From Lean 5S to 7S Methodology Implementing Corporate Social Responsibility Concept

Abstract

Introducing methodologies that promote innovation and continuous improvement in organizations is no longer optional; therefore, organizations are increasingly using methodologies based on Lean principles. Among them, the 6S tool stands out from the rest, commonly used to establish and maintain a high-quality environment, which it has capacity for due to its status as a kaizen process. Thus, this research seeks to evaluate the relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and the Lean 6S tool and, in the end, create synergies between them in order to enhance the 6S tool’s capabilities. To achieve this, a literature review and analysis of Lean 6S and CSR were performed, and a survey was also proposed to further the understanding of the relationship. With the analyzed sample, it can be confirmed that a relationship exists between the level of implementation of Lean tools and the level of development of CSR policies; therefore, companies that have implemented Lean tools such as 6S are organizations concerned with sustainability, and the hypothesis that organizations that apply Lean also have a high implementation of CSR is validated. Future work should further develop this relationship so that sustainability is no longer considered as implicit in the application of Lean tools but rather as part of them. This research proposes to develop the 6S tool toward the 7S tool to facilitate the inclusion of a CSR policy in a procedural and simple way.

1. Introduction

Currently, due to high competition within the industrial sector, it is increasingly necessary to introduce methodologies that promote innovation and continuous improvement in organizations [1].

This is why multiple organizations from various sectors use methodologies based on Lean principles, seeking to optimize their productivity, reduce waste, and improve the quality of their products [2,3].

Lean creates value by improving process flow and lead time by identifying and reducing waste. On the other hand, it is worth highlighting the Six Sigma methodology, which, following Lean principles, creates value through the identification of and reduction in variation. Lean Six Sigma (LSS) is a new-generation quality improvement tool that combines both approaches [4].

There are multiple tools to carry out these methodologies. The 5S tool stands out from the rest due to its capacity as a kaizen process, present since its first implementation by Osada in 1980 [5]. A clear example of its successful application is the Toyota production system (TPS) [6]. The 5S tool is considered a strategy for business excellence [7], and it is also commonly used to establish and maintain a high-quality environment in an organization [8]. To place extra emphasis on safety in the working area, a sixth S was proposed by Jiménez, and it was identified as a standard by this Special Issue. Later, this tool was referred to as 6S [9].

Ultimately, all these methodologies or approaches seek continuous improvement and waste reduction in production processes, which, by definition, implies better sustainability performance, such as reducing environmental waste, emissions, energy, or water consumption. As discussed before, implementing sustainability in all facets of business and industry is no longer an option but a necessity and is imperative for company competitiveness [10].

Consequently, it is remarkable how Lean tools, including the 6S tool, apply better sustainability performance, such as reductions in environmental waste, emissions, energy, or water consumption; therefore, they are related to sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) concepts.

However, CSR includes a broader concept of sustainability, taking human rights, community development, and other questions into account, rather than only environmental issues. Therefore, this research intends to find empirical evidence of the positive relationship that exists between the level of development of policies in CSR and the level of implementation of Lean tools, specifically the 6S tool. In addition, according to this relation, ways that organizations could improve their high level of quality are identified if, instead of just implementing the 6S tool, they implement the 7S tool (including CSR) in their corporate strategy.

2. Materials and Methods

As discussed before, the objective of this research is to evaluate how Corporate Social Responsibility is related to Lean, and more specifically the 6S tool, in order to establish a positive relationship. The reason for this is to create synergies between them in order to enhance the 6S tool’s capabilities.

To achieve this, it was necessary to review the literature, analyze what Lean 6S and CSR are, and identify their common key factors.

It was also important to understand the interaction between Lean and CSR; therefore, a literature review was performed, and once all the information was collected, a survey was carried out to complete the analysis so more accurate conclusions could be extracted.

The roadmap followed in this research is presented in Figure 1.

2.1. Lean 6S

The 5S tool is made up of the initials of five Japanese words which represent each of the five stages that make up the methodology [5,11]. Due to its natural evolution and the need to respond to a security requirement in the methodology, the inclusion of a sixth security S (6S) was made mandatory. Jiménez proposed an expansion which implies a reduction in and elimination of workplace risks through compliance with current regulations [9].

The different stages and a brief description of them are presented on

Table 1. Stages of 6S.

Nº	Stage	Description
1	Seiri	Remove all unnecessary tools and parts. Keep only essential items.
2	Seiton	Arrange the work, workers, equipment, parts, and instructions in such a way that the work flows free of inefficiencies through the value-added tasks with a work division necessary to meet demand.
3	Seiso	Clean the workspace and all equipment, and keep it clean and tidy ready for the next user.
4	Safety	Reduce labor risks and ensure the compliance with safety and health regulations.
5	Seiketsu	Ensure procedures and setups throughout the operation promote interchangeability. Normal and abnormal situations are distinguished, using visible and simple rules.
6	Shitsuke	Make it a way of life. This means commitment. Ensure disciplined adherence to rules and procedures.

.

The 6S approach can easily be applied in various organizations due to its simplicity and easy recognition. For example, the results obtained from the study carried out by Singh and Ahuja revealed that an organization’s performance was significantly enhanced through sustained 6S implementation in the workplace. The results show significant enhancement in labor productivity, delivery compliance, and safety, and a reduction in machine breakdowns, customer complaints, in-process rejections, absenteeism, and inventory turn ratio. As a result of 6S activities, a clean and efficient work environment was obtained, and improved work efficiency was witnessed in the organization [12], but also, a successful 6S application is dependent on updating education and training provided by the organization to the employees [13]; however, increasing the interest of companies and factories in the industrial sector is recommended, in particular in the implementation of the 5S tool or similar concepts and increasing the awareness of employees [14].

Additionally, it must be noted that, currently, there are two ISO standards that standardize the application of certain methods of continuous improvement.

On the one hand, ISO 13053 recommends the best way to apply each of the phases of the DMAIC methodology (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control), used during the execution of Six Sigma methodology, as well as recommendations about tools, useful techniques, and training of the personnel involved.

Among its recommendations, it suggests 5S as an outstanding tool in the improvement and control phases of the DMAIC process [15,16].

On the other hand, ISO 18404 defines competencies to achieve specific levels of competency in relation to Six Sigma, Lean and LSS [17].

As it can be seen in

Table 2. Knowledge of 5S and ISO 18404 roles.

Methodology	Role	Knowledge of 5S Tool
Six Sigma	Green Belt	As user
	Black Belt	As user
	Master Black Belt	As user
Lean	Lean Practitioner	As user
	Lean Leader	As authority
	Lean Expert	As authority
Lean Six Sigma	Green Belt	As user
	Black Belt	As authority
	Master Black Belt	As authority

, ISO 18404 indicates how different roles apply 5S knowledge.

So, 5S, as it is recognized from organizations that follow ISO 13053, as well as professionals certified by ISO 18404 for the application of LEAN, Six Sigma and LEAN Six Sigma, is considered as one of the fundamental tools for standardization and improvement.

2.2. Lean 5S/6S and Quality

As was discussed previously, the 6S tool, as a Lean fundamental, is considered a strategy for business excellence [7] and is implemented in many organizations, increasing its competitiveness through its influence on continuous improvement caused by order and organization in the workplace [18]. In one organization, as a result of 6S activities, a clean and efficient work environment was obtained, and improved work efficiency was witnessed [12].

Ultimately, it is well known that a good implementation of 6S helps in the process of continuous improvement, but specially contributes to improving the quality of the operations [14]. So, it is commonly used to establish and maintain a high-quality environment in an organization [8].

Therefore, the aim must be to continue the improvement of the 6S tool, since it is considered a fundamental of Lean, in a way that reinforces its benefits, especially as a quality developer, as well as adding more importance to sustainability in a way that adjusts better to today’s organizations’ needs. Ultimately, the sustainability present in 6S is not applied consciously; it is implicit and derived from other issues such as waste reduction, the final objective of which is savings and labor performance, not sustainability itself.

2.3. Sustainability

Sustainable development was discussed for the first time at the UN General Assembly that took place on 4 August 1987, where it was stated that the needs of the present should not be met by compromising the needs of future generations [19].

However, according to Purser and Sharma, the UN’s World Commission on Environment and Development [20] was written with an anthropocentric approach to the concept of sustainability as reference [21,22].

This approach actually prioritizes human needs over nature’s own [21,23], which puts human needs and wants above the survival and development needs of other species [24].

On the contrary, Belz and Peattie suggest that sustainability requires a holistic vision and systems-based view, which recognizes the intrinsic value of nature, not only human priorities and the prioritization of the economic efficiency [25].

On the other hand, the antecedents show that sustainability may contribute to the reputation of a company as a good corporate citizen [26]. Thus, sustainability initiatives should be integrated in the corporate strategy and organizational culture [27].

As result, Gold and Schleper conclude that the translation of sustainability into businesses has transformed into an instrumental concept that mainly considers profits as its ultimate goal [28].

Therefore, it seems that the concept of sustainability allows a certain ambiguity on how it is used and managed by organizations, in relation their interests. This is why in this research, the concept of sustainability is from the point of view of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), and specifically from the specific framework defined by the ISO 26000:2010 standard [29].

2.4. CSR

The first time the concept of social responsibility was used was in 1953, with the publication of the book Social Responsibility of a Businessman by Howard Bowen. Bowen proposes that business decisions must be in accordance with the objectives and values of society, and not only of the company [30].

However, taking shareholder theory as a reference [31], organizations traditionally only seek their own interests, but, with the irruption of stakeholder theory by Freeman, this vision starts to change, leaving behind the initial theory of shareholders [32]. In 2007, Freeman himself [33] pointed out the importance of organizations focusing not on competition oriented towards the appropriation of the economic value available in the market, but on creating value through exchange [34].

However, after Freeman raised his stakeholder theory, during the UN general assembly that took place on 4 August 1987, the Brundtland Report was published, and the type of economic development is commented with open criticism, and for the first time, sustainable development is discussed, defined as what meets the needs of the present without compromising the needs of future generations [19].

Thus, the CSR concept predates the sustainability concept, and as it has been seen, both concepts are not free from controversy, and for this reason, in this research, the ISO standard is preferably taken as standard. With this decision, it is believed that the conclusions of this research could be implemented in a more practical and simple way in organizations, because they are already widely used to the ISO standards.

According to the definition made by the ISO 26000:2010 standard, the social responsibility of an organization is the responsibility that every organization has to mitigate the potentially negative impacts that its decisions and activities may cause on society and the environment, through ethical and transparent behavior that contributes to sustainable development, including the health and well-being of society, with which it takes into consideration the expectations of its stakeholders, complies with applicable legislation, and is in coherence with international regulations behavior, and also that social responsibility is integrated in a practical way throughout the organization [29].

2.5. CSR and Sustainability

The importance of integrating sustainability in the processes of organizations is notable, both in regard to growing public interest and regulatory pressures, as well as regarding corporate social responsibility (CSR) itself [35,36]. Additionally, CSR initiatives have proved their importance in guiding ethical business companies as well as achieving sustainability [37,38], and, also, effective CSR implementation has a positive impact on customer satisfaction and, in the end, the organization profits [39].

It must be noted that sustainable development and CSR are two different concepts, since the first applies to society while the second applies to organizations as unitary elements, but in an organization in which the commitment to CSR is tangible, this will inevitably have a positive effect on global sustainable development [40], and therefore, on meeting the needs of society while respecting the ecological limits of the planet, such as the challenges addressed by the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) [41].

2.6. CSR and Quality

As more organizations are accentuating their roles in and responsibilities toward society, more research has been carried out to evaluate their impact on social and environmental practices, and the results suggest that CSR has a positive impact on internal quality results [42,43].

CSR also plays a very important role in providing service (in terms of quality and price) and in customer satisfaction, for example, in the airline industry [44].

Commonly, research that combines quality and CSR takes Total Quality Management (TQM) methodology into account; TQM is understood as an integrated management philosophy to achieve better customer satisfaction by continuously improving the quality of both products and processes [45].

Research shows that TQM and CSR interact, which helps firms obtain superior performance as well as a sustainable competitive advantage with benefits such as an enhanced reputation, better customer satisfaction or better environmental protection. Ultimately, TQM and CSR have similarly positive effects on enhancing organizations performance, but there is a need to extend research in various sectors globally [46,47,48]. Additionally, there is no consistent conceptual framework for integrating TQM and CSR initiatives to improve organizations’ performance [47,49]. In relation to both concepts, TQM and CSR, there is clearly a link between CSR and quality [50].

So, as it can be seen, quality improvement is implicit in the correct implementation of CSR.

2.7. CSR and Lean Relationship

Lean and sustainability have evident synergies. By its definition, one of the objectives of Lean is to seek the elimination of waste [2,3], which is fully related to sustainability.

Additionally, the impact of different combinations of Lean and environmental and social practices helps the financial, environmental, and social performance of an organization [40].

As previously discussed, sustainability and CSR are different, but it is natural to assume that Lean and CSR have also some kind of synergy. In this regard, Khilel and Harbal say that there is a positive relationship between CSR and Lean Manufacturing. They are methods that must be integrated to improve performance, in order to save costs, increase quality and reduce time [51].

Some authors show the need to align the Lean implementation process with the sustainability strategy that companies follow through a correct CSR policy. In this regard, the possible negative impacts that Lean production could have on the environmental and social components of sustainability are avoided [52].

Additionally, other authors demonstrate that the application of Lean Manufacturing is a solution to implement a CSR that is effective and sustainable [53].

In conclusion, it is recognized by the literature that the relation between CSR and Lean is closed and mutually beneficial due to its great synergy, and, as it has been previously verified, they are tools (in the case of Lean, specifically the 6S tool) that can foster sustainability and quality.

Nevertheless, it must be noted that CSR includes a broader concept of sustainability, taking human rights, community development and other questions into account, rather than only the environmental and pure labor issues that are presented and enhanced with Lean. Additionally, as was previously discussed, CSR policies make conscious efforts to improve sustainability, rather than Lean, where it is simply found implicitly by following its principles.

2.8. Survey Methodology

To learn more about the relationship between Lean (more specifically, the 6S tool) and CSR, a survey was proposed.

This study arises from the need to gather information about the level of CSR implementation in organizations that follow Lean methodologies, and more specifically, those that use the 6S tool, to further analyze the relationship between the two of them.

The sample used consisted of multinational organizations established in Spain, mainly from the automotive sector, because it is a sector closely related to Lean. Additionally, they were all organizations that publicly identify with Lean and are representative for their size and weight in the sector. The sample was limited to a few organizations, 10 in total, because the objective of the research was to seek quality answers, so it was ensured that the surveyed companies are very well known for their outstanding implementation of Lean.

The survey consisted of two different questionnaires; one was related to Lean, to confirm the quality of the sample, consistent the following questions about the implementation of Lean in their organization:

(1)

Is any type of LEAN tool used in your organization?

(2)

Is Lean methodology part of your organization strategy?

(3)

What are the objectives that your organization seeks to achieve thanks to the implementation of LEAN tools? (Multiple option).

(4)

Which of the following tools do you consider essential for a correct LEAN implementation in your organization? (Multi-option).

(5)

In your experience, what has been the most effective LEAN tool used in your organization?

(6)

Have your organization identified their employees’ LEAN competencies according to ISO 18404?

(7)

How do you think the implementation of LEAN could be improved in your organization? (Multi-option).

For the multi-option questions, some examples were proposed to facilitate the questionnaire completion, but free responses were also encouraged.

The other questionnaire was intended to determine the level of implementation of CSR in an organization in accordance with the ISO 26000:2010 standard.

The second questionnaire, in order to identify an organization’s CSR’s implementation level, was presented according to the seven fundamental matters defined on the ISO standard:

(1)

Governance of the organization: 1 question;

(2)

Human rights: 8 questions;

(3)

Labor practices: 5 questions;

(4)

Environment: 4 questions;

(5)

Practice fair trading: 5 questions;

(6)

Consumer affairs: 7 questions;

(7)

Active participation and community development: 7 questions.

Questionnaire criteria were defined to identify a basic level of implementation of CSR; organizations that obtained a score between 85% and 100% of positive answers were considered to have a robust implementation of the seven fundamental CSR subjects.

These results do not mean that they are at a level of excellence, because questionnaire was not designed to be able to measure that degree of compliance.

On the other hand, those organizations with a score between 60% and 85% of positive answers could be considered companies with good implementation, since although they do not have the seven fundamental subjects in CSR implemented, they do have some of them.

Those that obtained a score between 40% and 60% of positive answers could be considered companies with a poor implementation, since not only do they not have the seven fundamental CSR subjects implemented, but also very few of them are implemented.

Those that obtained a score between 0% and 40% of positive answers could be said to have a null implementation of the seven fundamental subjects in CSR.

The survey’s results are shown on the next paragraph.

3. Results

3.1. LEAN Questionnaire Results

As it can be seen in Figure 2, most of the managers surveyed considered Lean to be part of the strategy of their organization.

The validity of the sample was determined through the organizations’ answers to these two questions:

Is any type of LEAN tool used in your organization?

Is Lean methodology part of your organization strategy?

All of them answered “YES” to the first question, but 14% of the organizations surveyed did not consider Lean to be part of their strategy (Figure 2). So, in order to maintain valid results, the responses of those organizations were excluded.

Among these organizations, the 5S tool was unanimously recognized as a fundamental tool for correct Lean implementation, considering it part of their organizational strategy (Figure 3).

Even though 5S was considered a fundamental tool by all the respondents, none of them selected it as the most effective Lean tool used on their organization.

Regarding this question, Kaizen and Just in Time stand out, as each were selected by 33% of the respondents. So, from this it could be deduced that, even though it is a very important tool, there is still room for improvement on the 5S tool.

Furthermore, taking the results shown in Figure 4 into account, apparently, most organizations that use Lean as part of their strategy consider the ultimate objectives of Lean implementation to be quality improvement and sustainability improvement, among others such as cost saving and adaptation to customers’ demand. The aim of this question was to understand the motivations behind the implementation of Lean, and it was proven that sustainability is one of them.

Additionally, it should be noted that despite the fact that all the organizations considered on the sample had Lean as a part of their strategy, only 33% identified their employees’ LEAN competencies according to ISO 18404, which defines competencies to achieve specific levels of capability in relation to Lean; so, further analysis should be carried out in this regard.

3.2. CSR Questionnaire Results

On the other hand, CSR results show that most of the organizations surveyed have a great level of CSR implementation according to ISO 26000:2010. As it can be seen in Figure 5, all of them provided over 85% positive answers, which is considered a robust implementation of the CSR, and it must be noted that 50% of them have 100% positive answers.

The results shown below in Figure 6 specify the impact on each of the seven fundamental matters defined in the ISO 26000:2010 standard.

As it can be seen, regarding “governance of the organization”, “practice fair trading” and “active participation and community development”, there is a total level of CSR implementation.

On the other hand, “consumer affairs” only have 76% positive answers, but it must be noted that 21% of the non-positive answers did not apply, and this is because of the selected sample. Most of the organizations surveyed do not have that kind of relation with their customers.

3.3. LEAN and CSR Survey Results

The chosen sample was made up of organizations that stand out because of their integration of Lean into their strategies, so this survey highlights the fact that companies with a manifest Lean culture also have a high adherence to CSR policies.

In conclusion, in the analyzed sample it can be confirmed that those companies that implement Lean tools, such as the 6S tool, are organizations concerned with sustainability.

4. Discussion

As was stated, nowadays, innovation and continuous improvement are a necessity for organizations [1], and such innovation and improvement usually seeks to enhance the quality and implementation of sustainability in all possible aspects of an organization [2,3].

To achieve these objectives, organizations often decide to use methodologies based on Lean philosophy, and taking this into account, the aim of this research was to continue the improvement of the Lean 5S tool, because it is considered a Lean fundamental.

Additionally, considering the results of the survey, there is empirical evidence that organizations with a high level of Lean implementation are also deeply concerned about sustainability, taking it into account in the form of a robust implementation of CSR. A positive answers rate of 100% regarding “governance of the organization”, ”practice fair trading” and “active participation and community development” in the survey might be interpreted as suggesting that the implementation of CSR at these matters prevails even more.

Considering these results, it is considered that a new S on the 6S tool, taking sustainability into account through the correct implementation of the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), may amplify its benefits, especially regarding quality, due to the clear correlation between CSR and quality that has been detected in the literature [44]; there is a positive relation between CSR and quality when CSR is correctly implemented.

Additionally, these findings should add a new layer of awareness to sustainability, not only by the awareness that it is implicit in approaches that seek continuous improvement and waste reduction in production and processes [10].

So, considering that the 6S tool provides a standard and systematic framework, and is a fundamental tool in implementing Lean in organizations, another stage is proposed in the 6S to include the CSR, reinforcing quality and giving emphasis to incorporating sustainability into the process. Consequently, the 7S tool and a suggested flowchart are presented on Figure 7, which must be developed in further research.

The questionnaire used in the survey can be used as a checklist to ensure compliance in accordance with the ISO 26000:2010 standard, and an organization’s level of CSR implementation according to the seven fundamental matters defined in the standard. The checklist is presented in Appendix A.

5. Conclusions

Firstly, the discovery of empirical evidence of the link between Lean (incorporated in an organizations’ strategy) and CSR validates the thesis presented in the literature that, due to high competition within the industrial sector, organizations not only seek to optimize their productivity, reduce waste, and improve the quality of their products, but they also look to implement sustainability to enhance the organization’s competitiveness. So, an organization which has a continuous improvement culture is more likely to seek excellence regarding every of these aspects.

On the other hand, as the sixth S was added to provide extra focus on safety in working areas with the idea to continue to improve the process, it was identified that organizations could enhance their quality level by including a good implementation of CSR. So, it can be said that with the 5S/6S tool, there is high organizational quality, but with the application of the 7S tool, a superior organizational quality can be achieved; however, this statement must be proven with further study cases.

Additionally, the seventh S would provide a conscious sustainable perspective within the 5S/6S tool, and would include a broader concept of sustainability, taking human rights, community development and other questions presented in CSR into account. This perspective should be articulated through the robust implementation of CSR to assure its compliance with its policies.

However, this new process must be further developed to consolidate it and to ensure that it can help organizations make better implementations. So, as a continuation, future research may follow these directions:

• Carrying out an empirical test of the 7S to validate the hypothesis exposed.
• Presenting concise methodology to prepare a CSR plan and its implementation in accordance with the ISO 26000:2010 standard, enhancing the 7S process.
• Continuing to improve the quality of the 7S framework; there is the possibility of including TQM in it, giving the opportunity to combine it with CSR in a systematic and procedural way.
• Continuing to develop the validation of the positive relation between CSR, sustainability and Lean, expanding the survey to a greater number of organizations.