["4.5 Gender of Respondents Table 4.3: illustrates the gender of the respondents Gender Frequency Valid % Cumulative % Female 4 40 40 Male 6 60 100 TOTAL 10 100 Source; Research Findings (2023) The table above represents the results pertaining the gender of the respondents. There were six males which is equivalent to 60% of the total number of respondents. Female respondents were four which is the same as 40% of the total number of respondents. This revealed that there was a degree of gender disparity to an extent especially when it came to holding senior positions in these Small and Medium tea processing industries. Figure 4.5 Pie Chart representing the gender of respondents Gender of Respondents 40% Male 60% Female Source; Research Findings (2023) 37","The pie chart above represents the information on the table in which there is 60% of Male which is represented by blue color and 40% of the female which is represented by orange color. Still the issue of gender disparity is present to an extent due to unequal number of males and females in the holding of senior positions. Figure 4.6 Bar Chart representing the Gender of Respondents Gender of Respondents MUFINDI TEA COMPANY LUPONDE TEA COMPANY MWAKALELI TEA FACTORY KISIGO TEA FACTORY 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 Female Male Source; Research Findings (2023) The bar chart above breaks the information represented in the table by considering the number of females and male in each tea processing industry. Kisigo Tea Factory had no female respondent and had only one male respondent. Mwakaleli Tea Factory had one male respondent and one female respondent representing an equal number of respondents which is equality. Luponde Tea Company had one female respondent and two male respondents and Mufindi Tea Company (MTC) had two male respondents and two female respondents thus representing gender equality when it comes to holding senior positions. 38","4.6 Work Experience of Respondents Table 4.4: The Work Experience of the Respondents; Years of Experience Frequency Valid % Cumulative % 1-4 years 2 20 20 5-10 years 3 30 50 Above 10 years 5 50 100 TOTAL 10 100 Source; Research Findings (2023) The table above represents the results concerning the work experience of the respondents. Respondents having above 10 years of experience were the majority amounting to five which is equivalent to 50%. Those having 5-10 years were three which is equivalent to 30%. And the lowest rate of respondents was those with 1-4 years which were only two which is equivalent to 20%. Figure 4.7: Pie Chart representing the Work Experience of the Respondents. Work Experience 20% 1-4 years 5-10 years 50% Above 10 years 30% Source; Research Findings (2023) 39","The pie chart above represents the work experience of the respondents. The majority of workers have Above 10 years of experience amounting to five equivalent to 50% which is represented by grey color. Those having 5-10 years are three equivalent to 30% which is represented by orange color and lastly are those with 1-4 years of experience which are two equivalent to 20% which is represented by blue color. Figure 4.8: Bar Chart representing the Work Experience of the Respondents Work Experience of Respondents MUFINDI TEA COMPANY LUPONDE TEA COMPANY MWAKALELI TEA FACTORY KISIGO TEA FACTORY 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 Above 10 years 5-10 years 1-4 years Source; Research Findings (2023) The bar chart above represents the work experience of respondents with respective to each tea processing industry. Kisigo Tea Processing had neither respondent with 1-4 years of experience nor those with 5-10 years but had 1 respondent with above 10 years. Mwakaleli Tea Factory had no respondent with 1-4 years of experience. It had one respondent with 5-10 years of experience and one respondent with above 10 years of experience. Luponde Tea Company had one respondent with 1-4 years of experience, one respondent with 5-10 years of experience and also one respondent with above 10 years of experience. Mufindi Tea Company (MTC) had one respondent with 1-4 years of 40","experience, one respondent with 5-10 years of experience and two respondents having Above 10 years of experience. 4.7 Mostly common used Lean Production Tools used in Tea Industries in Southern Highlands. Table 4.5: Mostly common used Lean Production Tools used in Tea Industries in Southern Highlands OPT KAIZ 5S VAL AUTOMA KANB TOTAL STANDARD AGGREG ION EN % % UE TION % AN PRODUCTI IZED ATE STR % VE WORK % PERCENT EAM MAINTEN AGE MAP ANCE % PING % NO 50 70 70 0 40 50 60 48.57 YES 50 30 30 100 60 50 40 51.43 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 TOT AL % Source; Research Findings (2023) Looking at the aggregate percentage; it is clearly seen that to a certain extent the small and medium tea processing industries implemented lean production tools in their industries with a total of 51.43% which is more than 50%. The lean production tool that was mostly used in all Small and Medium Industries was Automation in which 100% of the respondents agreed on using this. This was followed by Kanban \/ Pull system in which 60% of the respondents responded with YES and only 40% of the respondents responded with NO. This was followed by Kaizen and Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) in which 50% responded with a YES and 50% responded with NO. This was followed by Standardized work in which 40% responded with YES and 60% responded with a NO. This was followed by 5S and Value Stream Mapping (VSM) in which 30% responded with a YES and 70% responded with NO to both of them. 41","Figure 4.9: Bar Chart Showing Common Used Lean Tools Common used lean tools 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% NO YES Source; Research Findings (2023) The bar chart above illustrates the common used Lean production tools in these Small and Medium sized industries. Kaizen had 50% YES and 50% NO. Value Stream Mapping had 30% YES and 70% NO. 5S had 30% YES and 70% NO. Automation 100% YES and 0% NO. Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) had 50% YES and 50% NO. Kanban had 60% YES and 40% NO. Lastly is Standardized Work which had 40% YES and 60% NO. YES is represented by orange and NO is represented by Blue. 4.8 Challenges which face Small and Medium Tea Processing Industries in Southern Highlands to Implement Lean Production Tools effectively The table below gives an overview of the results of the questionnaires analyzed particularly on section three that was about the challenges that Small and Medium Tea Processing Industries face in the implementation of lean production tools effectively in their industries. 42","Table 4.6: Challenges which face Small and Medium Tea Processing Industries in Southern Highlands to Implement Lean Production Tools effectively N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Skewness Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic 3.00 5.00 3.8000 Statistic Statistic Std. Error 3.00 5.00 4.1000 1.Lack of 1.00 3.00 2.3000 1.00 4.00 2.4000 Interface with 10 3.00 5.00 4.0000 .78881 .407 .687 1.00 5.00 2.5000 existing systems 4.00 5.00 4.5000 1.00 3.00 1.6000 2. Lack of 10 1.00 5.00 2.6000 .73786 -.166 .687 internal expertise 1.00 5.00 2.7000 .67495 -.434 .687 1.00 5.00 2.8000 3. Government 10 Policies 4.00 5.00 4.3000 4. Lack of 4.00 5.00 4.6000 Political 10 .96609 -.111 .687 Goodwill 5. Poor 10 .81650 .000 .687 infrastructure 1.26930 .815 .687 6. Poor 10 information 7. Employees resistance to 10 .52705 .000 .687 change 8. Lack of 10 .69921 .780 .687 vendor support 9. Lack of appreciation of 10 1.26491 .544 .687 resulting benefits 10. Power 10 1.33749 .334 .687 outages 1.31656 .088 .687 11. High cost of 10 electricity 12. Lack of continuing 10 .48305 1.035 .687 education\/ training 13. Lack of top management 10 .51640 -.484 .687 commitment Valid N 10 (listwise) Source; SPSS Red \u2013 Lower Weight Yellow \u2013 Higher Weight 43","From the table above; those having a mean above 4.0 are the major contributing challenges that affect the implementation of lean production tools in small and medium tea processing industries. The respondents to a great extent agreed that Lack of top management commitment was the biggest challenge in the process of implementing lean production tools. This was followed by employee\u2019s resistance. This was later followed by lack of continuing education and training. These were highlighted with yellow to show that they had more weight than others. This was followed by Lack of political goodwill and government policies had the lowest mean meaning they had lower weight in the subject under study. They are highlighted by red color. Hence this means that not all the above factors greatly affect the implementation of lean production tools in these small and medium tea processing industries. Those with lowest amount of mean didn\u2019t have direct effect in the implementation of lean production tools compared to those with highest amount of mean. 4.8.1 The impact of implementing Lean Production Tools in Small and Medium Tea Processing Industries The table below shows the response in relation to the influence of lean Production tools on performance of small and medium tea processing industries in Southern Highland 44","Table 4.7 Impact of Lean Production tools on Performance of Tea Processing Firm Kaizen VSM 5s Automation Kanban TPM SW Overall Indicator mean mean mean mean mean mean mean mean Quality of 3.0000 3.0000 2.7500 2.8000 2.6250 2.7500 2.6667 2.80 product 2.7778 2.7500 2.7143 2.6667 2.81 Cost 3.0000 3.0000 2.7500 reduction Product 1.7500 1.2500 1.7500 1.6000 1.7500 1.8750 1.3333 1.62 variety Satisfied 3.0000 3.0000 2.7500 2.8000 2.7500 2.7500 2.6667 2.82 customers Reliability 2.7500 2.7500 2.7500 2.7000 2.5000 2.6250 2.5000 2.65 Increased 3.0000 3.0000 2.7500 2.8000 2.7500 2.7143 2.6667 2.81 profits Maximization of stakeholders interest 3.0000 3.0000 2.7500 2.6667 2.6250 2.7500 2.6667 2.78 Innovation 2.7500 2.7500 2.7500 2.8000 2.6250 2.7500 2.5000 2.70 Waste elimination 2.5000 2.5000 2.5000 2.6667 2.5000 2.5000 2.3333 2.5 Overall 2.75 2.69 2.61 2.62 2.54 2.60 2.44 2.61 mean Source: SPSS 45","To a great improvement (mean \u22652.5) there was a substantial link between Lean production tools and Small and Medium Industries performance, the respondents agreed that Kaizen had a greater impact on the performance of the small and medium tea processing firms this was clearly depicted by the overall mean of all key firm performance indicators of 2.75 which was almost approaching the maximum value of 3 which was indicating that there was improvement on firm performance after implementation of lean manufacturing practices. Lastly was standardized work (SW) with an overall mean of 2.44. On the other hand, when the overall mean for all the practices was calculated against the maximum of 3 which indicated that there was improvement on firm performance, it was found that the mean was 2.607143 which was nearing the maximum value hence it was a clear indication that there was a substantial relationship between lean production tools and performance of small and medium tea processing firms in Southern highlands region. This means that lean manufacturing practices have a strong relationship with performance of tea processing firms to a great extent with an overall mean (2.607143). 4.8.2 Relationship between Lean Production Tools and Performance of Small and Medium Tea Processing Firms in Southern Highland Region Regression Results for the Relationship between Lean Production Tools and Performance of Tea Processing Firms in Southern Highland Region 46","Table 4.8: Variables Entered\/Removeda Variables Entered\/Removeda Model Variables Entered Variables Method 1 Removed Enter Standardized work, 5S, Value Stream Mapping, Pull System, . Kaizen, Total Productive Maintenanceb a. Dependent Variable: Performance Index b. All requested variables entered. On the relationship between Lean Production tools and Performance of Small and Medium Tea Manufacturing Firms in Southern Highlands Region, all the six Lean Production Tools were entered into the model as seen in the table above. Figure 4.9 Model Summary Model Summary Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 .873(a) .762 .754 31.24033 a. Predictors: (Constant), standardized work, 5S, value stream mapping, Kanban, kaizen, total productive maintenance Based on the model summary above, the six Lean production tools (standardized work, 5s, value stream mapping, Kanban, kaizen, total productive maintenance explain 75.4% of the changes in the performance of tea processing firms in southern highland region. This means Lean production tools of standardized work, 5s, value stream mapping, Kanban; kaizen and total productive maintenance are good predictors of SMEs performance. On the analysis of variance (ANOVA), the predicators are significant at 99.95% confidence interval as in the table below 47","Table 4.10 ANOVAa ANOVAa Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Regression .488 6 91883.361 94.147 .000(a) 1 Residual 2.529 3 .843 Total 3.017 9 a. Dependent Variable: Performance Index b. Predictors: (Constant), standardized work, 5s, value stream mapping, Kanban, kaizen, total productive maintenance Table 4.11 Coefficientsa Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Standardized t Sig. Coefficients Coefficients Beta 1.364 .266 1 (Constant) B Std. -.033 .976 kaizen Error 0.054 -.259 .813 VSM 2.800 2.053 0.387 .000 1.000 5S 0.060 1.836 0.000 -.111 .919 Kanban 0.433 1.676 0.114 .331 .762 total 1.000E-013 1.298 0.558 maintenance 0.125 1.124 -.033 .976 productive 0.668 2.018 0.044 standardized work 0.060 1.836 a. Dependent Variable: Performance Index The explanatory power of standardized work, Value stream mapping, 5S, Kanban, kaizen and total productive maintenance on firm performance based on the coefficients above is given as follows: 48","SME Performance = 2.800 + 0.060 Kaizen + 0.433 Value Stream Mapping + 1.000E- 013 5S + 0.125 Kanban + 0.668 Total Productive Maintenance + 0.060 Standardized Work From the model above, the most significant predicators are Total Productive Maintenance, Value stream mapping and Kanban given their significant coefficients. 49","CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 5.0 Introduction This chapter presents comprehensive discussion of the results with regard to the special objectives that were set and also includes previous studies whose results are in-line or contrary to the results of the study. 5.1 Comprehensive Discussion of the Results The first specific objective was to look at the lean tools that are being used by the small and medium sized industries (for this case tea processing industries). According to this research, mostly used lean production tool that was mostly used in all Small and Medium Industries was Automation in which 100% of the respondents agreed on using this meaning that all industries used this. Automation in these industries is mostly used in aspects like sorting and grading, Tea processing machinery and also packaging and labelling. This was followed by Kanban. Kanban is used in this industries in grounds like visualizing the workflow, limiting work in progress and tracking tea batches. This was followed by Kaizen and Total Productive Maintenance. Kaizen usually cultivates the culture of improvement and promotes a mindset of seeking small, incremental changes that can lead to significant improvement over time. Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) in these industries is used in Equipment life cycle management including the acquisition, installation, operation and disposal of the equipment. This was followed by Standardized work. This was followed by 5S and Value Stream Mapping (VSM).5S is used in these industries to remove unnecessary items and also standardization process. The second objective was to determine the appropriate elements required for the roadmap. And in the process of determining that it was inevitable to look at the challenges that were experienced when it came to the implementation of lean production 50","tools in the Small and Medium Enterprises and the impact the lean production tools had on these SMES. On the aspect of the challenges experienced in the implementation of lean production tools, according to this research, Lack of top management commitment was the biggest challenge in the process of implementing lean production tools. This was followed by employee\u2019s resistance to change which was later followed by lack of continuing education. Next in line was lack of internal expertise. This was followed by Poor infrastructure which was then followed by Lack of interface with existing systems. This was followed by High cost of electricity and later on followed by Power outages. This was followed by Lack of appreciation of resulting benefits and later followed by poor information. The last two were Lack of political goodwill and Government policies meaning they didn\u2019t have direct effect in the implementation of lean production tools compared to those with highest amount of mean like lack of top management commitment and Employees resistance to change. On the side of the impact of implementing lean production tools in SMEs. According to the research, to a great improvement (mean greater than 2.5), there was a substantial link between lean production tools and SMEs performance (Productivity, Waste Minimization and Quality). Kaizen had a greater impact on the performance of SMEs and this was clearly depicted by the overall mean of 2.75 which was almost approaching the maximum value of 3. This was followed by Value Stream Mapping with a mean of 2.69, then by Automation with mean of 2.62, the next inline was 5S with an overall mean of 2.61, followed by TPM with mean of 2.60, followed with Kanban which has a mean of 2.54 and lastly Standardized work with a mean 2.44. After these results, it is thus clear that the elements of the roadmap (lean tools to be used) should be geared on Leadership commitment, Current state assessment, Training and Education, Continuous improvement culture, Standardization, continuous training and reinforcement and visual management. 51","The last specific objective is to develop a roadmap that will assist the effective implementation of lean production tools in these small and medium sized industries (for this case the tea processing industries). After thorough look on the lean tools used in the SMEs and after determining the appropriate elements, then a roadmap was developed. This proposed roadmap is divided into three phases respectively which are; 1. Phase 1 (Planning and Mapping the Process) 2. Phase 2 (Design and Implementation) 3. Phase 3 (Sustain) a). PHASE 1 (Planning and Mapping Process) This is the first step. It involves assessing the readiness of the firm (here both the employees and management are concerned). In the process of assessing the readiness it is also important to evaluate the organization\u2019s readiness and commitment to implement lean production tools. It is also important to set goals and objectives for lean implementation. The goals should be aligned with the organization\u2019s overall strategy and objectives. Then educating and training the employees at all levels is vital. Education ensures a common and shared understanding on the tools and thus will allow easy and effective implementation. The best lean production tool for this process is Value Stream Mapping. Value stream mapping will enable the identification of areas of waste, bottlenecks and inefficiencies. It will also help to identify non value added activities and opportunities for improvement. b). PHASE 2 (Design and Implementation) After Value stream has already been used to determine the non-value adding process and inefficiencies then prioritize improvement opportunities based on their impact and feasibility. This can be accompanied by developing strategies and action plans for each improvement area. Select a few key processes or areas to pilot the lean implementation and then monitor and evaluate the results to identify the success and challenges 52","The best lean tools to use here are 5s, Kanban, Total Productive Maintenance (TPM), Just in Time (JIT) and Visual Management Systems. c). PHASE 3 (Sustain) This process involves expanding the implementation and rolling out the lean implementation to other processes, departments or areas within the organization. This can be done by ensuring effective communication, training and support for employees involved. It also involves performance measurement to track key metrics and indicators, conducting regular reviews to assess programs, identify gaps and make necessary adjustments. It also involves training and skill development by providing ongoing training and skill development opportunities. 53","The lean tools that should be used here are Kaizen and Standard Work. PROPOSED ROADMAP FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF LEAN PRODUCTION TOOLS IN SMEs Figure 5.1: Proposed Roadmap for effective implementation of Lean Production Tools in SMEs Lean Tools VALUE 5S STANDARD STREAM WORK MAPPING KANBAN (VSM) KAIZEN TOTAL PRODUCTIVE MAINTAINANCE (TPM) JUST IN TIME (JIT) VISUAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Phases PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 For the purpose of confirming the applicability and the usefulness of the roadmap developed above, it felt that is important to confront this roadmap with a set of criteria proposed by (Pillet, 2007). These criteria are; 54","\u2022 Systematic and easily understood \u2022 Simple in structure \u2022 Having clear links between the elements or steps outlined \u2022 General enough to suit different contexts \u2022 Represent a road map and a planning tool for implementation, \u2022 Answers \u201chow to?\u201d and not \u201cwhat is?\u201d, and \u2022 Implementable Looking at this proposed roadmap it clearly suits with these criteria. Below are the features of the proposed roadmap; 1) It is simple in structure, systematic and can easily be understood. It has only 3 phases which easiens its implementation. 2) It has got clear links between the phases and elaboratesin detail the lean production tools to be used for each phase. Phase 1 uses tools like Value stream mapping , Phase 2 uses tools like 5S and Total Productive Maintenance and Phase 3 uses tools like Standard work and Kaizen. 3) General enough to suit different Small and Medium Enterprises. Even though the research has been strictly done on tea processing industries but its applicability extends further even to other small and medium industries not necessarily tea. Even other food industries can utilize it. The utilization also extends to services. 4) It answers \u201chow to\u201d and not \u201cwhat is\u201d. This meansit provides a clear solution on what is required. Most problems occur because people know what but they don\u2019t know how to implement. 5) It is implememtable. This is the most important thing for any roadmap. If it is implememntable that becomes easy to solve the problems concerned. This roadmap thus acts as a planning tool for implememntation. 55","5.2 Local studies whose Results are in-line with the study A research done by Albert Magutu, a master\u2019s student at the University of Nairobi on lean manufacturing practices in the tea processing firms in Kenya, showed similar results compared to this study. According to this study, to a great percentage, tea processing firms implemented lean manufacturing practices in their firms with Automation being the one that was implemented in all tea processing firms. Other lean manufacturing practices that were mostly used included Just in Time and Continuous flow. This is similar to this study especially in the aspect of Automation being the most used lean production tool. On the side of Challenges facing the implementation of lean manufacturing practices; the research by Albert Magutu highlighted that Government policy and Lack of political will as the factors that didn\u2019t greatly affect the implementation of lean manufacturing practices in tea processing industries. This study also pinpointed the same points as points that have less effect on the implementation of lean production tools in these small and medium sized tea processing industries. 5.3 Foreign studies whose Results are in-line with the study According to the research done by Cadi Ayyad University in 2016 on the implementation of Lean production tools in Small and Medium Enterprises on five SMEs (those having 150 employees and 50 million dollars), in which the first industry A was an Automotive supplier, B was a chemical industry, C was a textile industry, D dealt with metal construction and E dealt with Electrical Equipment. The results showed that all companies had implemented lean successfully in their production process but they didn\u2019t implement the same lean tools. Also the sequences of their implementation weren\u2019t similar. This has been the same case in this study. From the four tea processing 56","industries that have been researched upon there has been variation when it came to the pattern of their implementation of lean production tools. 57","CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS 6.0 Introduction This section provides a summary of the key findings of the study. It illustrates a brief conclusion for each specific objective so as to see if really the objectives were achieved. Also it provides key recommendations based on the study results whereby recommendations for future research are critical. 6.1 Summary of findings In summary, it is evident that there is variation in the lean tools that are used with regards to each Industries. The results clearly show that Automation was used in all industries, but there were tools like Value Stream Mapping and 5S which were rarely used in some industries. Some tools like Kaizen and Total Productive Maintenance were equally used in all industries demonstrating an equivalent percentage of 50%. Also on the side of challenges its evident that Lack of top management, lack of continuing education and employee\u2019s resistance to change had more effect in lean implementation. And on the side of Impact. Kaizen, Value Stream Mapping and Automation seemed to be more impactful. This meant the elements of the roadmap was on these grounds and it focused vision and leadership, Training and education, Continuous improvement and visual management. Lastly, the proposed roadmap took into consideration and has elaborated in detail the clear link and the lean production tools to be used for each phase of lean production implementation. In addition to that it answers how to and not what is unlike other roadmaps do. 58","6.2 Conclusion The general objective of the study was to develop a roadmap that will assist the SMEs in the effective implementation of lean production tools in their firms. The study focused on SMEs because at a large extent, the use of Lean production tools has been associated with Large Scale industries as its benefits have been evidenced to a great extent. At a certain level, SMEs have failed to use lean production tools because they lacked a clear picture of how they should implement it. This proposed roadmap thus solves the problem to a greater extent and allows SMEs to understand how they can use these tools to their competitive advantage. 6.3 Recommendations The following are the recommendations as per this study perfomed. Firstly, it is of Vital signifance for there to be the presence of high commitment of top management in the implementation of Lean production tools. This is because it is the top management who have power in reducing and overcoming resistance, control resource allocation, Incharge of leadership and carry the vision of the firm. The second important recommendation is that the SMEs should embrace technologyas it goes hand in hand with effective implementation of lean production tools. Even though the results show that all industries utilized Automation in their process. But it is of great impotance if they upgrade their technology and go more for innovations. On the side of innovations firms can come up with more than one line which will ensure that there will be there product variety instead of dealing with only one product that is broken black tea. Thirdly is that education and training should be provided to all members of the organization so that they can have a shared knowledge concerning the applicability of lean production tools. Education is important because it provides employees with 59","knowledge and understanding about lean tools, develops their skills which later results to employee engangement and empowerment. Lastly is that the Small and Medium Enterprises should ensure full implementation of lean production tools in order to enjoy the full benefits of the lean manufacturing practices in their firms just like the large enterprises do. 6.4 Suggestions for further studies For those researchers and academicans interested in the study of lean, one of the greatest area to perform research is on cost and benefit analysis of implementing lean production tools in Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). 60","REFERENCES Association, A. P. (2020). Lean Production Tools. Retrieved from APA dictionary of Psychology: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/0000052-032 Authority, T. T. (1989). Tea Production in Tanzania. Barney. (1991). Firm resources and Suistained competitive advantages. Journal of Management, 99-120. Bhamu. (2006). Lean Manufacturing. International Journal of Operation and Production Management, 460-471. Chen. (2009). Decision support for Lean Practitioners. A web based adaptive assesment approach, 277-283. Dora, M. (2016). Determinants and Barriers to Lean Implementation in Food processing SMEs. Eisenhardt. (n.d.). Building Theories from Case study. Academy of Management Review , 532-550. Fiedler. (1964). Contigency Model. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 149- 190. Karlsoon. (1996). Change Processes towards Lean production. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 42-56. Koenigsacker. (2005). Leadership and Lean Transformation. Lee. (1997). JIT adoption by Small Manufacturers in Korea. Journal of Small Business Management, 98-107. Liker. (1996). Becoming Lean. Portland: Productivity Press. Lindblom. (1959). The Science of Muddling Through. Public Administration Review, 79-88. 61","Magutu. (2016). Lean Manufacturing Practices and Perfomance of Tea Processing Firms in Kisii Kenya. Nairobi. Manazai. (2012). Impact of JIT in Time Inventory System on efficiency. Matt. (2013). 2013. 8th CIRP Conference on Intelligent Computation in Manufacturing, 420-425. Mugenda. (2003). Research Methods. Njoiri. (2008). The logistics of JIT. 155-173. Ohno. (1988). Toyota Production System. Tokyo: Production Press. Ondiek. (2013). A survey on adoption of Lean manufacturing tools and Techniques in Sugar Industries. Nairobi. Orodho. (2004). Methodology of Research. Parker. (2003). Longitudinal effects of Lean production on Employees . Journal of Applied Psychology, 620-634. Pillet. (2007). A study of supporting programs for Small and Medium Enterprises. Pingyu. (2014). The Barrires to SMEs implementation of Lean Production and Counter Measures. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology. Rahman. (2010). Development of Framework for Lean Manufacturing implementation in SMEs. Rother. (1999). Value stream mapping to add value and Eliminate Muda. Lean Enterprise Institute. Rumelt. (1991). How much does Industry Matter. Strategic Management Journal, 167- 185. Salleh. (n.d.). A benchmarking Implementation Framework for Automative SMEs. 62","Sangwan. (2014). Lean Manufacturing. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 876-940. Schutt. (2012). Research Methods in Education. SAGE Publications. Soltan. (2013). Framework for Lean Manufacturing Implementation. Production and Manufacturing Research, 44-64. Stadnicka, D. (2017). Lean Philosophy Implementation in SMEs. Williams. (2015). Lean implementation within SMEs. Womack. (1991). The machine that changed the World. Yin. (1994). Case study Research, Design and Methods. California. Yusof. (2000). A conceptual Framework for TQM Implementation in SMEs. The TQM magazine, 31-36. Yxu. (2017). Lean implemenation Frameworks. 63","APPENDICES APPENDIX 1: Research Questionnaire This research targeted to get an insight of the Lean productions tools adopted in tea processing firms in Southern Highlands region (Iringa and Njombe regions), challenges facing the implementing Lean Production tools in tea processing firms in Southern highlands and the relationship between lean production tools and performance of tea processing firms. The information obtained will be only used for academic purposes and will be treated with great secrecy. SECTION ONE: GENERAL INFORMATION OF THE RESPONDENT 1. Respondent\u2019s position in the organization (a) Production Manager (b) Production Assistant (c) Supervisor Other (specify)\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026 2. Respondent\u2019s level of education (a) Undergraduate (b) Graduate (c) Diploma Other (specify)\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026.... 3. Gender (a) Male (b) Female 4. For how long have you served in the position? (a) 1-4years (b) 5 -10 years (c) Above 10 years 64","SECTION TWO: LEAN PRODUCTION TOOLS COMMONLY USED BY TEA PROCESSING FACTORIES IN SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS Listed below are some of the commonly used lean production tools in most processing firms. Please tick the most common tool(s) which is implemented in your factory (firm). (Multiple answers are accepted). LEAN PRODUCTION TOOLS Kaizen Value stream mapping 5S Automation Total productive maintenance Standardized work Pull system\/Kanban 65","SECTION THREE: CHALLENGES TO LEAN MANUFACTURING IMPLEMENTATION The factors listed below affect the implementation of lean manufacturing practices in tea processing factors within southern highland of Tanzania. Tick the appropriate option using the Likert scale given below; 5 = strongly agree, 4 = Agree, 3 = Undecided 2 = Disagree, 1 = Strongly Disagree. CONTEST OF LEAN IMPLEMENTATION 5 4 3 2 1 Lack of interface with existing systems Lack of internal expertise Government policies Lack of political goodwill Poor infrastructure Poor information\/data accuracy Employees resistance to change Lack of vendor support Lack of appreciation of resulting benefits Power outages\/blackouts High cost of electricity Lack of continuing education\/training Lack of top management commitment Any other (please indicate) 66","SECTION FOUR: IMPACT OF IMPLEMENTATION OF LEAN PRODUCTION TOOLS Based on the above mentioned lean production tools how do you compare the performance of your firm before and after implementing the tools. Rate it using the following three Likert scale; 1- No improvement 2-I don\u2019t know 3-There is improvement KAIZEN 321 Quality products Cost reduction Product variety Satisfied customers Final product distribution reliability Increased profits Maximization of stakeholders interest Innovation Waste elimination VALUE STREAM MAPPING Quality products Cost reduction Product variety Satisfied customers Final product distribution reliability Increased profits Maximization of stakeholders interest Innovation Waste elimination 5S Quality products Cost reduction 67","Product variety Satisfied customers Final product distribution reliability Increased profits Maximization of stakeholders interest Innovation Waste elimination AUTOMATION Quality products Cost reduction Product variety Satisfied customers Final product distribution reliability Increased profits Maximization of stakeholders interest Innovation Waste elimination TOTAL PRODUCTIVE MAINTENANCE Quality products Cost reduction Product variety Satisfied customers Final product distribution reliability Increased profits Maximization of stakeholders interest Innovation Waste elimination STANDARDISED WORK Quality products Cost reduction Product variety Satisfied customers 68","Final product distribution reliability Increased profits Maximization of stakeholders interest Innovation Waste elimination KANBAN Quality products Cost reduction Product variety Satisfied customers Final product distribution reliability Increased profits Maximization of stakeholders interest Innovation Waste elimination Thanks for Your Responses 69","APPENDIX II : List of Factories Research has been Done in the Southern Highlands Regions FACTORY LOCATION KISIGO TEA FACTORY IRINGA REGION MWAKALELI TEA FACTORY MBEYA REGION LUPONDE TEA COMPANY NJOMBE REGION MUFINDI TEA COMPANY IRINGA REGION 70","APPENDIX 111: Letter of Inquiry Aaron Sanga P.Box 01 Mzumbe, Morogoro [email protected] 0672415821 06\/04\/2023 Joas Kyaman Production Manager Mufindi Tea Company Dear Sir, Subject: Request for Permission to Conduct Research on Roadmap for Effective Implementation of Lean Production Tools in the Tea Industry. I hope this letter finds you well. My name is Aaron Jackson Sanga, a third year student pursuing Bachelor degree in Industrial Engineering Management at Mzumbe University. I am writing to inquire about the possibility of conducting research in the tea industry with specific focus on developing a roadmap for the effective implementation of lean production tools in SMEs as part of my final year project. As an aspiring researcher in the field of lean production and process improvement, I am eager to contribute to the continous improvement efforts in the tea industry. Thank you for considering my request. I look forward to your favorite response. For any questions or further information please do not hesitate to contact me via the provided contacts. Yours sincerely, Aaron Sanga 71"]
Search
