Examining the Impact of Lean Practices on Flexibility Performance: The Moderating Effect of Environmental Dynamism
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examined the effects of four core and internal lean practices on flexibility performance in Jordanian manufacturing companies. Lean practices included setup time reduction, continuous improvement, synchronization of operations, and pull system. A survey questionnaire was used to collect data from 157 manufacturing companies from different industry types. Hierarchical regression analysis showed that lean production posively and significantly affected flexibility performance. All lean practices proved to be positively and significantly related to flexibility performance. The most contributing lean practice was synchronization of operations followed by pull system and continuous improvement. The moderating effect of environmental dynamism was also examined. The results of the interaction terms showed that environmental dynamism positively and significantly moderated the relationship between synchronization of operations and flexibility performance. The findings of this study highlighted the important role of synchronization of operations, a widely neglected lean practice in the literature, in improving flexibility performance. Additionally, we contributed to the controversial issue in the literature concerning the impact of lean production on performance in a dynamic environment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it