Lean Kaizen Motivational Influence Explained Utilizing Expectancy-Value Motivation Theory

Bradley D. Miller, P.E. Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Houston, Houston, TX 77204, USA Abstract
To implement the lean manufacturing philosophy, engineers utilize kaizen: a structured process for continuous improvement that heavily involves the floor operator. The successful implementation of lean requires kaizen to motivate floor operators to both learn and apply industrial engineering principles to their individual tasks. The implied motivational power of the kaizen process has not been studied using modern psychological motivation theories. This paper describes expectancy-value motivation theory from a social-cognitive perspective and proposes how the kaizen process fits within this theoretical framework to increase worker motivation. Keywords: Kaizen, Lean Manufacturing, Psychology, Expectancy-Value Theory, Motivation

1.0 Introduction
Lean manufacturing has attracted increased attention in the industrial engineering community over the past decade. In order to implement the lean manufacturing philosophy, engineers utilize kaizen blitz: a structured process for continuous improvement that heavily involves floor operators [8, 29]. The successful implementation of lean requires the kaizen blitz process to motivate floor operators to both learn and apply industrial engineering principles to their individual tasks [1, 15 25, 31]. Industrial engineering researchers have extensively studied the utility and frequency of the use of lean tools [21, 22]. These researchers have assumed the motivational influences within kaizen blitz to change employee behavior. This assumed and implied motivational power of the kaizen process has not been studied using modern psychological motivation theories. Psychologists have studied motivation extensively over the past 100 years [28]. Expectancy-value theory has been robustly tested and recently explored within the context of academic motivation. This theory proposes that expectancy and task value beliefs predict and correlate with persistence, effort, choice, and performance at a goaldirected task. Expectancy-value motivation theory from a social-cognitive perspective provides a framework for describing the motivational process involved during a kaizen blitz.

2.0 Kaizen blitz requires employee motivation

One of the human components that researchers identify as fundamental to the effectiveness of an organizational change is the motivation of employees [23, 25]. Specifically, lean manufacturing is a change process that requires the motivated participation of employees [24]. Researchers believe that the implementation of lean manufacturing is related to enhanced motivation of employees [24]. To achieve its improvements, the lean manufacturing process relies on the purposeful use of teams, which is believed to motivate employees [25]. Kaizen blitz is one of the primary team-based tools that lean manufacturing utilizes to design and implement improvements in an organization [8, 29]. Berger [4] asserts that Kaizen blitz is associated with employee motivation. Lean manufacturing uses ordinary workers who have limited exposure and knowledge of industrial engineering concepts to design creative manufacturing improvements. A specialized knowledge of material flow, process evaluation, analytical tools, and improvement techniques is required for lean manufacturing to be effective [25]. Therefore, the implementation of lean manufacturing requires extensive employee training in these concepts [14]. For this training to be effective, employees must be motivated to learn these new topics. Simply learning the necessary topics is not enough, however. Employees must also be motivated to apply the principles they have learned to improve actual work processes [1, 15, 25, 31]. The lean manufacturing process requires motivated employees to improve processes by using their skills and knowledge [8]. Unfortunately, specific components of motivation have not been explored in the lean manufacturing literature. While acknowledging the need for employee motivation, especially within a kaizen blitz, empirical research has examined neither how that motivation is created nor its impact on the success of a kaizen blitz.

3.0 The connection between kaizen blitz and expectancy-value theory

To understand why kaizen blitz is effective when implementing Lean Manufacturing, the mathematical and analytical tools used in a kaizen blitz have been extensively reviewed and studied [21, 22]. However, in order for researchers to fully explain the variance in the implementation effectiveness of kaizen blitz, it may be even more important to consider the cognitive and motivational variables that influence workers to make organizational improvements [8, 30]. A review of related literature reveals that very little research has been focused on the psychology of human resources within lean manufacturing [18, 30]. The current study begins to fill this research gap by describing the motivation of employees during kaizen blitz from an expectancy-value theoretical perspective.

4.0 Expectancy-value model of motivation

4.1 Overview of the theorys main variables Modern motivation theories approach motivation from a social-cognitive viewpoint [28]. Social-cognitive theories assume human behavior is influenced by a triadic reciprocity [2] whereby three determinants, (1) environmental forces, (2) personal beliefs and perceptions, and (3) the results of a persons behavior, interact to influence each of the other determinants. Taking a social-cognitive perspective, expectancy-value theorists also view behavior as ultimately being influenced by an individuals perceptions of their environment, personal beliefs, and their behavior [37]. Because motivation is an internal process that cannot be observed directly, expectancy-value theorists define an observable and measurable set of achievement behaviors that are assumed to result from motivation to enact a behavior. Psychologists define and observe achievement behaviors as exerting effort at a particular task, persistence at difficult tasks, choosing to participate in task-related behaviors, and actual successful performance at the task [28]. Eccles and Wigfield and their colleagues both assume and verify from their research that two major categories of individual perceptions directly influence achievement behaviors as seen in figure 1: expectancy beliefs and task value beliefs[11, 12, 13, 28, 35, 36, 37]. A survey instrument to detect and measure the presence of these variables has been tested in educational settings, producing robust and consistent results [10, 11]. The influence of these two motivational beliefs on achievement behaviors are the focus of Eccles and Wigfields research and establish a foundation upon which to build the current research. Task Value Beliefs Importance/attainment Enjoyment/interest Usefulness/utility Perceived cost

Expectancy Beliefs Expectation for success Self-perception of ability Achievement Behavior Persistence Effort Choice of activity Performance figure 1

4.2 Expectancy beliefs Eccles and Wigfield define two primary expectancy beliefs: (1) expectation for success at an activity and (2) selfperception of competence at performing that task [11, 12, 13, 35, 36]. Expectation for success refers to an individuals belief that their behavior will result in favorable outcomes. An example of a statement of expectation for success in a kaizen blitz event would be I am certain that kaizen blitz events I am a part of will be successful. Self-perception of competence refers to an individuals belief that they are capable and competent to exhibit a particular behavior successfully [35, 37]. An example of a statement of self-perception of competence in a kaizen blitz event would be I am capable of doing the work involved in a kaizen event. In studies involving these two beliefs, they consistently emerge as a single statistical construct [10, 11]. The single construct of expectancy beliefs relates closely to Banduras [2] concept of self-efficacy [12, 13, 28]. Self-efficacy,

the belief individuals have of themselves that they can competently learn and complete a task successfully [2, 23], has been associated with the achievement behaviors persistence, effort, and actual performance [9, 28]. Educational psychologists also assume that expectancy beliefs are positively correlated with an individuals effort, persistence, and performance in specific academic subjects [9]. In Eccles and Wigfields expectancy-value model of motivation, expectancy beliefs are directly associated with achievement behaviors [28]. However, expectancy beliefs have been shown to exist in conjunction with and parallel to task value beliefs to influence achievement behavior and motivation [11, 12, 13, 35, 36]. 4.3 Task value beliefs Task value beliefs refer to an individuals beliefs that a specific task or behavior will be worthwhile [11, 12, 13, 35, 36]. These researchers describe task value beliefs as falling into four separate [10, 11] categories: (1) importance or attainment value, (2) enjoyment or interest value, (3) usefulness and utility value, and (4) perceived cost. Importance or attainment value is defined as the importance of performing well or achieving success on a task. An example of an importance value belief related to kaizen blitz events would be When I am participating in a kaizen blitz event, it is important for that event to be successful. Enjoyment or interest value is defined as how enjoyable or satisfying the individual finds the experience of performing a task. An example of an interest value belief related to kaizen blitz events would be I enjoy working on a kaizen blitz team. Usefulness and utility value refers to how useful the task is perceived to be in enabling the individual to reach future personal goals. An example of a usefulness value belief related to kaizen blitz would be Participating in kaizen blitz events is useful for improving my job. Finally, the cost of participating in an activity refers to the negative emotional, mental, and physical effort that is perceived to be associated with the task. In previous research, the cost component has not been evaluated empirically but are assumed to play a role in determining the overall value an individual attributes to a task [28]. Unlike expectancy beliefs, the constructs of importance, enjoyment, and usefulness emerge statistically as separate and distinct variables [10, 11]. Researchers assume that the importance, enjoyment, and usefulness values are related somewhat to an individuals effort, persistence, and performance in specific academic subjects [9]. This same study revealed that importance, enjoyment, and usefulness values are strongly related to the intended and actual choice of academic enrollment decisions. Additionally, expectancy beliefs tend to correlate positively with task value beliefs [11].

5.0 A synthesis of motivation in kaizen blitz within an expectancy-value framework

Many of the characteristic activities of a kaizen blitz have direct connection with the expectancy-value model. The expectancy-value theory is a model of motivation for achievement task values. Appropriately, the kaizen blitz practitioners and researchers assert that motivation of employees is necessary for successful participation [5, 27]. Additionally, they use other terms that may be closely associated with the need for employee motivation such as ownership [16, 19] and empowerment [5, 7, 16, 19, 20, 26, 27, 32, 33, 34]. This motivation for participation in kaizen blitz can be explained using the expectancy-value model. 5.1 Achievement behaviors in kaizen blitz Managers and researchers assert the human behaviors necessary for achievement in kaizen blitz. Expectancy-value theory suggests that persistence is an achievement behavior; kaizen blitz authors also state that employees must be dedicated, devoted, and persist at kaizen blitz problem solving [5, 14, 20, 26, 34]. The expectancy-value model poses effort as an achievement behavior and kaizen blitz authors agree by stating that employees must work hard and be actively involved in these events [4, 5, 6, 16, 27, 33]. Finally, cognitive engagement is seen as important in the expectancy-value model as well as in kaizen blitz [3, 33]. 5.2 Task value beliefs in kaizen blitz Expectancy-value research has shown a direct correlation between various task value beliefs and achievement behaviors. Expectancy-value researchers have shown that the belief that the task is important relates positively to performance [9, 17]. In the same way, kaizen blitz authors stress that employees must understand the importance of the kaizen blitz for it to be successful [3, 5, 16, 26, 33, 34]. Another task value belief associated with achievement behaviors is the belief that the task will be useful [17]. Similarly, literature asserts that employees must understand the benefits of the kaizen blitz [6, 16, 19, 26]. Just as students are more likely to exhibit achievement behaviors when they find a task enjoyable [17], anecdotal evidence suggests that successful kaizen blitz involves enthusiastic employees that enjoy the kaizen process and look forward to participating in more events [3, 6, 7, 26, 32].

5.3 Expectancy beliefs in kaizen blitz Expectancy-value research demonstrates that the expectancy beliefs of students expectation for success and their confidence in their own abilities are strongly related to achievement behaviors [28]. Likewise, kaizen blitz research suggests that in order for kaizen blitz events to be successful, employees must be confident in their abilities [19, 33] as well as trust in the kaizen process to work [16, 19].

6.0 Conclusion
The expectancy-value model has been robustly tested in educational settings to explain students motivation for exhibiting academic achievement behaviors. Using a survey measurement instrument, psychologists measure expectancy and task value beliefs and demonstrate correlations between these beliefs and persistence, effort, choice and performance at academic tasks. These same primary variables involved in motivation from an expectancy-value perspective are clearly advocated by kaizen proponents, albeit anecdotally. A survey of lean manufacturing literature demonstrates that researchers believe that high expectancy and task value beliefs are necessary for successful kaizen blitz events. Future research should measure these psychological variables within employees involved in kaizen blitz events to discover if they relate. Once tested empirically, the expectancy-value theory could be used to explain why kaizen tends to motivate line workers to improve their own work areas. Determining that expectancy and task value beliefs predict achievement behaviors within kaizen blitz events may encourage further research to explore ways to influence the antecedents to these key beliefs.

References
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Babson, S., 1993, Lean or mean: The MIT Model and Lean Production at Mazda, Labor Studies Journal, 18(2), 3 24. Bandura, A., 1986, Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Bateman, N., and Rich, N., 2003, Companies Perceptions of Inhibitors and Enablers for Process Improvement Activities, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 23(2), 185 199. Berger, A., 1997, Continuous Improvement and Kaizen: Standardization and Organizational Designs, Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 8(2), 110 117. Bond, T.C., 1999, The Role of Performance Measurement in Continuous Improvement, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 19(12), 1318 1334. Cuscela, K.N., 1998, Kaizen Blitz Attacks Work Processes at Dana Corp, IIE Solutions, 30(4), 29 31. David, I., 2000, Drilled in Kaizen, Professional Engineering, May 10, 30 31. Doolen, T.L., Worley, J., Van Aken, E.M., and Farris, J., 2003, Development of an Assessment Approach for Kaizen Events, Paper presented at the annual Institute of Industrial Engineers Industrial Engineering Research Conference, May, Portland, OR. Eccles, J. (Parsons), Adler, T.F., Futterman, R., Goff, S.B., Kaczala, C.M., Meece, J.L., et al., 1983, Expectancies, Values, and Academic Behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives: Psychological and sociological approaches, W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, CA, 75 146 Eccles, J.S., ONeill, S.A., and Wigfield, A., 2003, Measuring Childrens and Adolescents Ability SelfPerceptions and Subjective Task Values, Paper presented at the Positive Outcomes Conference, Child Trends, March, Washington, DC. Eccles, J.S., and Wigfield, A., 1995, In the Mind of the Actor: The Structure of Adolescents Achievement Task Values and Expectancy-Related Beliefs, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(3), 215 225. Eccles, J.S., and Wigfield, A., 2002, Motivational Beliefs, Values, and Goals, Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109 32. Eccles, J.S., Wigfield, A., and Schiefele, U., 1998, Motivation to Succeed, In W. Damon (Series Ed.) and N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (5th ed.), John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1017 1095. Elsey, B., and Fujiwara, A., 2000, Kaizen and Technology Transfer Instructors as Work-Based Learning Facilitators in Overseas Transplants: A Case Study, Journal of Workplace Learning, 12(8), 333 341. Forza, C., 1996, Work Organization in Lean Production and Traditional Plants: What are the Differences?, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 16(2), 42 62.

9.

10.

11. 12. 13.

14. 15.

16. Gossoo, M.A., 2001, People are the Key!, Paper presented at the annual Institute of Industrial Engineers Solutions Conference, May, Dallas, TX. 17. Greene, B.A., DeBacker, T.K., Ravindran, B., and Krows, A.J., 1999, Goals, Values, and Beliefs as Predictors of Achievement and Effort in High School Mathematics Classes, Sex Roles, 40(5/6), 421 458. 18. Hopkins, S.A., 1989, An Integrated Model of Management and Employee Influences on Just-in-Time Implementation, SAM Advanced Management Journal, 67, 15 20. 19. Huber, T., 2000, Lean Improvement Workshops: Rapid Team Oriented Results, Paper presented at the annual Institute of Industrial Engineers Solutions Conference, May, Cleveland, OH. 20. Imai, M., 1997, Gemba Kaizen: A Commonsense, Low-Cost Approach to Management. McGraw Hill, New York. 21. James-Moore, S.M., and Gibbons, A., 1997, Is lean Manufacture Universally Relevant? An Investigative Study, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 17(9), 899 911. 22. Karlsson, C., and hlstrm, P., 1996, Assessing Changes Towards Lean Production, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 16(2), 24 41. 23. Karsten, R.A., and Loomba, A.P.S., 2002, The Little Engine that Could: Self-efficacy Implications for Quality Training Outcomes, Total Quality Management, 13(7), 971 980. 24. Lee, S.M., and Ebrahimpour, M., 1984, Just-in-Time Production System: Some Requirements for Implementation, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 4(4), 3 15. 25. MacDuffie, J.P., 1995, Human Resource Bundles and Manufacturing Performance: Organizational Logic and Flexible Production Systems in the World Auto Industry, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 48(2), 197 221. 26. Minton, E., 1998, Luke Faulstick: Baron of Blitz has Boundless Vision of Continuous Improvement, Industrial Management, 98(1), 14 21. 27. Oakeson, M., 1997, Kaizen Makes Dollars and Sense for Mercedes-Benz in Brazil, IIE Solutions, 29(4), 32 35. 28. Pintrich, P.R., and Schunk, D.H., 2002, Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications, (2nd ed.), Merrill Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. 29. Ross, J.R., 2002, Evaluating Lean Manufacturing Benefits, Paper presented at the annual Institute of Industrial Engineers Solutions Conference, May, Orlando, FL. 30. Samson, D., and Whybark, D.C., 1998, Guest Editorial, Journal of Operations Management, 17, 3 5. 31. Shapiro, S., 2002, Innovate Your Organization, Industrial Management, 44(6), 18 23. 32. Sheridan, J.H., 1997). Kaizen Blitz, IndustryWeek, September 1, 18 27. 33. Soltero, C., and Waldrip, G., 2002, Using Kaizen to Reduce Waste and Prevent Pollution, Environmental Quality Management, 11(3), 23 38. 34. Wickiser, E.L., 2001, Unleashing Rapid Change and Innovation Through High Involvement Practices: Rapid Change Team Technology, Paper presented at the annual Institute of Industrial Engineers Solutions Conference, May, Dallas, TX. 35. Wigfield, A., 1994, Expectancy-Value Theory of Achievement Motivation: A Developmental Perspective, Educational Psychology Review, 6(1), 49 78. 36. Wigfield, A., and Eccles, J.S., 1992, The Development of Achievement Task Values: A Theoretical Analysis, Developmental Review, 12, 265 310. 37. Wigfield, A., and Eccles, J.S., 2000, Expectancy-Value Theory of Achievement Motivation, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68 81.