IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03807883.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What Does The Factory’s Suggestion Box Reveal? An analysis of the design capabilities of a train maintenance center from its idea management system

Author

Listed:
  • Honorine Harlé

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Pascal Le Masson

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Benoit Weil

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Tony Bourlier

    (SNCF - SNCF)

  • Yann Veslin

    (SNCF)

Abstract

Suggestion boxes have been used in factories to improve processes through a continuous improvement approach. From this perspective, the ideas with direct and quick implementation and visible results are favoured. This paper investigates the nature of design activities hidden behind the ideas suggested. The authors sort 132 ideas from a suggestion box of a French train maintenance center and highlight differences in the processing of the ideas through the suggestion box. The paper shows that a part of the ideas should have been rejected, as they present a gap in the design to be directly implemented. However, they are kept and collectively re-worked to be well adapted to the factory. This enriches literature on creativity and crowd sourcing for and by manufacturing. In particular, it gives a design perspective to innovation and continuous improvement in factory by revealing different design types in the box to fit the production system.

Suggested Citation

  • Honorine Harlé & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil & Tony Bourlier & Yann Veslin, 2023. "What Does The Factory’s Suggestion Box Reveal? An analysis of the design capabilities of a train maintenance center from its idea management system," Post-Print hal-03807883, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03807883
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-32808-4
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-03807883v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-03807883v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/978-3-031-32808-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Christian Sandstrom & Jennie Bjork, 2010. "Idea management systems for a changing innovation landscape," International Journal of Product Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 11(3/4), pages 310-324.
    3. Shumpei Iwao, 2017. "Revisiting the existing notion of continuous improvement (Kaizen): literature review and field research of Toyota from a perspective of innovation," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 29-59, June.
    4. Thom, Norbert, 2015. "Idea Management in Switzerland and Germany: Past, Present and Future," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 69(3), pages 238-254.
    5. Robert D. Dewar & Jane E. Dutton, 1986. "The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(11), pages 1422-1433, November.
    6. Angappa Gunasekaran & Yahaya Y. Yusuf & Ezekiel O. Adeleye & Thanos Papadopoulos & Dharma Kovvuri & Dan’Asabe G. Geyi, 2019. "Agile manufacturing: an evolutionary review of practices," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(15-16), pages 5154-5174, August.
    7. Recht, Ricardo & Wilderom, Celeste, 1998. "Kaizen and culture: on the transferability of Japanese suggestion systems," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 7-22, February.
    8. de Reuver, Mark & Sørensen, Carsten & Basole, Rahul C., 2018. "The digital platform: a research agenda," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 80669, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zheng, Leven J. & Fan, Youqing & Wang, Huan & Liu, Wei, 2021. "Born innovator? How founder birth order influences product innovation generation and adoption in entrepreneurial firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 414-430.
    2. Jimmi Normann Kristiansen & Frank Gertsen, 2015. "Is Radical Innovation Management Misunderstood? Problematising The Radical Innovation Discipline," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(06), pages 1-23, December.
    3. Xie, Zongjie & Hall, Jeremy & McCarthy, Ian P. & Skitmore, Martin & Shen, Liyin, 2016. "Standardization efforts: The relationship between knowledge dimensions, search processes and innovation outcomes," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 69-78.
    4. Louise Lindbjerg & Theodor Vladasel, 2021. "Hiring Entrepreneurs for Innovation," Working Papers 1309, Barcelona School of Economics.
    5. Sung‐Choon Kang & Scott A. Snell, 2009. "Intellectual Capital Architectures and Ambidextrous Learning: A Framework for Human Resource Management," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 65-92, January.
    6. Karl Aschenbrücker & Tobias Kretschmer, 2022. "Performance-based incentives and innovative activity in small firms: evidence from German manufacturing," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(2), pages 47-64, June.
    7. Qu, Guannan & Chen, Jin & Zhang, Ruhao & Wang, Luyao & Yang, Yayu, 2023. "Technological search strategy and breakthrough innovation: An integrated approach based on main-path analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    8. Michael Lenox, 1998. "Organizational Design and the Acquisition of Rent-Producing Resources," Research in Economics 98-06-051e, Santa Fe Institute.
    9. Kobarg, Sebastian & Stumpf-Wollersheim, Jutta & Welpe, Isabell M., 2019. "More is not always better: Effects of collaboration breadth and depth on radical and incremental innovation performance at the project level," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 1-10.
    10. Makarius, Erin E. & Mukherjee, Debmalya & Fox, Joseph D. & Fox, Alexa K., 2020. "Rising with the machines: A sociotechnical framework for bringing artificial intelligence into the organization," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 262-273.
    11. Kedong Chen & Xiaojin (Jim) Liu & Yuhong Li & Kevin Linderman, 2023. "Government support and cross‐border innovation: The effect of China's innovative city policy on Chinese firms' patenting in the United States," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(6), pages 1793-1811, June.
    12. Stephen J. Mezias & Mary Ann Glynn, 1993. "The three faces of corporate renewal: Institution, revolution, and evolution," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(2), pages 77-101, February.
    13. Brunswicker, Sabine & Schecter, Aaron, 2019. "Coherence or flexibility? The paradox of change for developers’ digital innovation trajectory on open platforms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    14. Schön, Benjamin & Pyka, Andreas, 2013. "The success factors of technology-sourcing through mergers & acquisitions: An intuitive meta-analysis," FZID Discussion Papers 78-2013, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
    15. Dost, Mir & Badir, Yuosre F. & Sambasivan, Murali & Umrani, Waheed Ali, 2020. "Open-and-closed process innovation generation and adoption: Analyzing the effects of sources of knowledge," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    16. Bogers, Marcel & Foss, Nicolai J. & Lyngsie, Jacob, 2018. "The “human side” of open innovation: The role of employee diversity in firm-level openness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 218-231.
    17. Lennerts, Silke & Schulze, Anja & Tomczak, Torsten, 2020. "The asymmetric effects of exploitation and exploration on radical and incremental innovation performance: An uneven affair," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 121-134.
    18. Quintana-Garci­a, Cristina & Benavides-Velasco, Carlos A., 2008. "Innovative competence, exploration and exploitation: The influence of technological diversification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 492-507, April.
    19. Montealegre, Ramiro & Iyengar, Kishen, 2021. "Managing digital business platforms: A continued exercise in balancing renewal and refinement," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 51-59.
    20. Ricarda Bouncken & Boris Plüschke & Robin Pesch & Sascha Kraus, 2016. "Entrepreneurial orientation in vertical alliances: joint product innovation and learning from allies," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 381-409, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    factory; design; suggestion box;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03807883. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.