation (Harrington, 1991; Yingling,
1997). This was achieved through a review of current best practices so as to continuously
learn from them, which led to the radical redesign of obsolete processes or those that
brought low functional returns with the result that the processes in place gave far better
results (Harrington, 1995; Zairi & Sinclair, 1995). Different authors have used different
definitions depending on their focus or their own terminology. So, process innovation
may be the same as BPI, the term used by Harrington (1991, pp. 20 21), which he
defines as a systematic methodology developed to help significant advances in the way
its business processes operate. Other scholars writing at the same time on this subject
such as Davenport and Short (1990, p. 24) define it as the analysis and design of workflows and processes within and between organisations. A few years later, Davenport
(1993, p. 14) rechristened this methodology calling it BPI and defined it as a structured
design of a system whose aim is to establish suitable indicators to measure the

Total Quality Management 1005

performance of the process. The results of these measurements generate (specifically)
results or outputs that a customer or market previously requested. In the literature,
these authors are considered to be the first to contribute theoretical concepts underpinning
process innovation (Dumay, 1998, p.4).
The main benefits of applying process innovations reported in the literature are the
reduction of customer complaints regarding the products and services they receive; elimination of errors produced in the departments which affect the process; generating value at
every stage of the process to make them efficient and effective; increasing the productivity
of the workers in every process; eliminating whatever activity does not add value to the
process muda with the aim of reducing costs (Tenner & De Toro, 1997; Persse,
2006; Page, 2010).
Owing to on the different methodological foci currently found in the literature regarding process innovation, this study has chosen to follow the pioneering work of Harrington
(1991) and base the theoretical framework on the methodology and findings presented in
his book Business process improvement (pp. 21 22). Harringtons BPI methodology (see
Table 1) showed that very significant improvements could be made in business performance. Companies that implemented the Harrington methodology Boeing, IBM, Corning
Glass among others gained enormous improvements in productivity as a consequence.
Harringtons books have become best-sellers in four languages. Thus, we can now say that
Harringtons globally relevant methodology of BPI is now recognised as a framework by
both business and academia.
2.2

Process innovation in Ibero-American countries

A search of the academic literature for Ibero-America regarding process innovation

reveals that there are few papers, and those that exist are based on practical cases with
little academic content relating to process innovation. Only a few articles have an academic dimension which specifically refer to the subject (Andreu, Ricart, & Valor, 1996;
Araujo, Churruca, & Landeta, 1998; Salgueiro, 1999; Albizu, Olazaran, & Simon,
2004; Simon, Olazaran, Igeregi, & Sierra, 2004; Suarez-Barraza & Ramis Pujol, 2010;
Suarez-Barraza, 2010). The first to mention is by Salgueiro (1999) of the Spanish Association of Standards and Certification (AENC), which sets out a methodology to document
processes so as to create manuals of standards for them. A large part of the work of AENC
is based on studies by Galloway (1994) for the mapping and documentation of processes.
However, this methodology has a weak focus on innovation and redesign. Andreu et al.
(1996) in their paper show how applying process innovation requires a process of total
quality which supports the efforts of information technology, which together with organisational change are considered as crucial catalysts for process innovation.
For Albizu et al. (2004), process innovation projects are all about organisational
change, whether that means changing the structure of the organisation or the way work
is defined and managed. They consider that process innovation is a less-radical approach
to organisational change than that proposed by the orthodox process re-engineering model
(Hammer & Champy, 1993). This is because process innovation can co-exist with other
incremental innovation methodologies like Kaizen and process redesigns (Childe et al.,
1994). Studies in Ibero-America and Spain, such as work by Climent, Mula, and Hernandez (2009), describe the mapping of work processes in a banking institution which led to
proposals for improvements. The mapping process enabled the bank to recognise where
innovations and improvements could be implemented at different levels and for various
operations in the bank.

1006 M.F. Suarez-Barraza and T. Smith

Table 1.

Methodology of Harringtons business process improvement.

Phase

Objective

Phase 1: Organising for

innovation

To ensure success by building

leadership, understanding and
commitment

Phase 2: Understanding
the process

To understand all the dimensions of

the current business process

Phase 3: Streamlining

To improve the efficiency,

effectiveness and adaptability of
business process

Phase 4: Measurements
and control

To implement a system to control the

process for ongoing improvement

Phase 5: Continuous
improvement/
innovation

To implement a continuous
improvement process

Source: Adapted from Harrington (1991, pp. 2122).

Notes: EIT, executive improvement team; PIT, process improvement team.

Activities
1.
2.
3.
4.

Establish an EIT
Appoint a BPI champion
Provide executive training
Develop an improvement
plan
5. Communicate goals to
employees
6. Select critical processes
7. Appoint process owners
8. Select PIT members
1. Provide team (PIT) training
2. Develop a process overview
(system diagram)
3. Define process scope and
purpose (mission)
4. Define process boundaries
5. Perform process
walkthroughs (current
situation)
6. Flow diagram process
7. Collect activities, cycle time
and cost
8. Create value process
analysis
1. Identify improvement
opportunities
Errors and reworks
Poor quality
Long time delays
Backlog and high cost
2. Eliminate bureaucracy
3. Eliminate no-value added
activities
4. Simplify the process
5. Reduce process cycle time
6. Automatise (optional)
1. Develop in-process
measurements and targets
2. Establish a feedback system
3. Establish a new flow chart
4. Standardise
5. Audit and check the process
periodically
6. Train the employees in the
new process
1. Qualify the new process
2. Define and eliminate new
problems in the process
3. Evaluate the change impact
on the customer satisfaction
4. Benchmark the process
5. Provide advanced team
training (Six Sigma)

Total Quality Management 1007

Finally and in a similar vein, Suarez-Barraza (2010) offers a global vision of the practice
of process innovation by describing two case studies in Latin America. The mapping and
subsequent innovation of processes occurred in a manufacturing company (a chocolate
factory) and a service company (a restaurant) where the methodology was applied in detail.
A review of the literature shows that the majorities of the empirical studies published
were exploratory, in the early phase of the concept of process innovation, or were
indirectly linked to it as the predominating notions were more associated with TQM
and ISO 9000. Other studies showed more recent work which begins to involve process
innovation being taken up in this part of the world, as shown in Table 2. However,
there is a clear gap in the literature, which has prompted the authors of this study to undertake their empirical work.
3.

Research design

With the aim of exploring the application of process innovation in the context of Kaizen in
Ibero-American countries, this research uses the case study methodology (Eisenhardt,
1989; Yin, 1994; Handfield & Melnyk, 1998; Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). As Eisenhardt (1989, p. 548) argues, the use of case studies as a research method is useful when
there is little knowledge of the phenomenon to be investigated. The case study method
is very useful when the research seeks to answer how and why type questions (Yin,
1994). It has also been suggested that this methodology is quite appropriate for application
to the field of operations management (Voss, Sikriktsis, & Frohlic, 2002).
3.1 Unit of analysis and case selection
The unit of analysis of this study was the processes in the organisations, specifically the
application of the particular methodology of process innovation enacted in each of the different businesses which we studied. Therefore, the unit of analysis is based on a holistic operational perspective which examines all details of the application of the methodologies of
process innovation in each firm. In a multiple case study research design, the choice of
cases to study is of utmost importance for the value of the research (Yin, 1994; Dubois &
Araujo, 2007), and the selection of cases has to be based on and guided by theoretical conceptual frameworks so that the research question goes beyond a simple statistical demonstration of facts but develops a theoretically based sampling approach (Ritchie & Lewis,
2003). Pettigrew (1997) states that the importance of the selection in this type of sampling
lies not so much in the number of cases as in the in-depth study of each of them (Pettigrew,
1997, p. 342). Therefore, the selection of multiple cases leads us to create robust theories, as
the emerging propositions are more closely related to the great variety of empirical evidence
that is compiled (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007).
In our study, our principal selection criterion was the application of process innovation
in a context of Kaizen in the work processes of the organisations in the study. For this
reason, we selected cases which were the final projects of graduating MBA students in
the course of operations strategy focusing on Lean-Kaizen and process innovation, at
the EGADE Business School of the Monterrey Institute of Technology for the Mexican
cases and for studies from Peru and Ecuador as these form part of the geographical
reach of this institution. For cases set in Spain, we selected cases presented by Masters
in Operations Management students as their final projects, at the ESADE Business
School of the University of Ramon Llull in Barcelona, Spain. The collection of the
final projects was done every semester in the case of EGADE, and annually in ESADE,

1008 M.F. Suarez-Barraza and T. Smith

Table 2.

Prior empirical studies on process innovation in Ibero-American.

Authors
Andreu et al.
(1996)
Salgueiro (1999)
Llopis and Tar
(2003)
lvarez,
Domingo, A
Meloda, and
Calvo (2007)

Climent et al.
(2009)

Carrillo and Zarate

(2009)
Suarez-Barraza and
Ramis-Pujol
(2010)

Suarez-Barraza
et al. (2012)

Purpose of research

Key findings

Describe the main characteristics of

the application of process
innovation in Spain

In order to apply process innovation, a

firm needs to have a process to
administer total quality supported
by upgrades in IT
Describes the methods to map
Shows a methodology to improve
processes for setting Spanish
processes and productivity in
Standards
Spanish companies
Some quality systems are closely
83% of Spanish firms believe that
linked to process innovation and
applying process innovation
can increase the productivity of
through ISO 9000 can help improve
Spanish firms
the quality of products and systems
This paper seeks to analyse the
The proposed logistics allows an
internal materials flow in lean
improvement of lean metrics,
manufacturing in an assembly line
without modifying the layout and
of the Bosch factory located in
production planning. The routing
Spain. The objective is to develop
flexibility of the milk-run reduced
a handling system in a small
stocks, work-in-process and dockspace, capable of solving the
to-dock time, while increasing lean
problems of accumulated
rate
intermediate stocks of parts
Describe and analyse the business
Detects the descriptive and graphical
process of a bank by considering a
view of the main critical business
graphical and descriptive view in
processes of a bank. Allows
order to find critical processes and
proposals to correct and make
improve them
effective improvements and
considers different views and
degrees of detail
Shows the best practices applied in Regarding process innovation, 87% of
assembly plants in Mexico
the electronics firms and 93.3% of
the automobile assembly plants
applied them
Present a successful example of how The Lean-Kaizen approach helps this
Lean-Kaizen through process
public service organisation to
innovation is implemented in the
improve cycle times in the human
human service resource process of
resource selection and hiring
a Mexican public service
process. Various enablers and
organisation
inhibitors are also identified during
implementation
Application of gemba-Kaizen in a
As a result of process innovation,
chocolate factory located in
applied process activities were
Mexico through process
slashed from 142 to 71 (50% of the
innovation
activities thus represented waste).
The cycle time was cut from an
average of 12 days before the
improvements to 7.07 days 41%
faster

Source: By authors.

during the three years during which these courses were delivered (2008 2011). This
allowed us to evaluate the application of process innovation in different countries and
contexts, and to see how Kaizen was presented through the implementation of process
innovation methodology in the firms studied in Ibero-American countries.

Total Quality Management 1009

At the outset of the research, we collected 58 projects all together and then we applied
a filtering process to check which of them fully complied with our specific requirements
that the literature called process innovation and redesign, following Harrington. We
rejected a total of 32 projects; this was not because the projects did not describe applications of process innovation but because, after applying a careful analysis using Harringtons framework (shown in Table 1), not all of them fulfilled all the minimum
specifications of Harringtons definition of the process innovation methodology. After filtering the projects, we identified a total of 26 work-process studies that were innovative in
26 different organisations. The distribution by country, the organisation where the innovation took place, the work process that was innovative. the number of interviews and
the main informants are listed in Table 3.
3.2 Data collection protocol
Qualitative and quantitative data were collected. Qualitative data were collected through
semi-structured, in-depth interviews with the people in charge of the implementation of
the methodology of process innovation, as well as with workers who had detailed knowledge
of the application (see Table 3 for details). A guide to the semi-structured interview was used.
Even so, the interview was conducted in each case with sufficient flexibility to allow emergent themes to surface. Each interview was tape-recorded and transcribed no later than the
following day. Each interview lasted an average of 40 min. The final interview transcript
was sent by e mail to the informants for their review. In addition, at the end of the review,
close contact was retained with the informants by phone and e mail in case of doubts or
new ideas. Finally, a detailed research journal was kept in which themes, ideas and reflections
were noted as they emerged, both during the company site visits and during the interviews.
Similarly, quantitative data was collected before and in parallel with the interviewing.
The aim of collecting quantitative data was the triangulation of data and themes which
emerged from the in-depth interviews. Specifically data were taken from the final projects
in which details of the application of the methodology of process innovation were reported
for every step. For example, the number of activities which the process diagram included
and the time required for each cycle. Also, the informants for each process that was studied
were asked what happened in the process before the application of improvement, using a
flow diagram as the instrument, comparing it with what happened after the implementation
of the methodology to observe and note what impact the innovation or redesign had on the
operation in the context of Kaizen. This included the following specific characteristics:
. Identify the participants in the process in question (Sinclair & Zairi, 1995).
. Clarify the boundaries of the process, where it began and ended (Harrington, 1991;
Zairi, 1997).
. Determine the theoretical cycle time (the timing of the process which discounts
waste and down-time) and the duration of the real-time process (process cycle
time that includes all activities including waste) (Harrington, 1995).
. If the process had been innovated or improved on an earlier occasion, specify the
methodology applied (Harrington & Harrington, 1997).
. Determine the impact on the efficiency of the operation, the effectiveness and the
adaptability of the process under investigation (Harrington, 1991).
3.3

Data analysis procedures and definition of study constructs

As recommended by Pettigrew (1997), the process of data analysis is an iterative one.

That is, there is a process of going back and forth to the patterns or themes that

1010 M.F. Suarez-Barraza and T. Smith

Table 3.

Case selected and interviews.

No.

Organisation

Country
location

Innovated processes

Number of
interviews

Key informant
interviews
Production
systems manager
Head of
production line
Production line
workers (6)
Warehouse
manager
Warehousemen
(2)
Managing
director
Manager in
charge of LeanKaizen
Assembly line
workers (5)
Manager of the
distribution
centre
Warehouse
manager
Managing
director
Distribution
manager
Workers on the
process line
Medical director
One nurse
Managing
director
Policies manager
Factory manager
Line supervisor
Workers on the
line (2)
Factory manager
Line supervisor
Workers on the
line (2)
Distribution
director
Warehouse
manager
Worker in the
process
Head of alumni
relations
Operations
analyst

German
multinational
maker of auto
components

Mexico

Alternator
production line

Textile and thread

company

Mexico

Management of the
dyes and chemical
warehouse

Swiss multinational
maker of auto
components

Mexico

Production line for

the mufflers that
protect engine
parts

Chain of self-service Mexico

stores

Process of supply
management for
the stores

Firm of direct selling

using housewives

Mexico

Process of product
distribution

Public health
institution
Insurance company

Mexico

Process of external
consultants
Process of issuing
policies

American
multinational
maker of cleaning
products
Multinational maker
of foods
(confectionary)

Mexico

Process of making
industrial scents

Mexico

Process of making
chocolate bars

10

Firm of food
distribution

Mexico

Process of product
range selection in
the warehouse

11

University, on one of Mexico

its campuses

Process of granting
scholarships

7
8

Mexico

(Continued)

Total Quality Management 1011

Table 3. Continued.
No.

Organisation

Country
location

Number of
interviews

12

Private sector
aeronautical firm

13

Multinational firm of Peru

supplies and
technology

14

Technology
company
(software)

Peru

15

Firm that sells

cosmetics

Peru

16

International airline
operating in this
country

Peru

Process of baggage
transport

17

Canadian bank with

operations in this
country
Agro-industry

Peru

Process of managing
personal loans

Peru

19

Multinational
mobile phone
company

Peru

Process of managing
the purchasing for
production
centres
Managing sales of
mobile phones

20

Distribution
company for
pharmaceuticals

Ecuador

Managing the call

centre

21

Managing the
catering for social
events

Ecuador

Managing the
catering
operations

22

State-owned petrol
company

Ecuador

Managing
acquisitions

23

Poultry farm

Ecuador

Process of raising
the chicks

18

Mexico

Innovated processes

Process of aircraft
maintenance

Process of
requesting and
supplying product
samples for
clients
Process of managing
the operative steps
for software
maintenance
Process of complaint
management

Key informant
interviews
Promotions
analyst
Chief engineer
Head of
maintenance
crew
Service engineer
Commercial
manager
Warehouse
manager
Salesman
Maintenance
manager
Maintenance
analyst
Customer care
manager
Analyst
Transport
manager
Front-desk
employee
Transport
operative
Credit and loans
manager
Bank analyst
Purchasing
manager
Analyst
Sales account
manager
Pre-sales
engineer
Owner of the
company
Head of the call
centre
Owner of the
company
Administration
manager
Acquisitions
manager
Engineer
Engineer in
charge of
supplier relations
Farm owner
Farm manager
(Continued)

1012 M.F. Suarez-Barraza and T. Smith

Table 3. Continued.
No.

Organisation

Country
location

24

Private hospital

Spain

25

Subsidiary of a
German auto parts
firm

Spain

26

Firm making
switches

Spain

Innovated processes
Process of
emergency
admissions
Process of managing
suppliers

Process of
assembling
electric switches

Number of
interviews

Key informant
interviews

A. and E. medical
director
Medical intern
Purchasing
manager
Engineer in
charge of
supplier relations
Manufacturing
manager
Head of the
switch assembly
line

78

emerge from the data during the cross-case analyses (Eisenhardt, 1989). Firstly, a triangulation is made with the qualitative data (interviews and documents) with respect
to the quantitative data extracted from the flow diagrams. This step was carried out
for each of the 26 cases under investigation. During this first stage, various summaries
were prepared and a database was set up that synthesised all the empirical data. Secondly, a cross-case analysis was undertaken which followed the cross-pattern analysis
method of Eisenhardt (1989, pp. 540 555) and that of Miles and Huberman (1994,
pp. 204 215). The analysis in this research centres on the classification of the qualitative
and quantitative materials, the themes that were uncovered and their cross-comparison
within and across the cases; the database allows us to record the themes and their distribution, clarify the first themes and refine them further during the analysis. From this
analysis, the first patterns or themes emerged which also included a constant refining
against the measures of the theoretical framework adopted from Harrington (1991) set
out in Table 1. Finally, the patterns and themes that emerged were compared iteratively
over several rounds among the group of researchers, that is, by an expert on the theme
from each country. The construct development was supported by the software visio using
the transcriptions of the 78 interviews from the field work, strictly following the protocol
as designed.

4.

Findings of the cross-case analysis

All the projects which overtly intended to innovate processes in the 26 cases we studied
from four countries were successful in the initial application of the methodology. In
each, at the time of the study, the methodology of process innovation was considered to
be a formal way to redesign processes within each organisation.
The main results, in terms of the characteristics of the application as well as the impact
on the processes of the 26 cases in the study, are presented in Table 4 (characteristics) and
Table 5 (impacts) which follow the theoretical guide of the sub-research questions RQ1.1
and RQ1.2. In particular, Table 4 of the results regarding the characteristics of the application was compared iteratively with the proposed framework of Harringtons (1991)
methodology in Table 1. Similarly, the cross-case analysis allowed us to identify basic

Total Quality Management 1013

or elemental patterns which were present when the innovation process methodology was
applied in the context of Kaizen in the organisations we studied. These themes were:
(1) the level of comprehension of the processes (awakenings) and
(2) the level of synchronisation between the context of Kaizen and the innovation
process.
Therefore, based on our study, we propose three inter-related themes which can
generate an impact on the processes and organisations studied. Also, we identified a
series of contextual elements which could act as inhibitors at the time the application of
the innovation process took place. Figure 1 shows our theoretical contribution. In
the next sections, each of the three themes is discussed, explaining and identifying their
contextual elements.

4.1

Level of understanding of the processes (awakening)

The first theme identified during the application of process innovation was what we termed
the level of understanding of the processes. This first theme helped us to respond to the
sub-question of the research 1.1: what were the specific characteristics of the application
of process innovation which were seen in the organisations we studied in Iberoamerican
countries? This first theme, following the evidence of the empirical evidence we
found, constitutes a wake-up call, or awakening, for the workers of the firms in the
study towards an understanding of Kaizen as a continuous improvement in their work
all day, every day, in their work places. Similarly, it shows in the same way the awakening of the employees of the organisations in the study towards the concept of process
innovation as being more horizontal and ongoing, leaving behind the mindset of a vertical
organisational structure based on a hierarchy of departmental functions (Talwar, 1993;
Majchrzak & Wang, 1996; De Toro & McCabe, 1997; Ostroff, 1999; Suarez-Barraza,

Figure 1. Framework with the proposed themes of process innovation in the context of Kaizen.
Source: Own design.

1016 M.F. Suarez-Barraza and T. Smith

2010, p. 2010). This is expressed as follows by one of the managers in a case which was
analysed in Mexico:
Perhaps the most difficult step we have taken in the application of process innovation using
Kaizen as a model of organisational continuous improvement has been the understanding
we are not working for a boss who has a higher position than us in the organisational
pyramid but rather, instead of thinking of superiors and senior posts, for a while now we
have begun to start thinking about internal clients, about the process flow and about internal
activities (E-Case-4;Mex-003).

From this viewpoint, we have classified and conflated the first phase (organising for
innovation), the second phase (understanding the process) and the third phase (streamlining) of Harringtons (1991) methodology into the first theme. In this way, in the theme of
understanding the process, the companies in the study organised themselves to start the
application of process innovation (phase 1) by undertaking actions such as confirming
the management team and the employee team to innovate the process; selecting critical
processes, and developing an innovation plan, among others. A characteristic in
Mexico, Peru, Ecuador and Spain was that in practically 46% of the firms in the study,
the executives were involved in the awakening theme (team training, nominating a
BPI champion and coaching) while the other 54% only selected one critical process for
redesign, along with the employee team who would put it into practice during phase 1
(see Table 4). Another outstanding result which characterised this theme even more is
that in none of the 26 cases was there a process owner in the critical processes, which evidenced even further the transition from a vertical view to horizontal view in terms of the
process flow. Finally, another characteristic element was that 98% of the cases generated
an improvement or innovation plan, a surprising result given the work culture which generally dominates in Ibero-American countries regarding certain failings in operational
planning (De Forest, 1994).
For the case of phase 2 (understanding the process), 95% of the cases in the study
undertook actions of improvement in this phase. In this stage, the application of the
systems diagram of the process was a basic element for the generation of the theme of
understanding and awareness of the processes in the context of continuous improvement
(Galloway, 1994; Zairi, 1997; Imai, 1997a). In the cases studied in some countries, this
action was more difficult to apply in some organisations than others. For instance, in
the cases studied in Mexico and Spain, it went more smoothly than in Ecuador and
Peru, where in four cases this action was not applied. In general, the perception of the
application of this tool together with the flow diagrams was that it was useful but difficult
to apply, deriving according to our empirical evidence from many years of observing
the processes in these organisations as being fragmented and/or divided between the functional departments. This was signalled as follows by Head of Urgent Care medicine in a
hospital studied in Spain:
After several years at the hospital we became aware of the importance of processes. In fact I
think in the end every single doctor, nurse and, administrator understood that we worked in an
organisation of processes and not in our classic walled-off sovereign states . . . I think this has
been the main contribution of process innovation (E-Case-1, Spain 002).

Lastly, in phase 3 (streamlining), 100% of the cases in our study of four countries
identified opportunities for improvement. In practice, the redesign and streamlining
phase for the firms in the study were centred on eliminating bureaucracy and red-tape
275% of the firms in Mexico, 100% in Spain and 50% in Peru; reducing cycle times
(Mexico, 58%; Spain, 100%; Peru, 57%); and eliminating activities that did not add
value (Mexico, 75%; Spain, 100%; Peru, 57%). The four companies studied in Ecuador

Total Quality Management 1017

concentrated on simplifying processes as did 22 cases in the other three countries. Thus, it
was characteristic to find that of the 26 cases from four countries, only 50% used automisation as a redesign method. This confirms findings in the literature which suggest that
before automising a particular process, it has to be innovated or redesigned (Venkatraman,
1994). A purchasing manager in an agro-industrial company in Peru commented on this
aspect as follows:
Before trying to innovate in a systematic way for us the idea of redesign was synonymous with
automization . . . because quite simply, if you had an operational problem in the production
process by default we looked for an alternative through automization . . . now, we see
clearly that this is not the only option if we really want to go deep into improving processes(E-Case 6-6,Peru-001).

It seems certain that phase 3 of Harringtons (1991) framework was undertaken with
some formality and seriousness in the 26 cases we studied. In other words, we could show
through our field work that there was evidence of the application of the six actions of
improvement which this phase comprises.
4.2 Level of synchronisation between the context of Kaizen and process innovation
The second of the two main themes we found was the theme of synchronisation. In accordance with the evidence we found, the term synchronisation means the capacity to coordinate efforts of process innovation within the context of continuous improvement. Put
another way, once the implementation of process innovation has begun, there comes a
point at which the change efforts never end or reach a conclusion; new projects of
process innovation have to begin so there is a continuous improvement (Kaizen) in the
innovation process itself.
From this, in the context of the phases of Harringtons (1991) methodology, the theme
of synchronisation can be considered as part of phase 4 (measurement and control) and
phase 5 (continuous improvement/innovation). In fact, based on the evidence we found,
there was an observable difference in the 26 cases regarding the fulfilment of the characteristics between phases 2 (understanding) and phase 3 (streamlining), and phases 4 and
5. These latter two phases showed lesser compliance in the improvement activities in
the companies we studied in the four countries. For example, certain critical actions for
the measurement and control of the innovation process in phase 4 such as develop inprocess measurements and targets, and standardise were present in the four countries in
80% and 61%, respectively. These actions reflect the importance of measuring the processes before they are improved (Deming, 1986; Imai, 1986). However, the activities to
establish a feedback system and audit, and check the process periodically were fulfilled
in only one characteristic in the 26 cases in Spain, and in 2 cases in Mexico and in Peru
regarding the second activity. An example of this specific finding for Ibero-American
countries is reflected by a distribution manager in a Mexican company who commented:
The most difficult thing on this journey has undoubtedly been measuring the processes, something we never did before, or if we thought we did I can assure you that when we used certain
indicators we didnt think that these could help us innovate our operations (E-Case -10,
Mexico-001).

In phase 5, where the crucial part of the theme of synchronisation is concentrated, that
is, the intention to continue with a constant improvement of the process innovation using
the methodology of redesign; in the four countries we could observe only a very weak
presence in four of the five characteristics that form this phase. The only characteristic
which was present in 58% of the 26 cases was qualifying the new process. A lesser

1016 M.F. Suarez-Barraza and T. Smith

2010, p. 2010). This is expressed as follows by one of the managers in a case which was
analysed in Mexico:
Perhaps the most difficult step we have taken in the application of process innovation using
Kaizen as a model of organisational continuous improvement has been the understanding
we are not working for a boss who has a higher position than us in the organisational
pyramid but rather, instead of thinking of superiors and senior posts, for a while now we
have begun to start thinking about internal clients, about the process flow and about internal
activities (E-Case-4;Mex-003).

From this viewpoint, we have classified and conflated the first phase (organising for
innovation), the second phase (understanding the process) and the third phase (streamlining) of Harringtons (1991) methodology into the first theme. In this way, in the theme of
understanding the process, the companies in the study organised themselves to start the
application of process innovation (phase 1) by undertaking actions such as confirming
the management team and the employee team to innovate the process; selecting critical
processes, and developing an innovation plan, among others. A characteristic in
Mexico, Peru, Ecuador and Spain was that in practically 46% of the firms in the study,
the executives were involved in the awakening theme (team training, nominating a
BPI champion and coaching) while the other 54% only selected one critical process for
redesign, along with the employee team who would put it into practice during phase 1
(see Table 4). Another outstanding result which characterised this theme even more is
that in none of the 26 cases was there a process owner in the critical processes, which evidenced even further the transition from a vertical view to horizontal view in terms of the
process flow. Finally, another characteristic element was that 98% of the cases generated
an improvement or innovation plan, a surprising result given the work culture which generally dominates in Ibero-American countries regarding certain failings in operational
planning (De Forest, 1994).
For the case of phase 2 (understanding the process), 95% of the cases in the study
undertook actions of improvement in this phase. In this stage, the application of the
systems diagram of the process was a basic element for the generation of the theme of
understanding and awareness of the processes in the context of continuous improvement
(Galloway, 1994; Zairi, 1997; Imai, 1997a). In the cases studied in some countries, this
action was more difficult to apply in some organisations than others. For instance, in
the cases studied in Mexico and Spain, it went more smoothly than in Ecuador and
Peru, where in four cases this action was not applied. In general, the perception of the
application of this tool together with the flow diagrams was that it was useful but difficult
to apply, deriving according to our empirical evidence from many years of observing
the processes in these organisations as being fragmented and/or divided between the functional departments. This was signalled as follows by Head of Urgent Care medicine in a
hospital studied in Spain:
After several years at the hospital we became aware of the importance of processes. In fact I
think in the end every single doctor, nurse and, administrator understood that we worked in an
organisation of processes and not in our classic walled-off sovereign states . . . I think this has
been the main contribution of process innovation (E-Case-1, Spain 002).

Lastly, in phase 3 (streamlining), 100% of the cases in our study of four countries
identified opportunities for improvement. In practice, the redesign and streamlining
phase for the firms in the study were centred on eliminating bureaucracy and red-tape
275% of the firms in Mexico, 100% in Spain and 50% in Peru; reducing cycle times
(Mexico, 58%; Spain, 100%; Peru, 57%); and eliminating activities that did not add
value (Mexico, 75%; Spain, 100%; Peru, 57%). The four companies studied in Ecuador

Total Quality Management 1017

concentrated on simplifying processes as did 22 cases in the other three countries. Thus, it
was characteristic to find that of the 26 cases from four countries, only 50% used automisation as a redesign method. This confirms findings in the literature which suggest that
before automising a particular process, it has to be innovated or redesigned (Venkatraman,
1994). A purchasing manager in an agro-industrial company in Peru commented on this
aspect as follows:
Before trying to innovate in a systematic way for us the idea of redesign was synonymous with
automization . . . because quite simply, if you had an operational problem in the production
process by default we looked for an alternative through automization . . . now, we see
clearly that this is not the only option if we really want to go deep into improving processes(E-Case 6-6,Peru-001).

It seems certain that phase 3 of Harringtons (1991) framework was undertaken with
some formality and seriousness in the 26 cases we studied. In other words, we could show
through our field work that there was evidence of the application of the six actions of
improvement which this phase comprises.
4.2 Level of synchronisation between the context of Kaizen and process innovation
The second of the two main themes we found was the theme of synchronisation. In accordance with the evidence we found, the term synchronisation means the capacity to coordinate efforts of process innovation within the context of continuous improvement. Put
another way, once the implementation of process innovation has begun, there comes a
point at which the change efforts never end or reach a conclusion; new projects of
process innovation have to begin so there is a continuous improvement (Kaizen) in the
innovation process itself.
From this, in the context of the phases of Harringtons (1991) methodology, the theme
of synchronisation can be considered as part of phase 4 (measurement and control) and
phase 5 (continuous improvement/innovation). In fact, based on the evidence we found,
there was an observable difference in the 26 cases regarding the fulfilment of the characteristics between phases 2 (understanding) and phase 3 (streamlining), and phases 4 and
5. These latter two phases showed lesser compliance in the improvement activities in
the companies we studied in the four countries. For example, certain critical actions for
the measurement and control of the innovation process in phase 4 such as develop inprocess measurements and targets, and standardise were present in the four countries in
80% and 61%, respectively. These actions reflect the importance of measuring the processes before they are improved (Deming, 1986; Imai, 1986). However, the activities to
establish a feedback system and audit, and check the process periodically were fulfilled
in only one characteristic in the 26 cases in Spain, and in 2 cases in Mexico and in Peru
regarding the second activity. An example of this specific finding for Ibero-American
countries is reflected by a distribution manager in a Mexican company who commented:
The most difficult thing on this journey has undoubtedly been measuring the processes, something we never did before, or if we thought we did I can assure you that when we used certain
indicators we didnt think that these could help us innovate our operations (E-Case -10,
Mexico-001).

In phase 5, where the crucial part of the theme of synchronisation is concentrated, that
is, the intention to continue with a constant improvement of the process innovation using
the methodology of redesign; in the four countries we could observe only a very weak
presence in four of the five characteristics that form this phase. The only characteristic
which was present in 58% of the 26 cases was qualifying the new process. A lesser

1018 M.F. Suarez-Barraza and T. Smith

presence was found of define and eliminate new problems in the process (7.6%) and
benchmarks the process and provides advanced team training (Six Sigma) in 27%.
Thus, this theme helps us answer the research sub-question 1.2 what differences can
be found in the application of the methods in countries reported in the literature (US, UK,
Japan and China) and the way these methods are applied in Iberoamerican countries? The
empirical studies carried out in USA, UK, Japan, Singapore and China clearly demonstrate
that phase 5 of Harrringtons (1991) framework continuous improvement/innovation
is strongly presented (Harrington, 1995; Zairi, 1997; Lee & Dale, 1998; McAdam &
Donaghy, 1999; Thong, Yap, & Seah, 2000; Lee & Chuah, 2001; Brunet & New, 2003;
Hung, 2006; Aoki, 2008). This contrasts with our findings in the Ibero-American countries
we studied where phase 5 is presented only sporadically and weakly, as shown by the
results set out in Table 1, explained above. A possible explanation for this crucial difference is the low use of the element of operational discipline which some authors have
reported as being a key element for the consolidation of Kaizen in countries outside
Japan (Hung, 2006; Aoki, 2008). In the countries we studied in Ibero-America it seems
that, in practice, carrying out process innovation in a systematic and methodical way
(using operational discipline) is far more complicated within the various organisations
we chose as case studies. In other words, despite making advances in the three previous
phases, when trying to apply phases 4 and 5, there is evidence of a failure in this characteristic. In fact, although some differences were observed depending on the type of
business (manufacturing or services) and the size of the organisation (large, medium or
small), the results displayed in Table 1 evidence the weak application of phases 4 and 5
in Harringtons (1991) methodology in comparison with the first three phases which generate the set-up of the application. An example that illustrates this evidence comes from
comments by two technical engineers in Spain, and in Mexico:
The hardest part of this Kaizen thing has been strictly following the methodology . . . it has
been really difficult to get the workers to follow the rules . . . each and every day there has
been pressure from them to give up what we were doing, including to stop analysing and
looking for quick solutions . . . (E-case -26, Spain, 002).
If you want me to be honest, in our company there was strong pressure on getting short term
results . . . sometimes my boss let me know we should get on with working and get rid of all
the Kaizen thing . . . what did he mean? well, simply, I think that we lost interest and even the
discipline to finish what wed started . . . truly, thats what I think (E-Case-9,Mexico 002).

Finally, the theme of synchronisation corresponds to a holistic and systematic approximation of thinking about processes which have no specific end-point for what is to be innovated and what has to be redesigned, and the cycle recurs so that there is an interminable
cycle that permeates the organisation and its processes (Harrington, 1991, 1995; Lee &
Chuah, 2001). However, the evidence found in our empirical work suggests another
overt difference from evidence in cases reported in the literature for countries in USA,
UK, Japan, Singapore and China. The 26 cases in our study showed there was a serious
difficulty in understanding the meaning of process in the characteristics of horizontality
(crossing departmental boundaries) and integrative and holistic (that processes do not
end at the boundary of a department but go on much farther, as far as the end client).
The vision of these characteristics was reduced in the beginning stages of process innovation by not understanding exactly what a process was, which made the whole application
more difficult and largely slowed it down. Possibly this finding can also explain why 70%
of the cases we studied had such a low presence of phases 4 and 5 of Harringtons (1991)
methodology. A sample of the comments made by various work-floor employees may
illustrate this:

Total Quality Management 1019

At the start, when they talked to us about process in the Kaizen training course, I didnt get it at
all, I thought they meant what we did every day and I mixed it up with what I had to do with
position and my objectives . . . I think that little by little I got to see that I wasnt working on
my own just for my boss but I was also working for my colleague by my side . . . my clients
client, right? (E-Case 2,Mexico-002).

4.3

The impact of the application of process innovation

In this section, we show the results which answer out research question RQ1.3 what were
the impacts of the application of methodologies of process innovation on the work processes in the organisations in the study? Therefore, as signalled above, the empirical evidence of the impact of the application of process innovation is shown in Table 5.
The main impacts shown in the 26 cases that were studied in four countries are centred
around four central elements extracted from the quantitative evidence observed in the case
studies we researched. These elements showed a positive impact in the following order of
frequency: (1) reduction in the number of process activities (found in 97% of the cases),
(2) elimination of quality errors in the process (80%), (3) reduction in customer complaints
(80%) and (4) elimination of muda and internal red-tape (69%). In the field work, other
elements were found which had a minor impact on the cases in the study, such as incremental improvements in operational efficiency, effectiveness of the process and reduction
in cycle times.
5. Discussion and final conclusions
We have tried to answer the three questions that guided this study, which were: RQ1.1:
Which specific characteristics of the application of process innovation can be observed
in the organizations studied in Ibero-American countries?; RQ1.2: What are the differences in the application of these methods in countries described in the literature (US,
UK, Japan and China) and their application in Ibero-America?; RQ1.3: What kind of
impact does the application of the methods of process innovation have on the work processes in the organisations of the study? This article has reported the results of a multiple
case study, showing and providing empirical evidence grounded in the application of
process innovation and the impact this has on the management of the organisation. As
stated in Section 4, and responding to each sub-question of the research, in our study
we found that the application of process innovation (see Table 4) basically can begin to
help Ibero-American companies to understand (wake-up or become aware of) the
deeper meaning of the term process (theme of understanding) and also, to begin to
inspire (theme of synchronisation) the sense of managing from the point of view of
process innovation and the philosophy of Kaizen in continuous improvement. In addition,
it shows how the application of process innovation can have certain impacts on some
elements that benefit the organisations in the study (see Table 5). Regarding the first
sub-question, one of the main findings of this study was the concept of comprehension
in the sense of wake-up to something or become aware of something. In Ibero-America,
organisational structure tends to be vertical, with silo-type departments and functional
areas. This affects both management and workforce and obscures the ability to see how
organisational processes work as a whole, as a conglomeration of activities from beginning
to end that cross all the boundaries between departments and function. For Harrington
(1991) and Ostroff (1999), the horizontal nature of processes allows people to become
more responsible for their own work, thus engendering a stronger sense of belonging as
well as generating an integrated vision of all the activities of the processes. This helps

Impacts observer for the application of process innovation methodology.

Mexico

Peru

Impacts observed

10 11

12 13 14

Reduction in customer complaints

Satisfaction of internal customers
(other areas)
Elimination of quality errors in the
process
Increase in operational efficiency
of the process
Increase in the effectiveness of the
process
Elimination of muda and internal
red-tape
Reduction in cycle times and in
consequence, response times
Reduction in process activities
Reduction in operational costs
Improvement in continuous
process flow among internal
customers

0
+

+
+

+
+

+
+

+
+

+
0

+
0

0
+

0
+

+
0

+
+

0
0

+
0

+
+
+

+
0
0

+
+
+

+
2
0

+
0
0

+
2
0

+
0
0

+
+
+

Ecuador

Spain

15 16

17 18 19

20 21 22

23 24 25

26

+
0

+
+

+
+

+
0

+
0

+
0

+
0

+
0

+
+

0
+

+
+

+
+

+
+

+
+
0

+
0
+

+
0
+

0
+
0

+
0
0

+
0
0

+
+
+

+
+
+

+
2
0

+
0
0

+
0
0

+
0
0

+
2
0

+
0
0

+
2
0

+
0
0

+
+
0

+
+
+

Notes: 2, negative impact; 0, no impact; +, positive impact. The impact of process innovation in the 26 case studies was supported with quantitative data.

1020 M.F. Suarez-Barraza and T. Smith

Table 5.

Total Quality Management 1021

avoid fragmented or duplicated effort in each department. So our findings in Ibero-American organisations have allowed us to observe that those organisations that have begun the
innovation process by changing their vision from vertical departments to a vision of
horizontal structure have substantially increased the impact of process innovation in
their organisations.
We believe that the main theoretical contribution of our paper lies in the construct of a
theoretical element we call understanding processes or understanding the meaning of
Process (see Figure 1), which is a special characteristic found in this study which helps
to answer sub-question 1 of the research (RQ1). This theoretical construct can act as a
bridge to join the seminal work previously conducted in process innovation with other
theoretical constructs such as measurement of processes and innovation of processes (Harrington, 1991; Davenport, 1993). And although Harrington includes this element in his
methodology, it seems that the theoretical evidence collected in the cases we studied
shows it is a theoretical term which goes further than the simple improvement activities
displayed in Table 1. For us, the understanding of processes represents a vital, previous
step which is necessary at least in the organisations which operate in Ibero-America
in order to go further in measuring and innovating processes. In this way, the theoretical
proposition found in the premise of Deming (1986) that what cannot be measured cannot
be improved becomes, in our terms, what is not understood cannot be measured, and thus
cannot be improved.
In addition, another important contribution refers to RQ1.2: What are the differences in
the application of these methods in countries described in the literature (US, UK, Japan
and China) and their application in Ibero-America? Lee and Chuah (2001) suggest that a
process may require incremental improvement in critical areas, or certain technology may
need to be updated, within the existing operational context, while other processes may
need a total revamp throughout the organisation. According to Brunet and New (2003),
the way of applying Kaizen using an approximate approach to process innovation in Japanese organisations depends specifically on the characteristics of each, some using zero
defects, others using methodologies to solve problems similar to a Kaizen type, while
others use process redesign. In contrast, our findings in Ibero-America indicate a difference from findings in China and Japan. In Ibero-America, it seems that the organisations
in the study tended to adopt incremental change, using tools such as flow diagrams to
reveal where muda or waste could be identified. Although in some cases, in Mexico
and Spain, organisations did indeed seek more radical changes, most of the organisations
studied directed themselves towards incremental change.
Regarding the third question RQ1.3: What kind of impact does the application of the
methods of process innovation have on the work processes in the organisations of the
study? we found in some cases there was a negative impact on the element of operational
cost reduction in countries such as Mexico, Peru and Ecuador. The reason for this finding
of negative impact was that some organisations decided to innovate their processes
through autoimmunisation (purchasing and/or modernising) machinery and/or software
which increased the original operational costs. The results in Table 5 coincide with
those reported in the literature for countries which are markedly advanced in their
uptake of Kaizen and process innovation (USA, UK, Japan, Singapore and China).
However, the characteristic of negative impact in some of the cases in our study (11.5%
of the total) on the costs of operations was significant, just as was the zero impact
finding (in 69% of the cases in the study) of the element improve the continuous
process flow among internal clients, a basic element which, according to the literature,

1022 M.F. Suarez-Barraza and T. Smith

is an immediate benefit when innovating processes in the context of Kaizen: the next
process is the client (Ishikawa, 1988; Galloway, 1994; Harrington, 1995).
Finally, another important contribution of our research is the following theoretical framework (see Figure 1) which schematically shows the significance of the themes which
were uncovered in this study, understanding and synchronisation, when applying the
process innovation methodology in the context of Kaizen. Once the process to be innovated has been selected and fully understood in all its complexity, the current level of performance can be established so as later to analyse which activities of the process in
question can be innovated or redesigned. This is the precise moment when synchronisation
takes place with continuous improvement (Kaizen) with the objective of generating positive impacts not only on quality but also on costs and delivery. Once this moment has
arrived, achieved through the concepts of the PDCA cycle (Deming, 1986) of continuous
improvement, the next new process ripe for redesign can begin. It seems clear that the most
valuable finding of our study is in respect to the synchronisation of process innovation with
Kaizen: without this synchronisation, the effort towards process innovation in organisations will be a passing fad which will not be able to consolidate itself in the management
of each company.
This study has certain limitations which should be taken into account arising from the
nature of the methodology in the case study. This is why the results should be treated with
some caution, especially when we are dealing with generalisations. The results are based
on a relatively small number of cases in multiple contexts (in different countries). The
main potential for errors in interpreting the results lies in the realm of external validity,
of having several different cultural contexts which might apply in each country, and within
in each country. Similarly, the 26 cases in the study did not undergo a very detailed analysis in the specific aspect of organisational context, such as company size, the sector, type of
company. Within Ibero-America, there are far more countries than the few we have
included, and of these, some are beginning to show outstanding progress such as Brazil,
Chile or Costa Rica, among others. However, for practical reasons and due to limited economic resources, it was not possible to extend the study any further. Despite this, 26 cases is
an adequate theoretical sample from which to draw an empirical generalisation about the
subject in this region.
With the aim of strengthening the quality of this study, we closely follow Yin (1994,
pp. 32 38) in the tactics he proposes to strengthen construct validity, internal and external
validities, and reliability. Thus, to address construct validity, there should be multiple
informants, and ongoing, regular reviews of the actors taking part in the study; a full discussion of the core academic work on case selection by various academics and an iterative
comparison of the theoretical constructs found in the literature. In addition, there should be
a constant combination of qualitative and quantitative data, with reference to the existing
theory. Finally, of course, it is necessary to extend the study to far more organisations in
any future research. This could also include an initial test of the resulting framework in the
form of a quantitative model with a statistical sample of the resulting variables.

References
Albizu, E., Olazaran, M., & Simon, K. (2004). Reingeniera de procesos en Espana: la adaptacion de
una moda de gestion. Revista de Direccion y Administracion de Empresas, 3(11), 161 181 (in
Spanish).
Andreu, R., Ricart, J.E., & Valor, J. (1996). Innovacion de procesos y cambio organizativo. Harvard
Deusto Business Review, 2(70), 24 37 (in Spanish).

Total Quality Management 1023

Aoki, K. (2008). Transferring Japanese Kaizen activities to overseas plants in China. International
Journal of Operation & Production Management, 28(6), 518539.
Araujo, A., Churruca, E., & Landeta, J. (1998). La reingeniera de procesos: Una nueva y milagrosa
tecnica de gestion? Harvard Deusto Busines Review, 83, 83 93 (in Spanish).
Brunet, A.P., & New, S. (2003). Kaizen in Japan: An empirical study. International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, 23(12), 1426 1446.
Carrillo, J., & Zarate, R. (2009). The evolution of maquiladoras best practices: 19652008. Journal
of Business Ethics, 88(2), 335 348.
Childe, S.J., Maull, R.S., & Bennet, J. (1994). Frameworks for understanding business process reengineering. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 14(12), 22 34.
Climent, C., Mula, J., & Hernandez, J. (2009). Improving the business processes of a bank. Business
Process Management Journal, 15(2), 201 224.
Dahlgaard-Park, S.M., Chi-Kuan, Ch., Yiu-Jin, J., & Dahlgaard, J. (2012). A snapshot of 25 years
quality movement (19872011). Diagnosing and reflecting the past, prognosing and
shaping the future. In Conference Proceeding of International Conference of Quality and
Service Science 15th QMOD (pp. 402 424), Poznand, Poland.
Davenport, T.H. (1993). Process innovation: Reengineering work through information technology.
Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Davenport, T.H., & Short, J.E. (1990). The new industrial engineering: Information technology and
business process redesign. Sloan Management Review, 31(4), 11 27.
De Forest, M. (1994). Thinking of a plant in Mexico. Academy of Management of Executive, 8(1),
33 40.
Deming, W.E. (1986). Out of the crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT/CAES.
De Toro, I., & McCabe, T. (1997). How to stay flexible and elude fads. Quality Progress, 30(3),
55 60.
lvarez, R., Meloda, M., & Calvo, R. (2007). Materials flow improvement in a lean
Domingo, R., A
assembly line: A case study. Assembly Automation, 27(2), 141147.
Dubois, A., & Araujo, L.M. (2007). Case research in purchasing and supply management:
Opportunities and challenges. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 13(3),
170 181.
Dumay, M. (1998). Business processes: The theoretical impact of process thinking on information
systems development. Business Process, 1(6), 1 22.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989). Building Theories from case study research. Academy of Management
Review, 14(4), 532 550.
Eisenhardt, K.M., & Graebner, M. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 2532.
Elzinga, J., Horak, T., Lee, C., & Bruner, C. (1995). Business process management: Survey and
methodology. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 42(2), 119128.
Galgano, A. (2003). Calidad total. Clave estrategica para toda la empresa. Madrid, Espana: Daz
Santos.
Galloway, D. (1994). Mejora continua de procesos. Barcelona, Espana: Gestion 2000.
Grover, V., Kettinger W., & Teng, T. (2000). Business process change in the 21st century. Business
and Economic Review, 46(2), 14 18.
Hung, R.Y.-Y. (2006). Business process management as competitive advantage: A review and
empirical study. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 17(1), 21 40.
Hammer, M. (1996). Beyond reengineering. Executive Excellence, 13(8), 13 14.
Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for business
revolution. New York: Harper Business.
Handfield, R.B., & Melnyk, S.A. (1998). The scientific theory-building process: A primer using the
case of TQM. Journal of Operations Management, 16, 321339.
Harrington, H.J. (1991). Business process improvement: The breakthrough strategy for total quality,
productivity and competitiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Harrington, H.J. (1995). Continuous versus breakthrough improvement finding the right answer.
Business Process Re-engineering & Management Journal, 1(3), 3149.
Harrington, H.J., & Harrington, J.S. (1997). Administracion total del Mejoramiento continuo.
Colombia: McGrawHill (in Spanish).
Imai, M. (1986). Kaizen-The key to Japans competitive success. New York: Random House.
Imai, M. (1997a). Gemba Kaizen. New York: Mcgraw-Hill.

1024 M.F. Suarez-Barraza and T. Smith

Imai, M. (1997b). An interview with Masaaki Imai. Interview in the Quality-Digest on line web Page
(June); last visited in May 22th of 2002. Retrieved from http://www.qualitydigest.com/
june97/html/imai.html
Imai, M. (2007). Mejorar la calidad es la mejor forma de reducir los costes. In Interview in the
Business Newspaper La Vanguardia. December 19, 2007 (p. 36). Barcelona, Spain (in
Spanish).
Ishikawa, K. (1988). Que es el control total de la calidad, La modalidad japonesa. Colombia:
Editorial Norma.
Jackson, M., & Sloane, A. (2003). Modelling information and communication technology in
business. A case study in electronic data interchange (EDI). Business Process Management
Journal, 9(1), 81 113.
Lee, K.T., & Chuah, K. (2001). A SUPER methodology for business process improvement. An
industrial Case Study in Hong Kong/China. International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, 21(5/6), 687 706.
Lee, R.G., & Dale, B.G. (1998). Business process management: A review and evaluation. Business
Process Management Journal, 4(3), 214 223.
Llopis, J., & Tar, J.J. (2003). The importance of internal aspects in quality improvement.
International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 20(3), 304324.
MacDonald, J. (1995). Together TQM and BPR are winners. TQM Magazine, 7(3), 2125.
Majchrzak, A., & Wang, Q. (1996). Breaking the functional mind-set in process organizations.
Harvard Business Review, 74(5), 93 99.
McAdam, R., & Donaghy, J. (1999). Business process re-engineering in the public sector: A study of staff
perceptions and critical success factors. Business Process Management Journal, 5(1), 3341.
McKay, A., & Radnor, Z. (1998). A characterization of a business process. International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, 18(9/10), 924936.
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Ostroff, F. (1999). The horizontal organization. New York: Oxford University Press.
Page, S. (2010). The power of business process improvement. New York: AMA.
Persse, J. (2006). Process improvement essentials: CMMI, six sigma and ISO 9001. New York:
OReilly.
Pettigrew, A.M. (1997). What is a processual analysis? Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13(4),
337 348.
Ritchie, J., & Lewis, J. (2003). Qualitative research practice. London: Sage.
Salgueiro, A. (1999). Como Mejorar los Procesos y la Productividad. Madrid, Espana: AENOR.
Asociacion Espanola de Normalizacion y Certificacion (in Spanish).
Simon, K., Olazaran, M., Igeregi, I., & Sierra, F. (2004). El papel de las consultoras en las introduccion de nuevos conceptos de gestion. Reingeniera de procesos en la CAV. In Conference
Proceeding del Cuarto Congreso de Economa de Navarra (pp. 565584) (in Spanish).
Sirkin, H., & Stalk, G. (1990). Fix the process, not the problem. Harvard Business Review, 68(4),
26 33.
gora Medios (in Spanish).
Suarez-Barraza, M.F. (2010). Innovacion de Procesos. Toluca: A
Suarez-Barraza, M.F., & Ramis-Pujol, J. (2010). Implementation of Lean-Kaizen in the human
resource service process: A case study in a Mexican public service organization. Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management, 21(3), 388410.
Suarez-Barraza, M.F., Ramis-Pujol, J., & Estrada, M. (2012). Applying Gemba-Kaizen in a multinational food company: A process innovation framework. International Journal of Quality
and Service Science, 4(1), 27 50.
Talwar, R. (1993). Business reengineering A strategy-driven approach. Long Range Planning,
26(6), 22 40.
Tenner, A., & De Toro, I. (1997). Process redesign: The implementation guide for managers.
Boston, MA: Addison Wesley Longman.
Thong, J., Yap, C., & Seah, K. (2000). Business process reengineering in the public sector: The case
of the housing development board in Singapore. Journal of Management Information Systems,
17(1), 245 270.
Venkatraman, N. (1994). IT-enabled business transformation: From automation to business scope
redefinition. Sloan Management Review, 35(2), 73 87.

Total Quality Management 1025

Voss, C., Sikriktsis, N., & Frohlic, M. (2002). Case research in operations management.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22(2), 195219.
Yin, R. (1994). Case study research, design and methods. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yingling, R. (1997). How to management key business processes. Quality Progress, 30(4),
107 110.
Zairi, M. (1997). Business process management: A boundaryless approach to modern competitiveness. Business Process Management Journal, 3(1), 64 80.
Zairi, M., & Sinclair, D. (1995). Business process re-engineering and process management: A survey
current practice and future trends in integrated management. Management Decision, 33(3),
3 16.

Copyright of Total Quality Management & Business Excellence is the property of Routledge
and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without
the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or
email articles for individual use.