The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/2040-4166.htm

Impact of lean
Impact of lean practices on practices
organizational sustainability
through green supply
chain management – an 1035

empirical investigation Received 28 June 2017

Revised 27 January 2018
19 August 2018
Jagdeep Singh 19 November 2019
Accepted 13 January 2020
Ludhiana College of Engineering and Technology, Ludhiana, India
Harwinder Singh
Guru Nanak Dev Engineering College, Ludhiana, India, and
Amit Kumar
Punjabi University, Patiala, India

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to uncover the significance of green supply chain management
(GSCM) to study the impact lean practices, namely, Kaizen and innovation management practices on
organizational sustainability.
Design/methodology/approach – The subject of green supply chains attracts a growing interest in
academic and professional literature since 1990. Questionnaire survey and structured interviews (set of
questions) among the industrial professionals and academicians of northern India region have been
performed to ascertain the significance of GSCM toward organizational sustainability. Structural equation
modeling, Cronbach’s alpha, z-test, correlation and t-test have been used to ascertain the significance of lean
practices toward sustaining organization by taking the mediating effect of GSCM.
Findings – The results signify the negative potential of combined Kaizen, innovation management and
government policies on environmental thinking through supply chain. The innovation management
strategies and Kaizen individually has positive influence on environment supply chain but government
policies should be improved to improve the positive impact on environmental thinking through supply chain
by decreasing pollution. Economic performance, environmental performance and competitive performance
are significantly improved by implementing Kaizen and innovation management through GSCM.
Research limitations/implications – The research is limited to northern India. Moreover, selection of
industry and academic organizations has been done on convenient sampling technique.
Originality/value – The paper demonstrates the application of lean techniques, namely, Kaizen and
innovation management practices, showing how it can bring real breakthroughs in organizational
sustainability through GSCM.
Keywords Kaizen, Green supply chain management, Innovation management
Paper type Research paper

International Journal of Lean Six

Sigma
Vol. 11 No. 6, 2020
pp. 1035-1068
The authors would like to thank reviewers for their valuable comments for improving the quality of © Emerald Publishing Limited
2040-4166
the manuscript. DOI 10.1108/IJLSS-06-2017-0068
IJLSS Introduction
11,6 An organization needs to set a strategic business agenda for the firm, and then find and
implement functional and operational strategies that are consistent with the firm’s business
strategy. To the extent that the organization is successful in doing this, it should achieve
improved operational and financial performance. On the contrary, to the extent that it is
unsuccessful, its operational and financial performance would be expected to deteriorate.
1036 Therefore, with regard to the natural environment, strategic alignment between green
supply chain management (GSCM) strategy and business strategy is interesting, relevant
and very important. Prior research argues that GSCM strategy enhances organizational
performance, and provides the company with a competitive advantage (Whitelock, 2012).
These practices require that manufacturers work in concert with suppliers and customers to
enhance environmental sustainability. The implementation of GSCM practices is expected
to result in improved environmental performance as measured by reductions in air
emissions, effluent waste, solid waste and the consumption of toxic materials. There is
concern, however, whether such environmental sustainability efforts will ultimately
translate into improved market share and profitability. Ultimately, manufacturing
managers are responsible for the performance of the organizations for which they work
(Green et al., 2008).
In recent years, the rapid industrial modernization has led to negative environmental
impacts, including greenhouse gas emissions, toxic pollutions and chemical spills (Peng and
Lin, 2008). In response to the growing global environmental awareness, GSCM has emerged
as a concept that considers sustainability elements and a combination of environmental
thinking along the intra- and inter-firm management of the upstream and downstream
supply chain (Walker and Jones, 2012). The green paradigm is intended to reduce
environmental risks and negative environmental impacts while improving the ecological
efficiency and eliminating environmental waste in organizations. Environmentally
conscious business practices have been receiving increasing scrutiny from both researchers
and practitioners (Zhu et al., 2008a). Environmental impact of green policy occurs at all
stages of a product’s life cycle. Therefore, green policy on the performance of GSCM has
emerged as an important new archetype for enterprises to achieve profit and market share
objective by lowering the environmental risks and impacts while raising their ecological
efficiency (van Hock and Erasmus, 2000).
GSCM practices involve activities among supply chain players such as a corporation
with customers for eco-design, cleaner production and demand for less energy-consuming
products during transportation. The investment recovery aspects of the GSCM practices
involve the extent to which organizations take steps to initiate the sales of excess
inventories, scrap, used materials and excess capital equipment (Zhu et al., 2008a).
Developing countries will be the most impacted by the climate change effects; in particular,
the poor populations will suffer the most because of their inability to sufficiently adapt to
the change (World Bank Report, 2013). As a result of industrialization, pollution is
increasing day by day which leads to environmental instability and disturbance in life of
living beings. The pollution of water and air is increasing which is causing many diseases to
the living things. Technology and human activities are the pivotal causative agents of
climate change. In the view point of this problem, this research has been carried out among
the industrial professionals and academicians in northern India. Various lean strategies, viz.
Kaizen and innovation management are assessed for its role in organizational sustainability
through GSCM as a mediating variable. The survey, including structured interviews and
questionnaire (set of questions) filling, has been performed to assess the performance of
Kaizen and innovation management strategies toward sustaining organization through
GSCM, and important benefits occurred after such successful lean strategies Impact of lean
implementation have been assessed. The study uses various statistical tools for extracting practices
significant factors contributing effectively toward realization of organizational
sustainability. For this purpose, the various statistical analysis tools such as Cronbach’s
alpha, Pearson correlation coefficient, t-test, z-test, descriptive statistics and structural
education modeling have been used to evaluate the contributions of GSCM toward
realization of performance improvement of the organizations. The paper is organized into
four sections: first section includes literature review, second section includes methodology 1037
adopted and instrument used for the research, third section includes results and discussion
of the findings and fourth section includes conclusions and limitation of the study.

Literature review
Literature review is divided into five different sections, which include literature review
related to Kaizen, innovation management, relationship between Kaizen and innovation
management, literature on GSCM, literature support for justification of Kaizen and
innovation management as a lean strategy, explanation of performance parameters,
literature on lean manufacturing, literature justifying role of government policies toward
green initiatives, five Kaizen and innovation management practices and important issues
and strategies identified from literature review.

Literature review related to Kaizen

Kaizen is a Japanese word that has become common in many Western companies; the word
indicates a process of continuous, incremental improvement of the “standard” way of work
(Chen et al., 2000). The term came from Gemba Kaizen in Japanese meaning “small
incremental changes” (Yan-jiang et al., 2006). It is a compound word involving two concepts,
including KAI means change and ZEN means good (Newitt, 1996).
Kaskhedikar and Katore (2013) suggested that Kaizen management tools are the key
elements for any manufacturing firm and are essential to study for providing a better
quality management in industries. This can be achieved by developing an instrument which
will consist of the critical success factors and performance measurement factors, which are
responsible for overall growth of casting industries.
Savino and Mazza (2014) conducted a study that provides some general principles to
integrate environmental management system in quality management system development
and suggested an implementation of continuous improvement, which addresses, analyzes,
prioritizes and measures activities within the Deming wheel. Under industrial management
perspective, this study provides an interesting opportunity to evaluate and to implement the
Deming wheel, suggesting a practical outline of activities that should be conducted within
the plan–do–check–act cycle. This study suggested that the following future practical
investigations are needed: an assessment of the core resources for continuous improvement
(CI); classification of CI capabilities of firms; and how to measure the attitudes of firms for
CI.
Chahal and Fayza (2016) measured patients’ perception toward Kaizen muda tool in
organizational sustainability. The study used mixed-method approach for muda/waste
identification, measurement and suggestions for controlling muda/waste in the hospital.
The quantitative approach was used for measuring the patients’ perception toward Kaizen
muda/waste and organizational sustainability, whereas qualitative approach was used for
gathering patients’ view points for controlling these wastes. The findings suggest that by
controlling this mudas/waste, the hospital can improve its level of sustainability –
economical, social and ecological.
IJLSS Mĺkva et al. (2016) defined that standardization is one of the tools that can be applied in
11,6 the CI of the organization. Standardized work is one of the most powerful but least used lean
tools. By documenting the current best practice, standardized work forms the baseline for
Kaizen. Standardized work is also a learning tool that supports audits, promotes problem
solving and involves team members in developing poka-yokes.
Gonzalez et al. (2016) studied critical success factors for CI projects and concluded that
1038 there is not a clear and concise set of factors mentioned in the literature that affects the
success of CI program.
Jurburg et al. (2017) describe the factors that appear with divers’ names and approaches
throughout the CI literature. However, some of the most common are as follows:
[. . .] top management support and commitment, strategic focus on CI through the definition of an
appropriate set of goals and objectives, using the right methodology to implement CI throughout
the whole organization, creating and sustaining a CI culture, employee support and commitment,
good information, communication and knowledge-transfer systems, and having a CI management
and follow-up system to track the CI efforts and progress made.
These facilitators should be merged into the organization’s culture to have successful and
sustainable CI systems.

Literature review related to innovation management

Innovation processes describe the activities that are performed at each stage of the
development of an innovation. Innovation management is the governance and organization
of these innovation processes; research and development (R&D) management can be
considered a broader term than innovation management because it contains invention
processes as well as innovation processes (Berkhout and van der Duin, 2007). The
innovation as a process starts with capturing ideas from employees and then evaluating
them to determine which ideas have the greatest potential to add value to the organization.
This front-end part of the innovation process, called “Idea management process,” is based
essentially on the generation of new concepts, by combining organization’s knowledge and
collective intelligence, aligned by the organization’s contextual factors (Schilling, 2005). Ortt
and van der Duin (2008) provided an overview of the changes that have taken place,
focusing on innovation management in large companies, with the aim of explaining that
innovation management has evolved toward a contextual approach, which it will explain
and illustrate using two cases. The idea that there is a single mainstream innovation
approach does not match with the (successful) approaches companies have adopted. What is
required is a contextual approach. However, research with regard to such an approach is
fragmented. Decisions to adapt the innovation management approach to the newness of an
innovation or the type of organization, respectively, have thus far been investigated
separately. Kim and Park (2010) stated that a firm’s innovativeness is positively influenced
by its international R&D network, as well as international gatekeepers. Both internal and
external research are affected by these influences. The installation of network structures
within the company is strongly linked to the already-mentioned concept of new aspects in
product design and can be useful for mainly two reasons. Lee (2010) helps companies to
leverage effects of international differences in innovation environment in terms of market
strength, market responsiveness and product innovation. Especially, internationally active
companies can benefit from a leveling of differences, e.g. in market demand or in times of
turbulent markets and bad conditions for product development in different parts of the
world. Rajavi and Attarnezhad (2013) critically examine the concept of organizational
innovation in the existing literature and identify different strategies and approaches to the
ways a manager can lead and manage innovation. Some studies emphasized on structural Impact of lean
forms, adaptability and capability of the organizations as the foundation of the management practices
of innovation, and other models considered organizational atmosphere, participative
management and incentives for innovation as the core requirement for managers to be able
to organize and lead organizational innovation. Horn and Brem (2013) identified
forthcoming fields of innovation management themes with an outline for the most important
areas and directions of academic research and management practice. There are seven major
fields for future research in innovation management theory and practice. These areas are,
1039
namely, customer orientation, network organization, sustainability, frugality, intellectual
property, business model and global innovation. Based on the literature review, the paper
develops a conceptual framework built on intra-firm and external openness as well as the
short- and long-term strategic perspective. Key trends in innovation research are derived
from an extensive literature review. In addition, major macroeconomic trends and new
technologies were identified to finally develop a conceptual framework. Kalay and lynn
(2015) investigated the impact of innovation strategy, organizational structure, innovation
culture, technological capability and customer and supplier relationships, which appear in
the literature as strategic innovation management practices in business enterprises, on firm
innovation performance. In this context, data collected from 132 managers at 66 firms
operating in the manufacturing sector in the TRB2 zone of Turkey were analyzed. The
partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) method was used to test the
hypotheses of the study.

Literature related to relationship between Kaizen and innovation management

Innovation is currently recognized as an essential competitive enabler for any organization
that wants to survive and grow through small incremental improvements. Increasingly,
corporate competitive success is hinging upon the effective management of innovation.
Innovation management has been the object of considerable process improvement from a
variety of perspectives. However, innovations are usually considered as objects and two
types of innovation are distinguished: radical and incremental. While the former introduces
a totally new design approach, resulting in a disruptive change in the evolution of the
previous one, the latter is characterized by minor but significant improvements that shape
the direction of existing design approaches. Despite the relevance of radical innovation, he
contends that “it is misleading to judge an innovation by its apparent novelty.” According to
him, “incremental innovation has been very important because it is cumulative and because
it builds on existing approaches.” The improvement is broken down into Kaizen and
Innovation (Abernathy, 1978). Kaizen is a Japanese system of incremental innovation, where
employees are encouraged to make small changes in their work area on an ongoing basis.
Both innovation and Kaizen require the involvement and commitment of top management.
Employees must be trained in the new processes, procedures and mindset that they must
follow to be successful and to contribute to the company’s vision for incremental
improvement or Kaizen. The foundation of Kaizen and innovation is ideas – creative ways of
looking at your job and your workspace, with an eye toward reducing waste, eliminating
steps that do not add value and creating new value (Van der Panne et al., 2004). In contrast to
CI (or Kaizen), which is characterized by incremental steps, process innovation is
characterized by fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes (O’Neill
and Sohal, 1999). Even though the change itself may be radical, the implementation does not
have to be, and can be the result of step-wise coordinated implementation toward a new
solution (Smeds, 2001).
IJLSS Literature on green supply chain management
11,6 GSCM is an approach in which managers seek to incorporate environmental considerations
into supply chain management decisions (Hofer et al., 2012). It was first proposed by
Michigan State University in 1996 (Handfield et al., 1997). Klassen and McLaughlin (1996)
tried to link firms’ green management efforts, as indicated by either awards or crises, with
financial performance, as indicated by stock market returns. They described the potential
1040 for both market gains and cost savings from green management initiatives. Their results
showed significant stock returns from both positive and negative events. In a similar event
study, Jacobs et al. (2010) found more mixed results. Specifically, announcements of
philanthropic gifts for environmental causes were associated with significant positive
market reactions; voluntary emission reductions were associated with significant
negative market reactions; and ISO 14001 certifications were associated with significant
positive market reactions. This latter study points to the potential for markets to
react differently to different types of green initiatives. Corbett and Klassen (2006) argued
that pursuit of green initiatives creates side benefits, including the removal of previously
unseen wastes and inefficiencies in operations. They emphasized the overlaps and
consistencies among policies and technologies associated with green management, lean
systems and total quality management programs. Fortes (2009) identified five different
aspects of GSCM, including green operations, green design, green manufacturing, reverse
logistics and waste management. This paper, however, briefly discussed some of these
issues and provided, first of all, a brief introduction to traditional supply chain management,
then a discussion to the chronology of GSCM and green supply chain as a discipline. This is
followed by brief discussions of green design and green operations. The last part of this
paper briefly touched on the motives for organizations to go toward green operations.
Galeazzo et al. (2014) provide evidence from three such projects used in two organizations to
show how, through the usage of lean and green principles, pollution can be prevented. They
also propose that implementing both paradigms at the same time can result in a better
performance of operations than applying them one after the other, as the latter solves issues
from just one perspective and poses constraints on possible practices. Geng et al.’s (2017)
study is to understand the relationship between GSCM practices and firm performance in
the manufacturing sector in Asian emerging economies (AEEs) based on empirical evidence.
The findings revealed that the GSCM practices lead to better performance in four aspects:
economic, environmental, operational and social performance. Moreover, the results indicate
that industry type, firm size, ISO certification and export orientation mediate several of the
GSCM practices–performance relationships. Moreover, the findings of this research help
managers and policymakers to have more confidence in the adoption of GSCM practices to
improve firm performance. In addition, as meta-analysis has not been widely used in the
supply chain management literature, our study is an important step in maturing
the academic field by adopting this technique for confirming GSCM practice–performance
relationships in the manufacturing sector of AEE. Chugani et al. (2017) explained that one
may wonder how a quality and operations improvement philosophy such as lean can
contribute to decrease pollution and thereby combat global warming. Results show a
reduction in emissions from transport and production operations through lean and the
achievement of more efficient processes. Being a greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide contributes
to the change in climate and is of global concern. One of the solutions to global warming and
pollution is to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Lean production,
through reduction of waste, can help to prevent pollution as it results in shorter cycle times
and higher utilization of resources. Duarte and Cruz-Machado (2017) proposed an
assessment framework to evaluate businesses in terms of the implementation of a green and
lean organization’s supply chain. A multiple case study of five different organizations in the Impact of lean
automotive industry was conducted to validate the conceptual framework. The study practices
reveals that high scores are derived from a good interaction between green and lean
implementation in these companies. The results confirm that the initiatives considered in the
conceptual framework are appropriate to represent the green and lean assessment
framework.

Literature on lean manufacturing

1041
Bhamu et al. (2013) used value stream mapping (VSM) to demonstrate the significance of
implementation of lean (waste elimination) production. The authors conducted a case study
in an automated production line. Current state and future state maps were compared to
assess the benefits of lean manufacturing and the resultant improvements were shown in
terms of value stream metrics.
Vinodh et al. (2015) presented an approach for assessing lean remanufacturing
characteristics in an Indian automotive engine valve manufacturing organization. Using this
approach, it has been found that the organization scores 53.75% in the context of its lean
remanufacturing ability. The weaker areas have been identified and lean remanufacturing
proposals have been derived for performance.
Garza-Reyes (2015) presented a systematic review of the existing literature on lean and
green, aimed at providing guidance on the topic, uncovering gaps and inconsistencies in the
literature and finding new paths for research. Important issues for future research are then
suggested in the form of research questions. The aim is to also contribute by stimulating
scholars to further study this area in depth, which will lead to a better understanding of the
compatibility and impact on organizational performance of lean and green initiatives. It also
holds important implications for industrialists, who can develop a deeper and richer
knowledge on lean and green to help them formulate more effective strategies for their
deployment.
Kumar and Kumar (2016) investigate the impact of different lean practices including
supplier development, supplier feedback, Just in time (JIT) supply from supplier, customer
involvement, flow, statistical process control, total productive maintenance (TPM), setup
reduction, employee involvement and customer participation on operational performance
parameters such as productivity, quality, cost, delivery, safety, morale and financial
performance. The study discovered and validated that lean manufacturing implementation
has positive impact on organizational performance of the Indian industries. The results
conclude that effective implementation of lean manufacturing is very much helpful in
contributing factor for realization of organizational performance improvement.
Sartal et al. (2018) addressed the individual environmental impact of three pillars of lean
manufacturing, JIT, Jidoka and Respect for People (RfP), from a shop-floor perspective.
Moving away from the cross-industry and cross-country approach, which has dominated
the economic literature on emissions and climate change, the authors tested hypotheses at
plant level with nine-year panel data (5,672 observations) from two official sources. Results
showed that the final environmental impact depends not only on the leanness level achieved
by each plant, but also on each lean pillar in question, while Jidoka and RfP positively affect
environmental performance. The authors found that a major trade-off between JIT
initiatives and the green goals is interrelated.

Kaizen and innovation management as a strategy for lean manufacturing

Lean incorporates the usage of one of the tools, Kaizen, which encourages CI throughout an
organization. Kaizen is a process improvement activity widely being practiced by
IJLSS organizations. It is thus considered to be vital for the application of lean (Bateman, 2005).
11,6 Kumar and Jain (2013) applied muda elimination tool in manufacturing organization and
remarked its positive impact on the organizational performance, particularly with respect to
reduced processing time, working space and increased work flow. Graban and Swartz (2012)
have used Kaizen muda/waste and plan–do–standardize–act (PDSA) tools in a health-care
setup to study the effect of muda elimination with respect to over-production, waiting line,
1042 inventory mismanagement, over-processing and human potential waste. The authors
established a positive relationship between PDSA and organizational productivity by
reducing the waiting time. The literature showing Kaizen and innovation management is
shown in Table 1.

Performance parameters for the study

The various performance parameters of the study are explained in Table 2.

Literature support of government policies toward green initiatives

Zhang (2008) described that the Government of India has expressed the desire to use
markets for control of pollution in the country. India has levied a cess on coal at the rate of
Rs. 50 per ton, which is applicable to both domestically produced and imported coal. This
money goes into a National Clean Energy Fund that is used for funding research, innovative
projects in clean energy technologies and environmental remedial programs.
Government of India (GOI, 2014) set up a high-level committee in 2014 to review all the
environmental laws and ascertain the gaps in government policies. To drive a paradigm
shift in technology adoption, this committee recommended a reworking of the existing
standards and revising a system of financial penalties and rewards to create a market-
related incentive system to encourage “green projects.”
Satapathy et al. (2017) investigated the mediating and moderating role of the government
in cleaner technology adoption (CTA) for climate proactivity. The data collected from a
survey of Indian firms were analyzed through exploratory factor analysis and multiple
regression analysis to examine the mediating and moderating role of the government. The

Literature
Strategy support Kind of study

Kaizen; Innovation Sigari and Clark The authors developed the relationship of impact of Kaizen and
Management (2013) innovation management on organizational sustainability through
lean manufacturing using structural equation modeling in the
British manufacturing companies. Results indicated that Kaizen
shows positive potential toward organization sustainability but
innovation management shows negative effect on organization
sustainability through elimination of waste
Kaizen Bateman and The authors reported the application of Kaizen in a power
Rich (2003) generation organization and showed the reduction of 25% in
cycle times. This demonstrates how using lean in power
Table 1. generation industries can aid the conservation of energy through
the usage of process improvement activities
Literature support to
Kaizen Pampanelli et al. The authors discussed the case of Kaizen in reducing energy
Kaizen and (2014) consumption through their study of a production cell. Energy
innovation flow in the cell was reduced in the range of 5%–10% showing
management as a how a lean and green model can aid the sustainability movement
lean strategy by decreasing energy consumption
Performance
Impact of lean
parameter Explanation Author practices
Environment Many organizations are content simply to establish a system for Wiengarten,
performance removing trash. Increasingly, greater attention is being paid to waste et al. (2013)
management, and pro-active organizations are seeing the benefits of
establishing a waste reduction program. It includes recycling and
managing of waste because of pollution that surrounds our earth and 1043
because of operations
Economic Economic performance of the organization deals with the following: Wang (2010)
performance
Product cost refers to the costs used to create a product. These costs
include direct labor, direct materials, consumable production
supplies and factory overhead. Product cost can also be considered
the cost of the labor required to deliver a service to a customer. In
the latter case, product cost should include all costs related to a
service, such as compensation, payroll taxes and employee benefits

Operational efficiency can be defined as the ratio between an output
gained from the business and an input to run a business operation.
When improving operational efficiency, the output-to-input ratio
improves

Profit in terms of money
Competitive Competitive performance includes the following: Stefan and Paul
performance
Productivity is about the effective and efficient use of all resources. (2008)
Resources include time, people, knowledge, information, finance,
equipment, space, energy and materials

Quality improvement includes management of the quality of raw
materials, assemblies, products and components, services related to
production, and management, production and inspection processes

Customer satisfaction by providing a timely delivery of the product Table 2.

In eco-friendly operations, you can implement the practices that will Explanation of
lead to healthier living for the planet performance

Competitive image improvement helps organizations to grow parameters

study finding indicated that although government mediates CTA, the government policies
are not adequate for faster CTA for climate proactivity. Government is strongly mediating
between firm and CTA for climate proactivity.

S. no. Important issues and strategies Source

1. Kaizen and innovation management is capable of sustaining organization by Singh and Singh
making small incremental improvements (2014)
2. Kaizen and innovation can significantly reduce waste through strategic
implementation
3. GSCM practices are capable of reducing environmental waste supply chain
concept
4. Small incremental improvements are capable of sustaining organizational
goals
5. Organizational goals can be achieved through Kaizen and innovation
management Table 3.
6 Environmental instability leads to disturbance in life of living being on earth Important issues and
7. Green initiatives are capable of reducing environmental waste strategies
IJLSS Important issues and strategies identified from literature review
11,6 The important issues and strategies (practices) that are identified are discussed in Table 3.
Table 4 shows different practices of Kaizen and innovation management taken in the
study.

1044 Research methodology and research instrument

This research has been developed in two different steps. First, literature from different case
studies, surveys and concept has been reviewed to identify that are considered to be key
issues for the business sustainability of in Indian context. This information was used to
develop a questionnaire which contains issues related to Kaizen, innovation management
and GSCM and performance parameters of organizational sustainability. Structured
interview along with filling of questionnaire has been conducted with the respondents of the
industrial professionals and academicians to assess how they value these factors and how
factors effect the organizational sustainability through GSCM. Theoretical framework has
been established by selecting the organization from industrial directory of India and
conducting interviews and filling questionnaire. The survey based on convenient sampling
(filling of questionnaire from industry selected based on convenience) has been performance
to ascertain the benefits of Kaizen and innovation management practices toward
performance improvement. The framework also includes fixing of face-to-face interview
time with respondents. The exhaustive literature review helped to identify different aspects
of Kaizen and innovation management practices. For conducting survey, a questionnaire on
five-point Likert scale has been designed, which consists of six different sections:
(1) First section includes questions related to general information about the company
and respondent characteristics.
(2) Section A indicates the issues related to Kaizen, innovation management,
government policies on five-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly agree, 2 = Agree, 3 =
Neutral, 4 = Disagree, 5 = Strongly disagree).
(3) Section B shows level of importance of different innovation management strategies
(1 = Not at all important, 2 = To some extent, 3 = To a moderate extent, 4 = To a
large extent, 5 = To an extremely large extent)
(4) Section C shows important issues related to Kaizen (1 = Not at all, 2 = To some
extent, 3 = To a moderate extent, 4 = To a large extent, 5 = To an extremely large
extent).
(5) Section D shows the level of importance different criteria’s used in GSCM (1 = Not
at all important, 2 = To some extent, 3 = To a moderate extent, 4 = To a large
extent, 5 = To an extremely large extent).

Kaizen Innovation management

Table 4.
1. Supplier development 1. Innovative resources
Distinguishable
2. Just-in-Time 2. Organization culture
Kaizen and 3. Total quality management 3. Organization structure
innovation 4. Total productive maintenance 4. Innovative strategy
management 5. Customer relationship 5. Innovative system
practices Reference: Singh and Singh (2010) Zheng et al. (2010)
 Exhaustive Literature Review Impact of lean
practices
Identification of important issues and strategies of Kaizen, Innovation Management, GSM and Performance Parameters

Application of Structural Equation Modeling and Statistical Analysis

1045
Results and Discussions
Figure 1.
Research
Conclusions methodology

(6) Section E indicates the role of Kaizen and innovation management on

organizational sustainability through supply chain management (1 = Not at all,
2 = To some extent, 3 = To a moderate extent, 4 = To a large extent, 5 = To an
extremely large extent).

The research methodology is shown in Figure 1.

To ensure the relevance and effectiveness of the questions of the questionnaire, it is pre-tested on
a representative sample of industry and experienced researchers. A total of 150 were initially
selected from among the confederation of Indian industry and directorate of industries for the
survey for the sake of sampling. A total of 46 questionnaires have been filled, representing a
response rate of 30.7%, to ascertain contributions made by lean strategies, viz. Kaizen and
innovation management in the Indian context toward realization of organizational sustainability
through GSCM. The organizations that filled the questionnaire include auto parts, cycle parts,
rods and sheet metal components manufacturing companies. The companies manufacturing
billets, blooms, pipes and scaffolding did not filled out the questionnaire as these companies do
not apply small incremental changes and GSCM practices. The selection of manufacturing
industry is done on convenient sampling technique.

Data analysis
This section includes the detailed description of statistical analysis performed to validate
the questionnaire and meet the objectives of the study.

Hypotheses for the study, testing and reliability analysis

To ascertain the role of Kaizen and innovation on organizational sustainability through
GSCM (mediating effect), SEM technique has been applied to the different independent and
dependent variables. To assess the performance of these lean strategies, an individual model
and mixed model have been prepared to ascertain the relationship between latent variables
with each other and also on measured variables assigned to each latent variable. The error
variables depicting measurement error are also included in relation to measurement
variables. The variance of all the error variables has been fixed in software AMOS 24. SEM
is a family of statistical models that seek to explain the relationship among multiple
variables. To do so, it examines the structure of interrelationships expressed in a series of
equations, similar to a series of multiple regression equations. These equations depict all of
relationship among construct involved in the analysis. Constructs are unobservable or latent
factors that are represented by multiple variables. The standard path coefficient (SPC) of one
individual measurement is fixed and the value of other path coefficients is measured relative
IJLSS to fixed measurement variable having SPC unity. The reliability of data is measured from
11,6 factor loading and Cronbach’s alpha, and hypotheses have been framed using correlation
analysis. Table 5 shows the correlation coefficient between exogenous and endogenous
variables.
A cutoff loading of 0.5 has been used to screen out variables that are weak indicators of
the constructs. The reliability coefficient of different variables is greater than 0.7, which is
1046 adequate for every empirical research as shown in Table 6. All the values are greater than
0.70, which is appropriate for the survey research.
The hypotheses have been framed for the present research in concern with SEM as
shown below:

H1. Kaizen, innovation management and government policies have positive influence
on innovation management strategies.
H2. Kaizen, innovation management and government policies have positive influence
on green supply chain management.
H3. Green supply chain management has positive influence on organizational
sustainability.
H4. Innovation management strategies have positive influence on green supply chain
management.
Figure 2 shows the hypotheses formulated for the proposed research from correlation
analysis and literature review.
Figure 3 shows the measurement model showing the impact of various exogenous
variables on endogenous variables. The value of SPC between these variables has been
calculated to ascertain the significance of Kaizen, innovation management, government
policies and innovation management strategies on organization sustainability through
GSCM.
Table 7 indicates the high model conformity prepared for improving the organizational
sustainability. The variables assigned to each of the dimensions have been subjected to
factors analysis to ensure that they are reliable indicators of those constructs.
The individual influence of different exogenous variables on endogenous variables, viz.
Kaizen, innovation management and government policies on GSCM is also predicted
through SEM. Figure 4 shows the measurement model showing the relationship between
these variables.
Figure 4 shows the individual measurement model showing the relationship between
various variables.
Table 8 shows the various indices of model fit for improving the performance of GSCM. The
value of various indices of model fit is between the standard limits so results are reliable.

Variables F1 F2 GSCM F3

F1 1 0.286062 0.077073 0.152826

F2 1 0.638147 0.645733
GSCM 1 0.683753
F3 1
Table 5.
Correlation between Notes: F1 signifies Kaizen, innovation management and government policies; F2 signifies innovation
different variables management strategies; F3 signifies performance parameters
 Impact of lean
Cronbach’s
Factor name Variables alpha
practices
Supplier development Managing the financial outcomes of every innovative activities are 0.764
issues (a) useful for working with suppliers
Significant reduction through Takt time through value stream
mapping helps in supplier development
Significant reduction in waste through value stream analysis helps 1047
to work continuously with suppliers
Innovative system (b) Employee search for new creative ideas and technologies as a part of 0.821
Kaizen practices
Relationship among employees is helpful in creating small
innovative system
Risk factors are easily assessable
Employees use failures as opportunity to learn as part of innovative
improvement
Employees let organizational objectives guide the evaluation of new
ideas and information as part of continuous improvement practices
Culture (c) The innovative culture encourages employees to hold knowledge 0.765
closely
The innovative culture reinforces behavior that upholds traditions
The culture encourages managers to closely monitor work time
The culture focuses on short-term performance
The culture encourages employees to interact with other people
Knowledge Do you have proper understanding of innovative Kaizen tools? 0.724
management (d) Do proper training programs are available for workers?
Top management actively participate in innovative improvement
activities
Internal and external audits encourage employee for continuous
improvement
Technological Our organization has the same or similar technologies as our 0.821
capability (e) competitors
Managers divide resources to share technology
Employees work consistently with the specific technological goals
Company considers the use of technology as a determinant of
business growth
Government policies Adoption and execution of technologies considering the environment 0.732
(f) Investment to decrease pollution
Setting up of monitoring network for assessment of ambient air
quality
Creation of infrastructure for industrial pollution control in corporate
cleaner production processes
Innovative resources Financial resources 0.823
(g) Social capital resources
Human resources
Organization culture Openness to idea and tolerance to failure 0.721
(h) Trust and cooperation
Knowledge creation
Organization Organization flexibility 0.897
structure (i) Communication and integration
Innovative strategy Strategy integration 0.784 Table 6.
(j) Strategy communication Reliability of
Top management commitment endogenous and
(continued) exogenous variables
IJLSS
Cronbach’s
11,6 Factor name Variables alpha

Leadership (k) Knowledge of leader 0.872

Characteristic of leader
Leadership style
Motivation by leader
1048 Innovation Efficiency and effectiveness of innovation process 0.762
performance (l) Number of external links
Time to complete innovation management projects
Number of product developed
Increased innovative ideas
Environment To incorporate waste management of the organization 0.843
performance (m) To reduce waste resulting from operations
Cutting down on waste resulting from pollution
To recycle the waste product.
Economic Improve the final cost of the product (power) 0.763
performance (n) Improvement in operational efficiency of the organization
Improves the profit of the organization
Competitive Increased productivity 0.734
performance (o) Improvement in quality
Overall customer satisfaction
Eco-friendly operations by government or non-government
employees
Table 6. Improvement in competitive image of the organization

GSCM
H2
F1
H3
H4

H1

F3
Figure 2.
F2
Hypotheses for the
research

The individual influence of different exogenous variables on endogenous variables, viz.

innovation management strategies on GSCM, is also predicted through SEM. Figure 5
shows the measurement model showing the relationship between these variables.
Table 9 shows the various indices of model fit for improving the performance of GSCM.
The value of various indices is between the standard limits so results are standards.
 0.42 Impact of lean
1
e6 a 0.47 practices
0.06 0.10
e5 1 b e16
1.24 0.16
0.15 –0.21
e4 1 c 0.73 1
0.14 F1 GSCM
0.79
e3 1 d 1049
0.17 1.07 0.44
1 e
e2
0.28
1 f 1.00
e1
0. 08 0.85
0.07
e12 1 g 0.49
0.18
1 h 0.16 0.11
e11 0.92
m 1
0.18 e17 1.0 e13
1 i 0.78 0.57
e10 1 0.10
F2 F3 1.2 n 1
0.21 e14
0.81
e9 1 j 0.99 0.14
Figure 3.
0.24 0.76 o 1 e15 Measurement model
e8 1 k of improving the
0.07 organizational
1 l 1.00 sustainability
e7

Indices Calculated values Standard values

Chi-square/degree of freedom 1.8009 Value should be less than 3

GFI (Goodness of fit index) 0.700 0 # GFI # 1
CFI (Comparative fit index) 0.835 0 # CFI # 1
TLI (Tucker–Lewis index) 0.804 0 # TLI # 1 Table 7.
AGFI (Adjusted goodness of fit) 0.596 0 # AGFI # 1 Various indices of
Probability level 0.000 <0.05 model fit

Validation of hypotheses framed

Results of investigation demonstrated that combined effect of small incremental
improvements, managing innovative activities and government policies collectively
decreases the performance of environment consideration in supply chain
management by 0.21. With the unity improvement in innovation management
strategies, the environment consideration of supply chain improves by a factor of
0.44. Both collectively improve the business sustainability by a factor of 0.85
through high improvement in economic performance. With the innovation
management activities, there is an improvement in small incremental changes by a
factor of 0.08 and vice versa. Collectively, small incremental changes in the
organization, innovation management and government policies have positive
influence on the measurement variables of innovation management strategies.
Innovation management strategies individually improve the performance of GSCM
through its measurement variables. However, government policies have non-
IJLSS 0.42
11,6 e6 1 a 0.47
0.06
e5 1 b 1.24
0.15
1 c 0.73 0.21
1050 e4
0.14 F1 e7
0.79
e3 1 d
Figure 4.
1.07 1
Individual 0.17
measurement model e2 1 e GSCM
showing relationship
0.28
between various 1.00
1 f
variables e1

Indices Calculated values Standard values

Chi-square/degree of freedom 2.243 Value should be less than 3

GFI (Goodness of fit index) 0.686 0 # GFI # 1
CFI (Comparative fit index) 0.758 0 # CFI # 1
Table 8. TLI (Tucker–Lewis index) 0.713 0 # TLI # 1
Various indices of AGFI (Adjusted goodness of fit) 0.577 0 # AGFI # 1
model fit Probability level 0.001 <0.05

0.07
e13 1 g 0.49
0.18
1 h
e12 0.92
Figure 5.
0.18
Individual 1 i 0.78 0.57
e11 0.11
measurement model
0.21 F2 e7
showing relationship 1
0.81
0.41
e10 j
between innovation
0.24 0.76 1
management
1 k GSCM
strategies on green e9
supply chain 0.07
1 1.00
management e8 l

significant positive impact on GSCM. The lean strategies have positive influence on
organizational sustainability by improving the economic performance by a factor of
1.28, environmental performance by a factor of 1 and competitive performance by a
factor of 0.99. With the unity increase in the small incremental changes, there is
increase in supplier development by a factor of 0.47; innovative system improves by
a factor of 1.24; culture improves by a factor of 0.73; knowledge management
improves by a factor of 0.79; technological capability improves by a factor of 1.07; Impact of lean
and the government policies improves by a factor of 1. practices
Correlation between various Kaizen issues on organizational sustainability
On the basis of the responses received from the industry professionals and academicians, an
assessment of association of various Kaizen issues with organizational sustainability
parameters has been made. To explore the role of Kaizen issues toward organizational
performance improvement, the Pearson correlations have been worked out to ascertain the
1051
significant factors contributing to the success of the Kaizen issue implementation program
in the organizations. The correlation analysis depicts how Kaizen issues are related to
different performance aspects of organizational sustainability. The positive value of Karl
Pearson coefficient of correlation depicts that each issue has a positive effect on the
performance parameters of CI. Table 10 shows the values of Karl Pearson coefficient of
correlation calculated for Kaizen issues and organizational sustainability through
performance parameters.

Indices Calculated values Standard values

Chi-square/degree of freedom 2.435 Value should be less than 3

GFI (Goodness of fit index) 0.842 0 # GFI # 1
CFI (Comparative fit index) 0.918 0 # CFI # 1
TLI (Tucker–Lewis index) 0.878 0 # TLI # 1 Table 9.
AGFI (Adjusted goodness of fit) 0.683 0 # AGFI # 1 Various indices of
Probability level 0.002 <0.05 model fit

Kaizen issues/performance Environmental Economic performance Competitive

parameters performance (Y1) (Y2) performance (Y3)

TPM issues (A1) 0.486* 0.551* 0.352*

TQM issues (A2) 0.459* 0.576* 0.513* Table 10.
5S issues (A3) 0.505* 0.532* 0.584*
JIT issues (A4) 0.681* 0.705* 0.693*
Correlation between
Overall Kaizen issues (A) 0.645* 0.713* 0.643* Kaizen issues and
performance
Note: *Correlation is significant at 5% level parameters

Kaizen issues/performance parameters Y1 Y2 Y3

A1 3.68 4.37 2.49

A2 3.43 4.67 3.97
A3 4.49 4.17 4.77
A4 6.16 6.61 6.17
Table 11.
A 5.58 6.75 5.61 t-Values for
validating correlation
Note: Table value of t = 2.031 coefficient
IJLSS Further, t-test has been conducted for investigating and validating the contributions of
11,6 Kaizen issues toward realization of significant performance enhancements, which will lead
to success of Kaizen issues. The t-values can be calculated by using the following relation:
pffiffiffi
r n2
t ¼ pffiffiffi  tn  2
1  r2
1052
where n  2 is the degree of freedom for the calculation of table value of t. Table 11 shows
the value of t for validating the correlation coefficient.

Result discussion of correlation between Kaizen issues and performance parameters

Results of the t-test show that all the correlation coefficients are significant at 5% level
because the calculated value of t is more than table value of t. Results of investigation
demonstrated that maintenance activities are significantly aimed at improving economic
performance of the organizations followed by environmental performance and competitive
performance. Involving all people in quality improvement activities is significantly aimed at
improving economic performance of the organizations followed by competitive performance
and environmental performance. Workplace organizational activities are significantly
aimed at improving competitive performance followed by economic performance and
environmental performance. JIT approach is significantly aimed at improving the economic
performance followed by competitive performance and environmental performance. Overall
economic performance of the organization is significantly improved by small incremental
changes in the organization followed by environmental performance and competitive
performance.

Issues Mean SD z-statistics

TPM issues
Does your organization has achieved the benefit of preventive maintenance? 3.130435 0.777709 5.497699*
Does small group activities are capable of performing better results? 3.26087 0.743409 6.94129*
Does equipment restoration really help in maintenance activities? 3.152174 0.787891 5.613773*
TQM issues
Are the quality practices helpful in implementing Kaizen activities? 3.195652 0.653863 7.215451*
Is removing operator mistakes really helpful? 3 0.730297 4.643318*
DMAIC methodology is helpful in making small innovative changes 3.152174 0.665579 6.645409*
5S issues
Have you obtained benefit of categorized lean 5S activities? 3.521739 0.752452 9.209142*
Did the percentage rating of 5S activities really helpful? 3.304348 0.83983 6.495468*
On-floor housekeeping is really helpful in incremental change 3.217391 0.727646 6.686422*
JIT issues
Did workflow analysis really helpful? 3.369565 0.710515 3.369565*
Removing constraints in the process is helpful in implementing Kaizen 3.434783 0.77895 3.434783*
Removing unnecessary material movement is helpful in reducing waste 3.434783 0.806974 3.434783*
Organization promotes the application of JIT practices 3.304348 0.756294 3.304348*
Table 12. Maintained equipment and tools well at workplace 3.326087 0.668476 3.326087*
Level of importance
of Kaizen sub-issues Notes: Z critical (0.05) = 1.645, Z critical (0.01) = 2.464; *significant at 5% level, **significant at 1% level
Level of importance of Kaizen issues Impact of lean
To explore the level of importance of different Kaizen issues evolved in improving the practices
organizational performance by ascertaining the different benefits from CI
implementation, z-distribution or z-test [for samples of size (n), more than 30, called
large samples, z-distribution is applicable] has been applied to ascertain the importance
of various Kaizen issues. The level of importance of different Kaizen issues has been
measured from the values of mean, and the significance level has been tested on the 1053
basis of z-statistic. Tables 12 and 13 show the level of importance of different Kaizen
sub-issues and Kaizen issues.

Result discussion of important issues and sub-issues of Kaizen

Results of investigation show that calculated z is more than the table value of z at the level of
significance adopted, so the claims are justified. Results of investigation demonstrated that
small group activities performed in the organization are helpful in performing maintenance
activities followed by preventive maintenance and equipment restoration which in turn
helps in change for better; quality practices are helpful in making small incremental
changes, which in turn improve the organization followed by DMAIC methodology and
reducing operator mistakes for improving the organization quality issues; removing
constraints in the process and reducing unnecessary is highly helpful in improving the
organization performance followed by workflow analysis, promotion of JIT activities and
maintaining equipment is important in improving the performance of organizations.
Delivering the product at right time and right place is significantly most important followed
by 5S issues, TPM issues and TQM issues.

Impact of government policies and level of importance of different government policies in

improving the performance of green supply chain management
On the basis of the responses received from the industry professionals and academicians, an
assessment of association of government policies on GSCM is done. Correlation coefficient is
calculated and tested at level of significance adopted. Table 14 shows the correlation

Issues Mean SD z-statistics

TPM issues 3.181159 0.635208 7.272617*

TQM issues 3.115942 0.482879 8.650857*
5S issues 3.347826 0.628369 9.150612*
JIT issues 3.373913 0.507033 11.68934* Table 13.
Level of importance
Notes: Z critical (0.05) = 1.645, Z critical (0.01) = 2.464; *significant at 5% level, **significant at 1% level of Kaizen issues

Table 14.
Correlation
coefficient between
Government Polices/Green supply chain management Green supply chain management
government polices
Government policies 0.1724** and green supply
t-Value 1.01 chain management
IJLSS coefficient between government polices and GSCM, and Table 15 shows the level of
11,6 importance of different government policies.

Result discussion of role of government policies in improving the performance of green

supply chain management
Results of investigation suggest that government policies are not significant for improving
1054 the performance of GSCM as the calculated t is less than the table value of t, which shows
dissatisfaction of the role of government polices among various respondents. The
investment in decreasing pollution is the most significantly important government policy
needed to improve the green thinking through supply chain. The respondents are not
confident in answering the issues, including adoption and execution of technologies
considering the environment, setting up of monitoring network for assessment of ambient
air quality and creation of infrastructure for industrial pollution control in corporate cleaner
production processes, so government should take appropriate steps to reduce the pollution
in the environment.

Results discussion of level of importance of different innovation management strategies

Results of investigation demonstrated that human resources is the most important strategy
of innovation resources followed by financial resources and social capital resources; trust
and cooperation is the most important innovation management strategy in terms of
organization culture followed by knowledge creation and openness to idea and tolerance to
failure; communication and integration is rated more important in terms of organization
structure followed by organization flexibility; top management commitment is rated the
most important innovation management strategy in terms of innovative strategy followed
by strategy communication and strategy integration; motivation by leader is the most
important strategy in terms of leadership followed by knowledge of leader, characteristic of
leader and leadership style; and increased innovative ideas is rated the most important in
terms of innovation performance followed by time to complete innovation management
projects, efficiency and effectiveness of innovation process and number of external links.

Important benefits of implementing Kaizen and innovation management through supply

chain management
In order to explore the benefits of Kaizen and Innovation Management evolved in
improving the organization organizational sustainability by ascertaining the different
benefits from these strategies, z-distribution or z-test [for samples of size (n); more than 30,
called large samples, z-distribution is applicable] has been applied. The important benefits

Government policies Mean SD z-statistics

Adoption and execution of technologies considering the environment 2.391304 0.829411 0.88879***
Investment to decrease pollution 2.26087 0.880272 1.84236**
Setting up of monitoring network for assessment of ambient air
quality 2.543478 0.780499 0.377796***
Table 15. Creation of infrastructure for industrial pollution control in corporate
Level of importance cleaner production processes 2.434783 0.77895 0.56782***
of different Notes: Z critical (0.05) = 1.645, Z critical (0.01) = 2.464; *significant at 5% level, **significant at 1% level,
government policies ***not significant
Role Mean SD z-statistics
Impact of lean
practices
Environment performance
To incorporate waste management of the organization 3.369565 0.770532 7.65366*
To reduce waste resulting from operations 3.347826 0.947919 6.065872*
Cutting down on waste resulting from pollution 3.391304 0.855785 7.063491*
To recycle the waste products 3.456522 0.911812 7.114549*
Economic performance
1055
Improve the final cost of the product (power) 3.630435 0.852674 8.991253*
Improvement in operational efficiency of the organization 3.543478 0.887106 7.977482*
Improves the profit of the organization 3.608696 0.881369 8.531242*
Competitive performance
Increased productivity 3.543478 0.861691 8.212766*
Improvement in quality 3.869565 0.859165 10.81095*
Overall customer satisfaction 3.891304 0.795215 11.86575* Table 16.
Eco-friendly operations by government or non-government employees 3.326087 0.761704 7.355246*
Improvement in competitive image of the organization 3.73913 0.772723 10.87554*
Important benefits of
implementing Kaizen
Notes: Z critical (0.05) = 1.645, Z critical (0.01) = 2.464; *significant at 5% level, **significant at 1% level, and innovation
***not significant management issues

Table 17.
Role of various
performance
Role Mean SD z-statistics parameters in
improving
Environment performance 3.347826 0.655147 8.776592* organizational
Economic performance 3.594203 0.785401 9.44853* sustainability
Competitive performance 3.673913 0.675092 11.79318* through green supply

Notes: Z critical (0.05) = 1.645, Z critical (0.01) = 2.464; *significant at 5% level, **significant at 1% level, chain management
***not significant (mediator)

achieved of Kaizen and Innovation Management issues have been measured from the values
of mean and the significance level has been tested on the basis of z-value. Tables 16 and 17
show the important benefits of different Kaizen and innovation management issues through
GSCM.

Result discussion of role of Kaizen and innovation management on organizational

sustainability through green supply chain management
Results indicated that calculated value of z is more than the table value of z, which signifies
that all claims are justified and significant. Results of investigation recommended that
Kaizen and innovation management is significantly aimed at recycling the waste products
followed by cutting down on waste resulting from pollution, incorporating waste
management of the organization and reducing waste resulting from operations in terms of
environmental performance; it improves the final cost of the product, improves the profit
of the organization and improves the operational efficiency of the organization in reference
to economic performance; overall customer satisfaction, improvement in quality,
improvement in competitive image of the organization, increased productivity and eco-
IJLSS friendly operations by government or non-government employees. The organization
11,6 sustainability is achieved through competitive performance, economic performance and
environment performance. The competitive performance is significantly improved as its
mean value is highest among the three benefits of implementing Kaizen and innovation
management.

1056 Conclusions, specific contribution, practical and managerial and social

implications, limitations and future scope
Conclusions and specific contribution
The results of investigation demonstrated that small incremental improvements, inventing
new things in the organization significantly aimed at organizational sustainability through
GSCM as a mediating variable. To sustain organization, they must exploit human resources,
trust and cooperation among employees, communication and integration among employees,
top management commitment, motivation by leader and time to complete innovation
management projects. Different aspects of the lean (Kaizen and innovation management
practices) and green strategies (green supply chain practices) have been studied as the
subsequent or simultaneous deployment of their practices has been considered as a potential
approach for achieving organizational sustainability. The study outlines the significance of
GSCM toward organization sustainability through environmental performance, economic
performance and competitive performance in Indian context. Kaizen issues have most
significant impact on the economic performance of the organization. Lean thinking results in
exceptional enhancement in organizational performance parameters simply by focusing on
waste identification and elimination with CI cycles. This thinking will be useful in service
sector and also in the other developing countries. The combined effect of Kaizen, innovation
management and government policies has been investigated but government policies were
not significant. The survey suggests dissatisfaction of the respondents toward government
policies regarding pollution-related aspects. However, government must implement new
policies regarding reduction of pollution so as to reduce pollution and sustain life on earth.

Social and managerial implications

This study is an attempt to make aware society about role of GSCM to the society by
introducing environment thinking into supply chain. The study adds to the literature the
significance of GSCM practices as a contributor of organization sustainability. KAIZEN and
innovation are aimed at improving the competitive image of the organization though
achievement of organization goals. The industrial professionals and academicians were
satisfied with the performance of these practices in their organization and significantly
predict the organizational sustainability. The present study outlines the significance of
Kaizen and innovation management that help professionals to know the significance of
small changes in the process and inventing new techniques toward performance
improvement through GSCM. The awareness aspects about the ill effects of pollution on
human life are ascertained. Indian industry should have more focus on lean thinking within
their manufacturing operations to improve upon productivity, quality, cost competitiveness
and improved financial results. Moreover, the understanding about ill effect will motivate
new generation to work toward the problem of pollution.

Practical implication
The readers will come to know the practical significance of small incremental improvements
and innovative activities in the manufacturing and service by taking into consideration the
green supply chain practices as a moderator and mediator. Moreover, the significance of
lean and green strategies in practical manufacturing environment can be studied effectively Impact of lean
from the present research. practices
Limitations and future scope
The study has some limitations as shown below:

The data is self-reporting in nature.

Scope of subjectivity might be there because industrial professionals and 1057
academicians have responded according to their own perceptions.

There is a possibility of method variance in applying SEM.

The selection of industry has been done on convenience sapling technique.

There are chances of variability of views while interviewing the respondents.

Furthermore, this study does not consider the specific relationship between the adoption of
GSCM practices and the individual metrics of each performance dimension. Survey can be
expanded by considering the constraints in implementing these practices. The difficulty
level of these practices can be assessed based on which it could be recommended that these
organizations should implement the most important and least difficult practices of Kaizen
and innovation management. Manufacturing sector can be considered as a main focus of
study. Moreover, longitudinal study can be conducted.

References
Abernathy, W. (1978), The Productivity Dilemma: Roadblock to Innovation in the Automobile Industry,
Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD.
Bateman, N. (2005), “Sustainability: the elusive element of process improvement”, International Journal
of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 261-276.
Bateman, N. and Rich, N. (2003), “Companies perceptions of inhibitors and enablers for process
improvement activities”, International Journal of Operations and Production Management,
Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 185-199.
Berkhout, A.J. and van der Duin, P.A. (2007), “New ways of innovation: an application of the cyclic
innovation model to the mobile telecom industry”, International Journal of Technology
Management, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 294-309.
Bhamu, J., Khandelwal, A. and Sangwan, K.S. (2013), “Lean manufacturing implementation in an
automated production line: a case study”, International Journal of Services and Operations
Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 411-429.
Chahal, H. and Fayza, N.A. (2016), “An exploratory study on Kaizen muda and organizational
sustainability: patients perspective”, International Journal of Lean Enterprise Research, Vol. 2
No. 1, pp. 81-94.
Chen, J.C., Dugger, J. and Hammer, B. (2000), “A KAIZEN based approach for cellular manufacturing
design: a case study”, The Journal of Technology Studies, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 19-27.
Chugani, N., Kumar, V., Garcia-Reyes, J.A., Rocha-Lona, L. and Upadhyay, A. (2017), “Investigating the
green impact of lean, six sigma and lean six sigma: a systematic literature review”, International
Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 7-32.
Corbett, C.J. and Klassen, R.D. (2006), “Extending the horizons: environmental excellence as key to
improving operations”, Manufacturing and Service Operations Management, Vol. 8 No. 1,
pp. 5-22.
Duarte, S. and Cruz-Machado, V. (2017), “Green and lean implementation: an assessment in the
automotive industry”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 8-18.
IJLSS Fortes, J. (2009), “Green supply chain management: a literature review”, Otago Management Graduate
Review, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 51-62.
11,6
Galeazzo, G.A., Furlan, A. and Vinelli, A. (2014), “Lean and green in action: interdependencies and
performance of pollution prevention projects”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 85 No. 4,
pp. 191-200.
Garza-Reyes, J.A. (2015), “Lean and green–a systematic review of the state of the art literature”, Journal
of Cleaner Production, Vol. 102, pp. 18-29.
1058
Geng, R., Mansouri, S.A. and Aktas, E. (2017), “The relationship between green supply chain
management and performance: a Meta-analysis of empirical evidances in Asian emerging
economies”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 183, pp. 245-258.
Gonzalez, F., Eileen, A. and Van, A.M. (2016), “Systematic literature review of critical success factors
for continuous improvement projects”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 7 No. 3,
pp. 214-232.
Government of India (GOI) (2014), “Report high level committee to review various acts administered”,
Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, New Delhi, p. 95.
Graban, M. and Swartz, J. (2012), Kaizen for Healthcare: Engaging Front Line Staff in Sustainable
Continuous Improvements, CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group.
Green, K.W., Jr, Whitten, D. and Inman, R.A. (2008), “The impact of logistics performance on
organizational performance in a supply chain context”, Supply Chain Management: An
International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 317-327.
Handfield, R.B., Walton, S.V., Seegers, L.K. and Melnyk, S.A. (1997), “Green’ value chain practices in the
furniture industry”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 293-315.
Hofer, C., Cantor, D.E. and Dai, J. (2012), “The competitive determinants of a firm’s environmental
management activities: evidence from US manufacturing industries”, Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 30 Nos 1/2, pp. 69-84.
Horn, C. and Brem, A. (2013), “Professional development-a conceptual framework”, Management
Research Review, Vol. 36 No. 10, pp. 939-954.
Jacobs, B.W., Singhal, V.R. and Subramanian, R. (2010), “An empirical investigation of environmental
performance and the market value of the firm”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 28
No. 5, pp. 430-441.
Jurburg, D., Viles, E., Tanco, M. and Mateo, R. (2017), “What motivates employees to participate in
continuous improvement activities?”, Total Quality Management and Business Excellence,
Vol. 28 Nos 13/14, pp. 1469-1488.
Kalay, F. and Lynn, G.S. (2015), “The impact of strategic innovation management practices on firm
innovation performance”, Pressacademia, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 412-429.
Kaskhedikar, K. and Katore, H.V. (2013), “Improvement of quality and productivity in casting
industries”, Mechanica Confab, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 63-71.
Kim, C. and Park, J.-H. (2010), “The global research-and-development network and its effect on
innovation”, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 43-57.
Klassen, R.D. and McLaughlin, C.P. (1996), “The impact of environmental management on firm
performance”, Management Science, Vol. 42 No. 8, pp. 1199-1214.
Kumar, A.A. and Jain, S. (2013), “Impacts of Kaizen in a small-scale industry of India: a case study”,
International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 22-44.
Kumar, R. and Kumar, V. (2016), “Effect of lean manufacturing on organizational performance of Indian
industry: a survey”, International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, Vol. 17 No. 3,
pp. 380-393.
Lee, R.P. (2010), “Extending the environment-strategy-performance framework: the roles of Impact of lean
multinational corporation network strength, market responsiveness, and product innovation”,
Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 58-73.
practices
Mĺkva, M., Prajova, V., Yakimovich, B., Korshunov, A. and Tyurin, I. (2016), “Standardization - one of
the tools of continuous improvement”, International Conference on Manufacturing Engineering
and Materials, 6-10 June 2016, Nový Smokovec, Slovakia, pp. 329-332.
Newitt, D.J.H. (1996), “Beyond BPR and TQM- managing the processes: is Kaizen enough?”,
Proceedings Industrial Engineering, Institution of Electric Engineers, London, pp. 1-5. 1059
O’neill, P. and Sohal, A.S. (1999), “Business process reengineering a review of recent literature”,
Technovation, Vol. 19 No. 9, pp. 571-581.
Ortt, J.R. and Van der Duin, P.A. (2008), “The evolution of innovation management towards contextual
innovation”, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 522-538.
Pampanelli, A.B., Found, P. and Bernardes, A.M. (2014), “A lean and green model for a production cell”,
Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 85 No. 2, pp. 19-30.
Peng, Y.-S. and Lin, S.-S. (2008), “Local responsiveness pressure, subsidiary resources, green
management adoption and subsidiary’s performance: evidence from Taiwanese manufactures”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 79 Nos 1/2, pp. 199-212.
Rajavi, S.H. and Attarnezhad, O. (2013), “Management of organizational innovation”, International
Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 226-232.
Sartal, A., Senra, A.I.M. and Cruz-Machado, V. (2018), “Are all lean principles equally eco-friendly? A
panel data study”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 177 No. 1, pp. 362-370.
Satapathy, S.K., Sangle, S. and Unnikrishnan, S. (2017), “Role of government towards adoption of
cleaner technologies for climate proactivity: a survey-based empirical study of Indian firms”,
World Journal of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 29-49.
Savino, M.M. and Mazza, A. (2014), “Toward environmental and quality sustainability-an integrated
approach for continuous improvement”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management,
Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 28-34.
Schilling, M. (2005), Strategic Management of Technological Innovation, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York,
NY.
Sigari, S. and Clark, R. (2013), “Applying lean thinking to improve the production process of a
traditional medium-size British manufacturing company”, International Journal of Information
and Operations Management Education, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 154-169.
Singh, J. and Singh, H. (2010), “Assessment of continuous improvement approach in SMEs of Northern
India”, International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 252-268.
Singh, J. and Singh, H. (2014), “Role of CI enablers for improving the performance of manufacturing
industry of Northern India”, International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management,
Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 179-195.
Smeds, R. (2001), “Implementation of business process innovations: an agenda for research and action”,
International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 22 Nos 1/2/3, pp. 1-12.
Stefan, A. and Paul, L. (2008), “Does it pay to be green? A systematic overview”, Academy of
Management Perspectives, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 45-62.
Van der Panne, G., Van Beers, C. and Kleinknecht, A. (2004), “Success and failure of innovation: a
literature review”, International Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 1-30.
van Hock, R.I. and Erasmus, S. (2000), “From reversed logistics to green supply chains”, Logistics
Solutions, No. 2, pp. 28-33.
Vinodh, S., Vasantha Kumar, C. and Manjunatheshwara, K.J. (2015), “Development of a methodology to
evaluate lean remanufacturing characteristics in a manufacturing organisation”, International
Journal of Services and Operations Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 187-199.
IJLSS Walker, H. and Jones, N. (2012), “Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector”,
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 15-28.
11,6
Wang, J.X. (2010), Lean Manufacturing: Business Bottom-Line Based, CRC Press.
Whitelock, V.G. (2012), “Alignment between supply chain management strategy and business
strategy”, International Journal of Procurement Management, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 430-451.
Wiengarten, F., Fynes, B. and Onofrei, G. (2013), “Exploring synergetic effects between investments in
1060 environmental and quality/lean practices in supply chains”, Supply Chain Management: An
International Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 148-160.
World Bank Report (2013), “Turn down the heat: climate extremes, regional impacts, and the case for
resilience”, The World Bank, Washington, DC.
Yan-Jiang, C., Dan, W. and Lang, X. (2006), “Influencing factors of continuous improvement and
tendency to change”, IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and
Technology, Singapore, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 181-185.
Zhang, Z. (2008), “Asian energy and environmental policy: promoting growth while preserving the
environment”, Energy Policy, Vol. 36 No. 10, pp. 3905-3924.
Zheng, G., Lu, J., Yu, X.Z., Li, W.F. and Ding, X. (2010), “Total innovation management paradigm for
SMEs – an empirical study based on SME survey”, International Journal of Learning and
Intellectual Capital, Vol. 7 Nos 3/4, pp. 235-251.
Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J. and Lai, K. (2008a), “Confirmation of a measurement model for green supply chain
management practices implementation”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 111
No. 2, pp. 261-273.

Further reading
Aragon, M.V. and Ros-McDonnell, L.C. (2015), “Implementing a lean production system on a food
company: a case study”, International Journal of Engineering Management and Economics,
Vol. 5 Nos 1/2, pp. 129-142.
Boer, H. and Gertsen, F. (2003), “From continuous improvement to continuous innovation: a
(retro)(per)spective”, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 26 No. 8,
pp. 805-827.
Deshmukh, S.V. and Chavan, A. (2012), “Six sigma and SMEs: a critical review of literature”,
International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 157-167.
Deshmukh, S.V. and Lakhe, R.R. (2010), “Six sigma awareness in central Indian SMEs”, International
Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 200-212.
Ionica, A.C., Leba, M. and Corbu, C. (2013), “Professional development – between reengineering and
continuous improvement”, 2nd World Conference on Educational Technology Researches –
WCETR2012, pp. 12-17.
Malik, S.A. and YeZhuang, T. (2006), “Execution of continuous improvement practices in Spanish and
Pakistani industry: a comparative analysis”, IEEE International Conference on Management of
Innovation and Technology, Singapore, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 761-765.
Malik, S.A., Li-bin, L., YeZhuang, T. and Xiao-Lin, S. (2007), “Continuous improvement practices in
Asian developing countries: a comparative analysis between Chinese and Pakistani
manufacturing industry”, 14th International Conference on Management Science and
Engineering, Harbin, P.R.China, pp. 692-697.
Oprime, P.C., Mendes, G.H. and Pimenta, M.L. (2012), “Continuous improvement: critical factors in
Brazilian industrial companies”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 69-92.
Pisano, G.P. (1997), The Development Factory: unlocking the Potential of Process Innovation, Harvard
Business Press.
Shah, R. and Ward, P.T. (2003), “Lean manufacturing: context, practice bundles and performance”, Impact of lean
Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 129-149.
practices
Shingeo, S. (1988), Non-Stock Production: The Shingo System for Continuous Improvement,
Productivity Press, Cambridge, MA.
Sim, K.L. and Rogers, J.W. (2009), “Implementing lean production systems: barriers to change”,
Management Research News, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 37-49.
Singh, B. and Khanduja, D. (2010), “SMED for quick changeover in foundry SMEs”, International
Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 98-116.
1061
Srivastava, S.K. (2007), “Green supply-chain management: a state-of-the-art literature review”,
International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 53-80.
Terziovski, M. (2002), “Achieving performance excellence through an integrated strategy of radical
innovation and continuous improvement”, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 5-14.
Terziovski, M. and Power, D. (2007), “Increasing ISO 9000 certification benefits: a continuous
improvement approach”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 24
No. 2, pp. 141-163.
Tseng, M.L., Chiu, A.S.F. and Chinag, J.H. (2006), “The relationship of continuous improvement and
cleaner production on operational performance: an empirical study in electronic manufacturing
firms, Taiwan, China”, International Journal of Management Science and Engineering
Management, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 71-80.
Vinodh, S., Thiagarajan, A. and Malanjur, G. (2014), “Lean concept selection using modified fuzzy
TOPSIS: a case study”, International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Vol. 18
No. 3, pp. 342-357.
Yamashina, H. (1995), “Japanese manufacturing strategy and the role of total productive maintenance”,
Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 27-38.
Yang, L.-R. (2013), “Key practices, manufacturing capability and attainment of manufacturing goals:
the perspective of project/engineer-to-order manufacturing”, International Journal of Project
Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 109-125.
Yeo, C.H., Goh, T.N. and Xia, M. (1995), “A positive management orientation for continuous
improvement”, IEEE Conference on Engineering Management, pp. 208-213.
Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J. and Lai, K. (2008b), “Green supply chain management implications for ‘closing the
loop”, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 44 No. 1,
pp. 1-18.
IJLSS Appendix 1
11,6

1062
Impact of lean
practices

1063
IJLSS
11,6

1064
Impact of lean
practices

1065
IJLSS
11,6

1066
Impact of lean
practices

1067
IJLSS Appendix 2. Interview protocol
11,6

1068

Corresponding author
Jagdeep Singh can be contacted at: jagdhoor605@yahoo.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com