Successful implementation

There are multiple aspects that construction organizations should consider to guarantee that their Lean implementation will be successful. It cannot be stressed enough that even while multiple authors have emphasized the necessity to adapt Lean to fit the industry’s characteristics, many of the success factors and necessary activities for successful Lean implementations in other industries also apply to the construction industry. For example, similarly to “traditional” Lean management literature, authors such as Sarhan et al. (2018) and Ayarkwa et al. (2011) have underlined the importance of top management participation in the Lean construction implementations. The barriers of Lean construction presented in the previous section support this notion as multiple authors identified the lack of top management support to be a major barrier blocking Lean construction implementations. Ayarkwa et al. (2011) further establish that it is highly important that construction managers are committed to changes to have success in the LC implementations.

Following, employee training is critical also in Lean construction implementations (Ayarkwa et al. 2011; Khaba and Bhar 2017). Creating a culture of continuous improvement and training employees should help to successfully implement Lean in construction (Khaba and Bhar 2017). In addition, an effective LC implementation improves human relationships in organizations as the roles and responsibilities are defined thorough all organizational levels (Kim and Park 2006).

Finally, the importance of subcontractors in LC implementations has been emphasized by several authors (e.g. Kim and Park 2006; Johansen and Walter 2007; Ayarkwa et al. 2011). Due to the extensive use of subcontractors in construction, the subcontractors should be included in the design process (Khaba and Bhar 2017). Also, it is important to improve the communication between participants in construction projects (Ayarkwa et al. 2011) and LC has a major impact on improved communication between project participants (Kim and Park 2006). Similarly to employee training, Kim and Park (2006) highlighted the need to have Lean training programs for the subcontractors, where the focus should be on the “how-to” rather than theoretical concepts. Further, Lean consultants can be used to help the main contractor and subcontractors to understand Lean better and consequently to have more successful LC implementations.

3.2.2. Criticism

Some considerable criticism towards Lean construction has been provided by multiple authors. While the research on LC has been increasing lately (Eriksson 2010), research on Lean construction’s key concepts is scarce (Marhani et al. 2013).

Early LC criticism was given by Green (1999), London and Kenley (2001) and Green and May (2003). Green (1999) argued that the debate on LC is “based on an extremely one-sided interpretation of the available literature” and has mostly ignored the human cost in Lean production. Green and May (2003) further established the disregard for human aspect in re-engineering construction, where people are treated as passive objects and the short-term focus completely ignores the employee intransigence created by the existing management practices in construction.

London and Kenley (2001) established that the LC literature lacks contextualization

in their Lean implementations, for example missing the comprehensive empirical analysis of market structures that support the construction environment, asserting that practitioners have forgotten to organize and control the market in an extensive and elaborate scale, which is essential in Lean implementations.

Green and May (2005) concluded that Lean construction definitions are vague and subject to various interpretations but are still accepted as a necessary part of best practice. They point out the inherent need of consultants having to sell their services and managers to act as “improvement champions” is one reason for the increased Leanness in construction. Consequently, while LC is advertised as a unique socio-technical innovation, its use is highly context dependent and relied on localized contexts. It has been argued that construction can utilize at best a scarce amount and at worst none of the Lean principles developed in the manufacturing industry (Johansen and Walter 2007). Although Green and May (2005) agree that LC could possibly act as a catalyst for workplace transformation, the most likely result is that managers maintain the existing practices and routines while giving lip-service to Lean. They further establish that the construction industry has had structural changes towards leaner ways of working since mid-1970s, which is a long time before Lean terminology came to the industry.

Jørgensen and Emmitt (2008;2009) have conducted two extensive literature reviews on Lean construction and its applicability to the construction industry. The earlier study (Jørgensen and Emmitt 2008) supports Green and May’s (2005) argument of Lean construction lacking a unified definition and having diverse interpretations, underlining that no meaningful philosophy for LC currently exists.

They also note that Lean manufacturing literature is perceived to be significantly more advanced than the one of LC. The study further argues that the LC literature lacks peer-reviewed empirical research and has failed to recognize (or chosen to ignore) Lean’s limitations, arguing that it is therefore necessary to address these shortcomings by assessing the preconditions and limitations of Lean in the construction industry. In the latter study, Jørgensen and Emmitt (2009), surveyed Lean methods’ applicability in integrating design and construction. While Lean was perceived to be applicable for integrating purposes, there was some limitations.

First, the “Ambiguity, vagueness and uncertainty over value aspects define the limit to which the lean philosophy can be applied in an integrated construction project system.” Second, the practical limitations are also affected by social, cultural and structural aspects, and define the extent to which Lean philosophy can be applied to. They emphasize the need for comprehending the fundamental contextual conditions that define value to guarantee effective decision-making for projects.