Introducing KAIZEN in Africa

Edited by

GRIPS Development Forum
October 2009

© GRIPS Development Forum 2009
Cover photo © Kenichi Ohno
Contact:
GRIPS Development Forum
National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies
7-22-1 Roppongi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 106-8677 Japan
Phone: +81-3-6439-6337
Fax: +81-3-6439-6010
E-mail: forum@grips.ac.jp
URL: http://www.grips.ac.jp/forum-e/

Introducing KAIZEN in Africa

Edited by
GRIPS Development ForumContents

Foreword
Chapter 1

Introduction ……………………………………………………………………… 1
Izumi Ohno, Kenichi Ohno, and Sayoko Uesu

Chapter 2

Needs for Kaizen Activities by African Manufactures ……………………… 13
Ayako Ishiwata

Chapter 3

Kaizen: Quality, Productivity and Beyond …………………………………… 23
Akio Hosono

Chapter 4

JICA-Supported Project for Quality and Productivity Improvementin Tunisia … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 39
Tsuyoshi Kikuchi

Chapter 5

Productivity and Quality Improvement: JICA’s Assistance in Kaizen …… 55
Takafumi Ueda

< Contributors >Izumi Ohno:
Kenichi Ohno:

Professor, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies
Professor, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies

Sayoko Uesu:
Ayako Ishiwata:

Research Associate, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies
Senior Consultant, Because Institute Co., Ltd.

Akio Hosono:
Tsuyoshi Kikuchi:
Takafumi Ueda:

Professor, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies
Senior Industrial Consultant, Japan Development Service Co., Ltd.
Senior Advisor on Private Sector Development, Japan International
Cooperation Agency

Foreword

This book aims to introduce the basic concept and characteristics of kaizen to African audienceand explain how Japan has implemented kaizen assistance in developing countries. It also discusses
the factors that affect the performance of international kaizen assistance.
Kaizen means continuous improvement of productivity and quality, based on a participatory
process involving the entire workforce. With no requirement for huge investment, it is a low-cost
approach to productivity and quality improvement. Moreover, kaizen is applicable not only to the
manufacturing sector but also to the service sector, public organizations, and non-profit organizations.
Kaizen is one of the standard menu items of Japanese industrial support in developing countries.
It has been widely practiced in Asia by Japanese firms and their local subcontractors, and increasingly in Latin America and Eastern Europe as well. Nevertheless, knowledge-sharing and implementation of kaizen has so far been limited in Sub-Saharan Africa, partly due to the relatively
small presence of Japanese business activities in the continent.
Since late 2008, the GRIPS Development Forum has been engaged in industrial policy dialogue
with the Ethiopian Government, in collaboration with the Japan International Cooperation Agency(JICA). Compilation of this book was prompted by strong interest shown by Prime Minister Meles
Zenawi in Japanese development experiences and his request for the Japanese Government to introduce kaizen in Ethiopian firms, modeled on JICA’s kaizen assistance in Tunisia. We are gratefulto all contributors who responded to our initiative in a fairly short period. We are also very gratefulto the Embassy of Japan and JICA for providing valuable support and inputs to this endeavor.
We sincerely hope that this publication will motivate the interested readers to go deeper to findpractical suggestions from other documents and, furthermore, stimulate the discussion on how
Japan’s kaizen assistance can complement the Western management approach, which is more
widely practiced in Africa.

Tokyo, October 2009
GRIPS Development ForumChapter 1
Introduction
Izumi Ohno, Kenichi Ohno, and Sayoko Uesu
The Kaizen philosophy assumes that our way of life—be it our working life,
our social life, or our home life—should focus on constant-improvement efforts….. In my opinion, Kaizen has contributed greatly to Japan’s competitive
success. (Imai, 1997, p.1)

In Japanese management, kaizen means “continuous improvement” involving the entire workforce
from the top management to middle managers and workers.1 The origin of Japan’s kaizen movement was the quality control method imported from the United States (US) in the post WW2 period. Japan assimilated and developed this as its own management practice method which latereven surpassed performance in the US. This adapted method, which became known as kaizen,
spread rapidly among Japanese companies including a large number of small and medium-sizedenterprises. It subsequently spread overseas as Japanese business activities expanded abroad andJapanese companies began to build production networks with local companies.
Japan offers assistance for kaizen in many developing countries through private channels such as
intra-company technology transfer and support for local suppliers, as well as through public channels such as official development assistance (ODA) and guidance provided by various public organizations. By now, kaizen assistance is one of the standard menu items of Japanese industrial
support in developing countries. While such assistance initially focused on East Asia where Japan
had active business partnerships, it has now been implemented widely in other regions includingSouth Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe. However, as far as Sub-Saharan Africa is concerned, knowledge sharing and implementation of kaizen has been rather limited except in a few
notable cases (see footnote 5). There are a lot of unexploited benefits of selective and well calibrated application of kaizen from which African countries can draw upon to improve their production and service units.2
There is also a need for Japan to more actively propagate the idea of kaizen in Africa as an additional menu item in their industrial development strategies. This is partly because of increased interest among African countries in the growth agenda in general and in East Asia’s industrial

1
2

Kaizen literally means improvement: change (kai) for good (zen).
While many documents stress the importance of “continuous improvement” in Africa, especially in relation to tradepromotion strategy and activities like Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) and Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures(SPS) (for example, see Foss (2004, pp.113-118)), their recommendations do not discuss the specific actions needed
in detail.

1Chapter 1

experience in particular. In addition, this is important because of the plans announced by the Japanese government at the Fourth Tokyo International Conference for African Development (TICAD
IV) at Yokohama in May 2008 to promote trade and investment in Africa.3
The purposes of this book are to: (i) introduce the basic concept and characteristics of kaizen to
African audience; (ii) explain how Japan has implemented kaizen assistance in developing countries including the range of sectors and countries and the methodology adopted by Japanese experts
to transfer necessary techniques and practices; and (iii) discuss factors that affect the performanceof international kaizen assistance. The book also provides information on the history of Japan’squality and productivity improvement.

1. Principles and tools
The two key features of kaizen are incremental and continuous improvement and involvement of
the entire workforce in that process. The workforce, even workers, need to participate in producing
small but frequent changes by making suggestions for improvement in both process and product.
Beyond that, the logical structure of the concept of kaizen, the precise relationship among its tools,
and concrete measures and sequences adopted on the factory floor, are difficult to pin down since
there are many different schools of teaching that emphasize different aspects and tools of kaizen
relative to others. Even among excellent companies, Toyota’s way is different from Honda’s way,
and the Panasonic philosophy is quite distinct from Canon’s.
According to Masaaki Imai, who introduced kaizen to the international audience with his seminal
book, Kaizen: The Key to Japan’s Competitive Success, kaizen is an umbrella concept for a large
number of Japanese business practices (Imai, 1986; 1997—see Figure 1-1). It could even be argued
that, like Zen Buddhism, it is not just a management technique but a philosophy which instructs
how a human should conduct his or her life. Kaizen focuses on the way people approach work. It
shows how management and workers can change their mindset together to improve their productivity. As Edwards C. Johnson III, CEO of Fidelity Investment, puts it, while there are many strategies for management success, kaizen is different since it helps focus in a very basic way on how
people conduct their work (Imai, 1997).

3

As the main organizer of the TICAD IV, the Japanese government made a commitment to intensify its engagement
in boosting economic growth in Africa. Major initiatives in this regard include: (i) expanding training programs in
Africa to improve the productivity of promising industries (by the Japan International Cooperation Agency: JICA)
and to facilitate trade and investment by transferring Japanese manufacturing and marketing skills (by the Association
for Overseas Technical Scholarship: AOTS); (ii) establishing mechanisms for ODA to complement private sector
activities that contribute to African development; (iii) setting up the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC)
Facility for African Investment to offer equity investment, guarantees, and local currency financing; and (iv) regularly
providing information on the African business climate to Japanese private companies (by Japan External Trade Organization: JETRO). See Yokohama Action Plan and its Appendix.
<http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/africa/ticad/ticad4/doc/actoin.pdf><http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/africa/ticad/ticad4/doc/appendix.pdf>

2

Introduction

Figure 1-1. The Kaizen Umbrella

KAIZEN●

Customer orientation●

Kamban●

TQC (total quality control)●

Quality improvement●

Robotics●

Zero defects●

QC circles●

Small-group activities●

Suggestion system●●

Automation

Cooperative labormanagement relations

Discipline in the workplace●●

Productivity improvement●

New-product development

TPM(total productive maintenance)●

Source: Imai (1986, p.4).

There are a large number of related and often overlapping components that belong to the kaizen
toolkit such as: 5S, Suggestion System, Quality Control Circles (QCC) or Quality Circle (QC),
Total Quality Control (TQC), Total Quality Management (TQM), Toyota Production System (TPS),
Just-In-Time (JIT) System, Kamban System, and so on. Among these, 5S is generally considered
to be the most basic step for improving quality and productivity. Beyond that, the emphases vary
according to the particular author or expert. A brief explanation of each is provided below.

3Chapter 1

Table 1-1. Selected Components of the Kaizen Toolkit
TermExplanation

5S

5S is a philosophy and checklist for good housekeeping to achieve greaterorder, efficiency and discipline in the workplace. It is derived from theJapanese words Seiri (Sort), Seiton (Straighten), Seiso (Shine), Seiketsu(Systematize), and Shitsuke (Standardize/Self-Discipline). There are also
different English renditions.

Suggestion System

A Suggestion System is the method by which the ideas and suggestions of
employees are communicated upwards through the management hierarchy
to achieve cost savings or improve product quality, workplace efficiency,
customer service, or working conditions. Examples range from simply placing suggestion boxes in common areas, to implementing formal programswith committees reviewing ideas and rewards given for successful adoptionof those ideas.

Quality Control Circle(QCC)

QCC is a small group of workers who collectively find a problem, discussalternative remedies, and propose a solution. QCCs voluntarily perform improvement activities within the workplace, as part of a company-wide program of mutual education, quality control, self-development and productivity
improvement.

Total Quality
Management (TQM)

TQM represents a number of management practices, philosophies andmethods to improve the way an organization does business, makes its products, and interacts with its employees and customers. QCC activities function as an integral part of TQM. Historically, statistical quality control wasborn in the US, and Japan imported and developed that concept as Total
Quality Control (TQC) in the 1960-70s, which evolved as TQM in the late
80s.

Toyota Production
System (TPS)

TPS is the philosophy which organizes manufacturing and logistics at Toyota, including interaction with suppliers and customers. It focuses on theelimination of waste and defects at all points of production including inputs,
process and final output (delivery). The term “Lean Production System” canbe used interchangeably.

Just-In-Time (JIT)
System

JIT, a part of TPS, is a production system aimed at eliminating non-valueadding activities of all kinds and achieving a lean production system flexible
enough to accommodate fluctuations in customer orders.

Kamban System

Kamban refers to a communication tool in the JIT production and inventory
control system, developed at Toyota. A kamban (signboard) is attached toa given number of parts and products in the production line, instructing thedelivery of a given quantity. When the parts have all been used, the kamban
is returned to its origin where it becomes an order to produce more.

Source: Compiled by the author, based on Imai (1986, 1997), Fujimoto (1999), Fukui et al. (2003), Liker (2004),
and Asian Productivity Organization (APO) website.

2. The history of diffusion
Kaizen activities have developed and spread in Japan and later to the rest of the world in fourphases.
The first phase was the absorption of foreign technique by Japan in the early postwar period. In
the 1950s, the world market perceived Made-in-Japan products to be as “low price, low quality.”4

Introduction

Driven by a sense of urgency for industrial catch-up, Japan learned American style quality management from Drs. W. E. Deming and J. M. Juran, and adapted this to the Japanese context. A national movement for quality and productivity improvement emerged, supported by the Union ofJapanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE), established in 1946, and the Japan Productivity Center(JPC), established in 1955. Many companies developed their own systems of kaizen, including
the globally known TPS developed by the Toyota Motor Corporation. These efforts laid a solid
foundation for establishing the so-called Japanese production management system. Thus, kaizen
was originally a foreign technique which was adopted and adjusted to become a Japanese technique(Chapters 2 to 4 will explain the history of Japanese quality and productivity improvement efforts).
The second phase was diffusion throughout Japanese companies, including small and mediumsized ones. This led to a rapid increase in the number of QCCs in the 1970s and 80s (see Chapter
3 for more details). The two oil crises in the 1970s drove Japanese companies to integrate energy
saving into their quality and productivity improvement efforts.
The third phase was the regional spreading of kaizen beginning in the mid 1980s, which coincidedwith the globalization of Japanese business activities. The sharp appreciation of the Japanese yen
after the Plaza Agreement4 in 1985 prompted Japanese manufacturing companies to shift their production bases to East Asia where production costs were lower. Japanese firms tried to duplicate
the quality management system in their factories abroad. Moreover, as they endeavored to increase
local procurement of intermediate inputs, local suppliers were requested to conform to Japan’squality standards. Japanese companies often assisted their local partners to learn kaizen philosophy
and practices. Also, various public organizations—the Association for Overseas Technical Scholarship (AOTS), established in 1959, the Asian Productivity Organization (APO), established in1961 as a regional inter-governmental organization, the Japan Overseas Development Corporation(JODC), established in 1970, the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), JUSE, andJPC—began their active engagement in kaizen assistance in developing countries. The first JICA
project for productivity management was extended to Singapore from 1983 to 1990 (see Chapter
5). Building on the success of this cooperation, the Singapore Productivity and Standard Board
has subsequently grown to become a major organization to extend training programs to other countries and regions, including the Southern African Development Community (SADC) under partnership arrangements with JICA. This Singaporean case is regarded as the best example ofgraduation from and international diffusion of Japan’s kaizen assistance.5
4

5

The governments of the US, Japan, France, Germany and the United Kingdom agreed to depreciate the US dollar
against the yen and the mark. It was signed on September 22, 1985 at the Plaza Hotel in New York City. The exchange
rate value of the dollar versus the yen declined by 51% from 1985 to 1987.
The Singaporean government and Japanese government jointly implemented the third-country training program on
productivity management in SADC countries during 1997-2002. In addition to the bilateral channel, kaizen assistanceis also offered by Japanese experts utilizing Japanese funds through international organizations. For example, during
the 1990s, the World Bank supported the government of Burkina Faso in implementing QCC through technical assistance. In 2003, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) produced a handbook for TQM and QCC for Latin
America and the Caribbean Region.

5

Chapter 1

The fourth phase, which is now beginning, has witnessed growing interest in East Asia’s industrial
experience in other developing regions (including Africa). However, outside, interest in and knowledge of the East Asian approach often remains general and insufficient, and has not been operationalized with practical details. This situation, together with the Japanese government’s TICAD
IV initiative for promoting trade and investment in Africa, provides an opportunity for Japan tomore actively publicize and introduce kaizen in developing regions including Africa.

3. The Japanese approach vs. the Western approach
There are notable conceptual differences between the Japanese and the Western management approaches. In particular, kaizen contains many features unique to the Japanese industrial experience.
First, the Japanese approach emphasizes small incremental changes under existing technology
while the Western approach favors innovation based on technological breakthroughs (Clark et al.,2009; Imai, 1986 and 1997).6 Second, the Japanese approach focuses on human elements and advocates people’s process-oriented efforts for improvement, while the Western approach is more
inclined towards reviewing performance from results-based criteria (Imai, 1997). Kaizen does notnecessarily call for large investments, such as installing new machines or hiring experts. Instead,
it requires continuous effort and commitment at all levels of the workforce to propose and practicethe use of existing human and capital resources to improve quality and productivity. Imai (1986)
gives a comparison of kaizen and innovation in Table 1-2.
Table 1-2. Features of Kaizen and Innovation
Innovation

Kaizen
1. Effect

Long-term and long-lasting but undra- Short-term but dramatic
matic

2. Pace

Small steps

Big steps

3. TimeframeContinuous and incremental

Intermittent and non-incremental

4. Change

Gradual and constant

Abrupt and volatile

5. Involvement

Everybody

Select few ìchampionsî

6. Approach

Collectivism, group efforts, systems
approach

Rugged individualism, individual ideas
and efforts

7. ModeMaintenance and improvement

Scrap and build

8. Spark

Conventional know-how and state of Technological breakthroughs, newthe artinventions, new theories

9 Practicalrequirements

Requires little investment but great ef- Requires large investment but little effort to maintain it
fort to maintain it

10. Effort
orientation

PeopleTechnology

11. Evaluation
criteria

Process and efforts for better results

Results and profits

12. Advantage

Works well in slow-growth economy

Better suited to fast-growth economy

Source: Imai (1986, p.25).
6

Clark et al. (2009) describes it as the difference between kaikaku (reform, big change) and kaizen (small incremental
changes).

6

Introduction

In a sense, the differences between the Japanese and the Western approach are a matter of degrees.
Generally, few Japanese managers belittle the importance of having the right kind of equipment
or conducting Research and Development (R&D), while Western managers cannot be accused ofneglecting the workers in factory management. For example, Toyota makes enormous efforts forinnovation and integrates such efforts with its kaizen activities (Clark et al., 2009). There are many
areas of overlap and agreements between the two, and they may often produce similar prescriptions
for improvement. Nevertheless, the comparison is still meaningful because they point to different
initial actions, priorities and sequences which may result in different overall performance. For developing countries, having two distinct perspectives will broaden the strategy space for enterprisemanagers and policy makers.
One of the frequently recommended management tools of the Western origin is business process
re-engineering (BPR). BPR differs sharply from kaizen as it aims at a fundamental and drasticchange that leads to a breakthrough rather than achieving incremental improvements on a daily
basis. BPR is “the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve
dramatic improvements in critical measures of performance” (Hammer, 1990; Hammer & Champy,
1993). In fact, according to Hammer (1990), re-engineering is an all-or-nothing proposition withan uncertain result, which cannot be accomplished through small and cautious steps. BPR usuallytakes a top-down approach in contrast to kaizen’s participatory bottom-up approach. In implementing BPR, the re-engineering team assumes central responsibility by representing the functional
units being reengineered and having all other units depend upon it.
Another popular management tool from the West is benchmarking, whose basic procedure is gathering information on a number of competing firms or countries engaged in the same activities,
comparing the performance of targeted domestic firms against the so-called best practice, and setting goals for improvement. Kaizen also differs from benchmarking, since the latter is a tool for“identifying, understanding, and adapting outstanding practices and processes from organizations
anywhere in the world to help your organization improve its performance” (American Productivity & Quality Center7). Benchmarking is mainly for identifying one’s weaknesses and setting goals
in relation to others whereas kaizen is applied mainly to find room for improvement internally andrealizing this through team effort.
For example, in the process of assisting the Ethiopian government in formulating a master planfor the Leather and Leather Product Industry (LLPI), the United Nations Industrial Development
Organization (UNIDO) conducted a benchmarking exercise to compare the Ethiopian LLPI against
four of the best LLPI performing countries, namely, India—specifically West Bengal (leather),Vietnam (leather and footwear), China (footwear) and Italy (footwear). This exercise analyzed theavailability of raw materials, labor costs, the level of human capital, the establishment of backward

7<http://www.apqc.org/portal/apqc/ksn/GlossaryofBenchmarkingTerms.pdf?paf_gear_id=contentgearhome&paf_dm=full&pageselect=contentitem&docid=119519>

7

Chapter 1

and forward linkages, design capacities, as well as strategies and policy mixes adopted by thesefour countries (e.g. price, product, and communication). In doing this, it intended to help generate
an understanding of the relative strengths and weaknesses of the supply chains in the Ethiopian
LLPI in the global context and design strategies to overcome such constraints and weaknesses(UNIDO, 2005). While this specific exercise was undertaken at the industry level, it is also possible
to conduct benchmarking at the firm level.

4. Applicability to developing countries
The philosophy, concept, and tools of kaizen have been adopted not only in Japanese firms but
also in many multinational corporations in the US and Europe. Many studies note that, in both
Japan and abroad (especially in the cases of American and European companies), leadership is the
single most important factor for successful implementation of kaizen (Imai, 1986; Kaplinsky, 1995;
also see Chapter 4 of this book). This implies that it is possible to apply kaizen in countries withdifferent socio-cultural contexts but that application must be conducted under proper leadershipand with adjustments that reflect the uniqueness of the targeted society.
In introducing kaizen to Africa, three issues are raised here for the attention of the interested reader.
They are: (i) complementarity with the Western approach which is more frequently adopted in
Africa; (ii) cost effectiveness of adopting kaizen instead of other methods; and (iii) transferabilityof kaizen to the socio-economic environment of developing countries.
Complementarity with the Western approach
Japanese and Western approaches are different. Can they be adopted simultaneously in the same
country, or even in the same firm, to produce a successful synergy? Or are they incompatible so
only one model can be implemented? Are kaizen and BPR complementary or substitutes? We are
not ready to give a simple answer to this difficult question here. It appears that a meaningful answer
must come from proper contextualization of the problem at hand.
To improve different aspects of the same company, it should be possible to mobilize two alternative
methods at the same time. For example, BPR can be invoked to make a discontinuous breakthroughsuch as introducing new overseas marketing or cutting-edge technology, whereas kaizen can beused to raise productivity and reduce waste on the factory floor. The former can be achieved byoutsourcing experts at market cost, for example, while the latter is a daily process which does notconflict with the former.
However, from another angle, there is some concern. BPR is most compatible with top-down management styles while kaizen requires an organizational structure which permits bottom-up decision
making. Yet, the two cannot be embodied in one organization—or can they? Our purpose here isto raise questions without suggesting finite answers. To go beyond this, further studies and drawing

8

Introduction

concrete lessons from experience will definitely be needed.
Cost effectiveness
Generally speaking, kaizen is a low-cost approach to productivity improvement for two reasons.
First, it does not require huge capital investment, expensive technology, or costly R&D since it
seeks to use existing equipment and human resources in a more efficient—less wasteful—way.
Second, the key goal of kaizen is to generate the internal capability of the targeted firm and to let
it ultimately “graduate” from the guidance of external kaizen experts and conduct continuous improvement by itself. In fact, if kaizen instructors do not leave the company after one or two years,
improvement efforts should be considered a failure. Thus, kaizen is particularly suited for enterprises in low-income countries which face financial access problems.
While a large sum of capital is not needed, however, other things must be invested in, in order togarner the benefits of kaizen. They include strong commitment by executives, long-term orientation, a sense of oneness, trust and teamwork among all levels of personnel, and willing cooperationof workers. Can that be ensured? This leads to the next issue below.
Transferability across cultures
In the developing world, a number of attempts to implement kaizen have yielded a wide range ofresults, for example, in Southeast Asia and India.
On the one hand, there are views that question the general applicability of kaizen to developing
countries. They argue that most developing countries face the problem of weak human resources.
Continuous improvement requires a seamless extension of training and skills development to theentire workforce. However, in a country with low literacy, it is difficult for firms to implement
such a training system for the entire workforce (Kaplinsky, 1995). Short-terminism, the lack of
upward mobility, and inattention to details of the workers in general may also add to management’s
problems. Furthermore, in societies where the hierarchical structure is deeply rooted, it may not
be easy to introduce a participatory mechanism in which all workers are encouraged to contributeactively to process and product improvements. In addition, managers’ misconceptions about continuous improvement are common sources of difficulty, since they often expect instant results,
whereas in reality it takes time before the benefits of quality management become visible(Karsten & Pennink, 2007). In such circumstances, even if managers know the concept and tools,
translating these ideas into practices and internalizing kaizen as a company-wide movement remains very complex tasks.
On the other hand, the diffusion of kaizen philosophy and practices are already observable in someparts of the developing world, especially in Southeast Asia and India. Japan’s kaizen assistanceprograms in Singapore, Brazil, Central America, and Tunisia, which are mentioned in different
chapters of this book (Chapters 3 to 5), also show that efforts are being made by local institutions

9

Chapter 1

to adopt kaizen. This inevitably requires assimilation in the specific country context, and progress
is reported in some cases. These cases should serve as useful references for Africa to help understand key factors that determine the success and failure of applying kaizen in the developing world.
It should also be added that, even in Japan, workers were lazy, short-sighted, and hardly productivein the early 20th century (Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce, 1901). Disobeying company
rules and executive orders was the norm rather than the exception. Through the effort of private
firms and public policies, these “ungovernable” workers were transformed into kaizen workers
half a century later. Culture does not change easily, but it is also incorrect to say that culture is immutable.

5. A guide to the chapters
Following this introduction, the four chapters provide concrete ideas from Japan’s implementationof kaizen assistance in developing countries, as well as information on Japan’s postwar experiencesin improving quality and productivity
Chapter 2 (by Ayako Ishiwata) reviews ongoing kaizen assistance in Africa, discusses the need forkaizen in Africa drawing on the cases of Kenya and Ethiopia, and raises key issues to be consideredin applying kaizen activities to African manufacturers. Chapter 3 (by Akio Hosono) explains how
quality and productivity improvements originating in the US were developed into the kaizen movement in Japan. He suggests possible application of kaizen in a variety of activities and in different
country contexts, highlighting the cases of JICA’s assistance in Brazil and Central America. Chapter 4 (by Tsuyoshi Kikuchi) explains how Japan implements kaizen assistance in developing countries, based on the case of a JICA project in Tunisia. It contains information on specific activities
supported by the project, institutional arrangements, outputs, and so on, and draws lessons for successful implementation. Lastly, Chapter 5 (by Takafumi Ueda) provides an overview of JICA projects in kaizen, which range from kaizen-only projects, integrated projects, master plans aimed atmodel companies, regional projects, experts and training courses. Based on a variety of JICA’spast and ongoing assistance in Asia, Latin America, and Europe, he suggests that kaizen can beapplied in many parts of the world, including Africa.
This book is meant for those who have little information on or experience in kaizen. It provides abroad picture to help the interested reader explore particular aspects of the topic. For specificdetails about kaizen philosophy, tools, or company-specific experiences, there are a number ofbooks, manuals and handbooks which are readily available. We do hope that the reader will notstop with this book but go on to find practical suggestions from other documents. To help readers
get started, we attach a short list of selected references below.

10Introduction

Table 1-3. Selected Literature and Websites
Literaturel Fukui, Ryu, Yoko Honda, Harue Inoue, Noriharu Kaneko, Ichiro Miyauchi, Susana Soriano, andYuka Yagi (2003) Handbook for TQM and QCC, Volume I and Volume II. Published in October
2003, Inter-American Development Bank (IDB).
l Imai, Masaaki (1986) Kaizen: The key to Japan’s competitive success. McGraw-Hill Publishing
Company.
l Imai, Masaaki (1997) Gemba Kaizen: A commonsense, low-cost approach to management. McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.
l Liker, Jeffrey K. (2004) The Toyota Way: 14 management principles from the world’s greatest
manufacturer. McGraw-Hill.
Websitesl American Productivity & Quality Center (APQC) <http://www.apqc.org/portal/apqc/site>l Association for Overseas Technical Scholarship (AOTS)<http://www.aots.or.jp/eng/indexeng.html>
l Asian Productivity Organization (APO) <http://www.apo-tokyo.org/index.htm>
l Japan Productivity Center (JPC) <http://www.jpc-sed.or.jp/eng/index.html>
l Kaizen Institute <http://www.kaizen.com/>l National Productivity & Competitiveness Council, Mauritius<http://www.npccmauritius.com/pressrelease/>l Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE) <http://www.juse.or.jp/e/>

References
Clark, N., Chataway J., Hanlin R., Kale D., Kaplinsky R., & Robbins P. (2009). “Below the radar:
What does innovation in the Asian driver economies have to offer other low income
economies?” Development Policy and Practice, The Open University. Milton Keynes.
MK7 6AA. INNOGEN Working Paper No.69. January 2009.
Foss, I. (2004). Development of trade in Africa: Promoting export through quality and productsafety. NORAD/SIDA.
Fujimoto, T. (1999). The evolution of a manufacturing system at Toyota. Oxford University Press.
Fukui, R., Honda Y., Inoue H., Kaneko N., Miyauchi I., Soriano S., & Yagi Y. (2003). Handbook
for TQM and QCC, Volume I and Volume II. Published in October 2003. Inter-American
Development Bank (IDB).
Hammer, M. (1990). “Reengineering work: Don’t automate, obliterate.” Harvard Business Review.
July-August 1990.
Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for business revolution. Harper Business.
Imai, M. (1986). Kaizen: The key to Japan’s competitive success. McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.
Imai, M. (1997). Gemba kaizen: A commonsense, low-cost approach to management. McGrawHill Publishing Company.
Kaplinsky, R. (1995). “Technique and system: The spread of Japanese management techniques to11

Chapter 1

developing countries.” World Development. Vol. 23, No.1, pp.57-71.
Karsten, L., & Pennink B. (2007). “Total quality management in the African business communityof Burkina Faso: A change in perspective on knowledge development.” CDS Research
Report No.25. July 2007.
Liker, J. K. (2004). The Toyota way: 14 management principles from the world’s greatest manufacturer. McGraw-Hill.
Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce. (1901). Survey of industrial workers (in Japanese).
United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO). (2005). Integrated programme
for Ethiopia master plan “A strategic sction plan for the development of the Ethiopian
leather and leather products industry.” Volume I, prepared by the UNIDO in cooperation
with the Ministry of Trade and Industry of Ethiopia. March 2005.

12

Chapter 2
Needs for Kaizen Activities by African Manufactures
Ayako Ishiwata

1. Global spread of kaizen activities
Kaizen is a familiar word for the Japanese. In its direct translation, kaizen simply means “improvement,” without any concept of time frames. On the other hand, the term kaizen used in managementmeans the creation of a system, which enables continuous and sustainable improvement for an organization. Since global competition calls for never ending improvement, the goal of kaizen activities is not static and always has to be shifted to a higher level.
Kaizen has two definitions. The broader definition of kaizen encompasses various production andquality management tools under the umbrella of kaizen philosophy. On the other hand, the narrower
definition is improvement of the workplace (“gemba”) derived from proposals from the workers
on the basis of a quality control circle (QCC) and a suggestion system. This paper adopts thebroader definition of kaizen.8
The kaizen method has been established as an outcome of various activities undertaken for improving the productivity and quality of Japanese products after mid 1940s, as Japanese manufactures were urgently trying to catch up with the standards of American and European manufacturers.
Initially, efforts were made to learn from western management systems, particularly the statisticalquality control methods. Introduction of an annual award for quality management, the Deming
Prize, has contributed to awareness among enterprises and provided opportunities to learn frombest practices.9 Through this process, the western management strategy was combined with Japanese management methodologies and gradually developed into the kaizen system.
The best kaizen model is considered to be the one developed in the Toyota Motor Corporation
since 1950s, as Toyota initiated the QCC with the introduction of statistical methods. A QCC isformed by a group of workers in gemba, who discuss issues and actions to improve the quality
and productivity of products, and to upgrade personal skills. A suggestion system is usually intro-

89For example, Imai (1986 and 1997) uses the broader definition, and Fujimoto (1997) uses the narrower definition.
The Deming Prize is named after Dr. W. Edwards Deming who was invited to Japan by the Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE) in the 1950s. The Deming Prize was initially created using contribution from Dr. Deming’s sales of copies of his lecture notes on quality management to Japanese manufacturers. In appreciation to Dr.
Deming’s contribution, JUSE has managed the funds and continued the Deming Prize Awards since 1950. (source:
Homepage of JUSE <http://www.juse.or.jp/e/deming/01.html> accessed on 1 May 2009.)

13

Chapter 2

duced together with the QCC in order to integrate both initiatives into the management systems
of companies. Then Toyota developed a Just-In-Time system by eliminating all types of wastes in
the production flow.10 After these unique methodologies were being practiced widely in Japan, thephilosophy and methodologies of kaizen have become famous worldwide through Imai’s book on
kaizen written in 1986.11 His book received attention particularly because the success of the Japanese manufacturers was intriguing western countries by then, and the uniqueness of kaizen convinced the west that the kaizen methodology was a key element for success. From there, othernotable books introducing the Toyota production system, as well as Imai’s book, helped the west
to understand and adopt the details of the kaizen method.12
The kaizen methodology is often contrasted to the western management style. Since kaizen attaches
importance to the workplace where actual activities are carried out, the workers in gemba are thecentre of kaizen activities. Although the owner and the managers are responsible for making decisions and providing guidance, the workers are the key people who make proposals for improvement and implementation. This bottom-up decision making process is considered in sharp contrast
to the orthodox western management style, in which solutions and decisions are mostly made bymanagerial staff, and workers are simply ordered to implement them.
The advantages of empowering workers are three-fold. Firstly, the workers who are engaging in
the actual production are in a better position to know the sources of the problems, and usually
have clearer ideas for solutions than managerial staff. Secondly, involvement of the workers forkaizen activities raises their motivation towards achieving the targets for improvement. Thirdly,
small steps taken by all sections and all workers are usually more efficient and effective than making big investments towards improvement. In fact, a key characteristic of kaizen is that improvements come with minimum investment, since the emphasis is on minimizing waste.
Under the philosophy of kaizen, various production and quality management tools are used. The
most basic tool of kaizen is 5S, which stands for Sort (Seiri), Straighten (Seiton), Shine (Seiso),
Systematize (Seiketsu), and Standardize (Shitsuke). Since the original terms of 5S are in Japanese,
5S are translated into various symbols and words by each company globally (see photos below).
Contrary to the belief that the high technology of Japanese manufacturers heavily relies on modern
machinery, such high product quality and productivity could not have been attained without the
5S principle. These simple house keeping methods are undertaken by all employees in successful
Japanese manufacturers, regardless of their position in the company. This is in sharp contrast to
traditional companies in developing countries where house keeping is usually undertaken by specific employees who are often considered of lower status.

10

Ohno, Taiichi, the key person in developing the Toyota Production System between the 1950s and 70s, classifies 7
types of wastes (muda): i.e. overproduction, inventory, repair/rejects, motion, processing, waiting, and transport (asreferred in Imai (1997, p.75)).
11
Imai (1986).
12
For example, Ohno (1988), and Monde (1983). The third edition of Monde’s book is now available.

14

Needs for Kaizen Activities by African Manufactures

Global Implementation of 5S
5S are practiced in various counties as 5S sign boards in gemba symbolize implementation.

From left to right: a local company in Thailand; a Japanese company in Indonesia; a multinational company
in Kenya; and, a local company in Kenya.
Source: Sanyu Consultants Inc. and KRI International Corporation (2008, p.94).

Kaizen does not prescribe for a particular model since as it empowers creation of the system tothe workers in gemba. On top of 5S, each company selects and combines various production andquality control tools such as a QCC, a Just–In-Time System, Total Productive Maintenance (TPM),
Total Quality Control (TQC), Total Quality Management (TQM), etc. Some tools originate fromthe western management system. However, these tools are combined through bottom-up decision
making processes involving all employees and bringing about step-by-step improvements withemphasis on eliminating all types of waste in production.
While Toyota’s kaizen model contributed to systematically developing the kaizen concept andmethod, the kaizen approach (i.e. bottom-up decision making process, house keeping activities involving all the workers, and step-by-step improvement with eliminating wastes) is culturally common in the Japanese managerial system. Therefore, Japanese manufacturers did not have to takedrastic efforts to establish kaizen. Moreover, leading Japanese assemblers consider that implementation of 5S is a minimum requirement for becoming their suppliers. Since 5S implementation isvisually observable at gemba, all their suppliers are urged to implement 5S. These are the reasons
why kaizen is the de facto standard in most of the successful manufacturers in Japan and became
the core of the success of the Japanese industry.

2. Kaizen assistance in Africa
Kaizen has become a global activity spread by multinational companies and their employees. It
has become popular not only in the manufacturing sector but also in the service sector. However,proliferation of kaizen in Africa is still very small due to the limited number of players who bringin the practice. Since individual companies cannot be a major force in transferring kaizen, the activities of the following four organizations are considered vital in transferring the kaizen method
to Africa.

15

Chapter 2

Kaizen Institute
The Kaizen Institute is an international private consultant group that specializes in the kaizen
method. It has licensed networks throughout 24 countries from which consultants provide services
globally. In Africa, its subsidiary is in Mauritius.13 Their performance has proved that the kaizen
method is much needed and commercially viable. There are also other unlicensed consultancy
firms, which can provide training on kaizen. Yet, these private services are still the domain of
medium and large-scale companies, and their services are not affordable for most micro and small
enterprises in Africa.
JICA
The Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) is the executing agency for official development assistance from the Government of Japan. JICA’s activities cover a variety of subjects, andkaizen is one of the activities often undertaken by JICA under the subject of private sector development. A characteristic of JICA’s assistance is that the content of each project is customized according to the needs and conditions of the recipient country. Kaizen activities are often foundproject titles such as “productivity improvement.” In Africa, Tunisia and Egypt are on-going beneficiaries from the kaizen projects assisted by JICA.
JICA’s kaizen assistance in Tunisia

JICA’s kaizen assistance in Egypt< Study on the Master Plan for Quality/Productiv- < Quality and Productivity Improvement Centre
ity Improvement in the Republic of Tunisia >(Kaizen Centre) Project >Period: August 2006 to July 200814
Period: October 2007 to April 2011
Sectors: Electrics/Electronics and Food Processing
Activities :Activities :l Fact finding survey of the manufacturing in- l Capacity building of the Centre
dustryl Seminars, training, and consultation
l 11-month pilot project on kaizen activities for l Creation of the best practices with model
30 selected companies from the electrics
companies/electronics and food sectors15
l Establishment of publicity tools (newspaper,l Formulation of the master plan for the national
homepage, etc.)
dissemination of kaizen activities
Kaizen Tools :Kaizen Tools :QCC, 5S, layout improvement, worker-hour
QCC, 5S, Total Quality Management, etc.
work balance, setup time minimization (single
minute exchange of die), etc.
Source: Japan Development Service Ltd. (2008).16

Source: Knowledge Site in the JICA homepage<http://gwweb.jica.go.jp/km/ProjectView.nsf/
NaviProPj?OpenNavigator> accessed on 1
May 2009 (Japanese texts only).

13

Homepage, Kaizen Institute <http://www.kaizen.com/contact/> accessed on 1 May 2009.
Second phase of assistance is now being planned.
15
64% (9 companies) of the electrics/electronics sector and 31% (4 companies) of the food sector made viable quality
and/or productivity improvements by the end of the pilot project.
16
See also, Kikuchi (2009) “JICA-Supported Project for Quality and Productivity Improvement in Tunisia” Chapter 4of this book.
14

16

Needs for Kaizen Activities by African Manufactures

Asia Productivity Organization
Productivity improvement is a common agenda globally. The Asian Productive Organization(APO), established in Tokyo in 1961, has been the focal point for promoting productivity improvement in Asia. APO now has 20 member countries, and each country has established a center responsible for productivity improvement. In 2006, APO decided to extend its activities towards
member countries of the Pan African Productivity Association (PAPA) through the Japan Productivity Center (JPC), a member of APO in Japan. PAPA was established in South Africa in 2002
and now has 8 member countries. The main purpose of this assistance is to provide organizational
capacity building to the productivity centers in the member countries. In the first phase of the program, which ended in March 2009, JPC provided seminars and consultations on kaizen to 14 modelcompanies in South Africa, Kenya, Botswana, and Mauritius. In many countries, productivity centers are established under the ministries dealing with labor issues. In these countries, the targeted
beneficiaries of the kaizen assistance through the productivity centers are not restricted to the manufacturing sector, as is the case in Kenya and Mauritius.
Sustaining Competitive and Responsible Enterprises Program by ILO
The International Labour Organization (ILO) has a program entitled Sustaining Competitive andResponsible Enterprises (SCORE), formerly called the Factory Improvement Programme (FIP).
SCORE aims to improve productivity and quality among small and medium enterprises by building
good workplace practices. Although SCORE does not use the term kaizen, its methodology has
many similarities with kaizen including 5S and QCC. SCORE has five modules: i) workplace cooperation; ii) quality management; iii) productivity and cleaner production; iv) organizing motivated and productive workers; and, v) safety and health. Its activity includes in-class training andon the job training in the model companies. In addition to the manufacturing sector, SCORE aims
at expanding its benefits to the service sector. SCORE, then operating as FIP, has so far been implemented in Sri Lanka, Viet Nam, India, and China, and is in the process of expanding its program
to other countries including in Africa. In Ethiopia, SCORE training is to be introduced to the Cotton
and Textile Project, in which six export-oriented garment factories have been selected as modelcompanies.

3. Needs for kaizen: cases for Kenya and Ethiopia
To give more specific ideas on the needs for kaizen in Africa, the cases of Kenya and Ethiopia are
discussed as follows.
Kenya
The manufacturing sector in Sub-Saharan Africa is generally not dominant compared to the agriculture and service sectors. Kenya is no exception. In 2007, the contribution to GDP of the manufacturing sector in Kenya was 11.8%, whereas the agriculture and the service sectors accounted

17Chapter 2

for 22.7% and 58.2%, respectively.17 Manufacturing activities in Kenya vary widely, since thecountry was a popular investment destination in the 1970s and 80s within East Africa.
There are some leading multinational companies operating in Kenya which are bringing in kaizen
methods including Toyota East Africa Ltd.18 and GlaxoSmithKline Kenya Ltd.. Furthermore, theKenya Association of Manufacturers (KAM), which has approximately 600 members, has been
actively involved in organizing seminars and training to upgrade the capacity of its members.
KAM has partnered with the Kaizen Institute in Mauritius since 2005 and has been inviting experts
for seminars and consultations.19 These costs are now partly covered by the African Management
Services Company whose original sponsor is the International Finance Corporation (IFC). KAM
and the Kaizen Institute set up an annual award on kaizen in 2008.20 Since the demand for training
on kaizen is growing, the Kaizen Institute is offering regular training courses of its own in Nairobi.
Because of publicity gained through newspaper articles presented by KAM, kaizen is relatively
well recognized in Kenya, and now there are some local private consultants who can provide
kaizen services.
As for public initiatives, the Productivity Centre of Kenya (PCK), which has been receiving assistance from APO and JPC since 2006, has organized seminars and provided consultations to 3
model manufactures, in addition to 4 governmental and service institutions. PCK, currently under
the Ministry of Labour, has only 5 personnel. Its activities have received good attention from theGovernment, and there is a plan to legally expand both the mandate and capacities of PCK during
the 2009/10 Fiscal Year.
In spite of the presence of some kaizen activities in Kenya, there are some challenges. Firstly, thebeneficiaries of KAM’s kaizen activities are so far limited to relatively well-established enterprises,
and the majority of manufactures are still not aware of the actual methodology. Secondly, the mandate of PCK does not focus on the manufacturing sector. Therefore, the spread of kaizen activities
to manufacturers through the channel of PCK may be slow. Yet, the Ministry of Industrialization
as well as its agencies, which are the key public institutions for the manufacturing sector, are yet
to be conversant with the kaizen methodology and cannot guide local manufacturers.
Ethiopia
The contribution of the manufacturing sector to GDP is even smaller in Ethiopia. In 2006/07 it
17

Source: Kenya at a glance, the World Bank <http://devdata.worldbank.org/AAG/ken_aag.pdf> accessed on 1 May
2009.
18
However, activities of Toyota East Africa are currently limited to trade and after sales service.
19
Mabati Rolling Mills Ltd., Bidco Oil Refineries Ltd., Synresins Ltd., and Tetra Pak Ltd. are the main players promoting kaizen activities among KAM members.
20
KAM reports that kaizen interventions have often resulted in 50-70% reductions in throughput time, 50-100% increases in productivity, 20-40% savings in manufacturing costs, 40-60% reductions in quality errors, and 50% releasesof space, as well as significant improvements in team spirit and morale. (Source: KAM Homepage: Industries Compete for Kaizen Awards, Newsletter of 23 July 2008. <http://www.kam.co.ke/?itemId=17&newsId=98> accessed on
1 May 2009.)

18

Needs for Kaizen Activities by African Manufactures

was just 5.1%, in comparison to 46.3% from the agricultural sector and 40.3% from the service
sector.21 Compared to Kenya, the presence of multinational companies is very small in Ethiopia.
At the same time however, some talented local entrepreneurs have enjoyed the benefits of accessto a market consisting of nearly 80 million people. Due to the absence of major multinational companies, Ethiopia is yet to absorb the knowledge of kaizen.
One characteristic of the Ethiopian manufacturing industry is the dominance of public enterprises.
44% of value addition from the manufacturing sector was produced by 154 public enterprises in
2006/7.22 The Government of Ethiopia is committed to modernization and productivity improvement in its public enterprises. The Privatization and Public Enterprise Supervising Agency(PPESA), a section under the Ministry of Trade and Industry, is responsible for implementing
Business Process Reengineering (BPR) among public manufacturers.
BPR introduces benchmarking practices and intends to review the needs for restructuring organizational missions and activities. Although kaizen has not been adopted as a productivity improvement method by PPESA, it is considered that BPR and kaizen are complementary since BPR is atool needed for innovation or radical transformation, while kaizen is needed for bringing in gradualand sustainable improvement to daily operations.
The outer circle of Figure 2-1 shows the process of BPR. It involves “learning” from the best practices and strategic decisions (“strategy”) by top managers. On the other hand, the inner square illustrates the process of kaizen. Once strategic decisions are made by top managers, the major roleof Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) is given to the workers in gemba, and managers are to monitor
and supervise the PDCA cycle. Therefore, introduction of kaizen shall reinforce initiatives undertaken by BPR.
Figure 2-1. Complementary Relationship between BPR and Kaizen
Strategy

ActionInnovation

Plan
P’

Check
D’
Learn

Do

Source: Takanashi (2006, p.71).
21

Source: Ethiopia at a glance, The World Bank <http://devdata.worldbank.org/AAG/eth_aag.pdf> accessed on 1 May
2009.
22
Source: Central Statistical Agency, Statistical Abstract 2007, Ethiopia.

19Chapter 2

The private sector in Ethiopia is also aware of the need for productivity and quality improvements,
and the leading manufactures have adopted TQM. Yet, they have not established a visual monitoring system, which enables real-time production and quality control. Furthermore, adoption of
5S is hardly observable. Introduction of kaizen shall strengthen TQM already initiated in thosemanufacturers.

4. Application of kaizen activities to African manufacturers
African manufacturers are not only disadvantaged by the technological gap but also by the lack ofknowledge in key managerial methodologies like kaizen. While engineering capacity may taketime to catch up, managerial capacity may be improved more quickly since kaizen tools are developed in a way to be appreciated by all the workers, and its fundamental methodology is notvery complicated. Kaizen is more to do with a philosophy and daily practices rather than techniques. For example, 5S can be taught even to the primary school students since the philosophy isSort, Straighten, Shine, Systematize, and Standardize. The beauty of kaizen is that it can realize
productivity improvements with little additional investments. Simplicity and cost effectivenessare the major reasons why kaizen is well appreciated globally.
However, there are a few challenges in implementing kaizen in Africa. Firstly, in countries whichhave a socialistic nature like Ethiopia, power may be very much concentrated in the hands of top
managers, whereas the basic concept of kaizen is empowering the workers in gemba. It may be achallenge for managers to change their attitude and trust the workers in gemba. Secondly, workers
without sufficient educational backgrounds may not understand tables and figures. Since visualization of production and quality performance is one of the key tools of the kaizen method, separate
training for workers may be required to develop a full understanding of the tools. Thirdly, thesources of productivity loss are often found outside the company, particularly delays in the deliveryof materials and sudden interruption of orders from retailers and traders due to oversupply in themarkets. Therefore, the problems of gemba may often be found outside the company. Improving
the business network, both backward and forward, should be an important element of productivity
improvement for most African manufacturers. These solutions may require some logistical arrangement such as use of information and communication technology (ICT) and improved transport.
Furthermore, in order to nationally disseminate kaizen activities in African countries, two measures
should be considered. Firstly, kaizen needs to be publicized as a national movement. As mentioned
earlier, kaizen is effective not only for the manufacturing sector but also for the service sector.
Disseminating the best practices through the media should raise awareness amongst people of theneed for kaizen activities. Secondly, the dissemination route through vocational institutions shallbe vital. Vocational institutions provide for a wider array of beneficiaries among workers in the
manufacturing sector than in other types of institutions in Africa. Since the number of manufacturers which have the chance to attend seminars or become model companies for kaizen activities
will inevitably be small, it is recommended that training at vocational institutions be promoted.23

20

Needs for Kaizen Activities by African Manufactures

Kaizen is knowledge which is very applicable for African manufacturers but has yet to be transferred well enough. Japanese consultants often hear about the need for capital and machinery fromAfrican manufacturers. However, capital and machinery need to be accumulated and invested infrom their own internal resources. What is to be supported is not hardware, but knowledge thathelps to generate and accumulate internal resources. As experienced by the leading Japanese manufacturers, managerial tools, particularly the kaizen method, are critical for productivity and quality
improvements across industries.

ReferenceCentral Statistical Agency. (2007). Statistical Abstract 2007. Government of Ethiopia.
Fujimoto, T. (1997). Seisan shisutemu no shinka-ron [Theory on evolution of production system].
Yuhikaku.
Imai, M. (1986). Kaizen: The key to Japan’s competitive success, McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Imai, M. (1997). Gemba kaizen: A commonsense, low-cost approach to management, McGrawHill.
Japan Development Service Ltd. (2008). The study on the master plan for quality/productivity improvement in the Republic of Tunisia: Final report. JICA.
Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. (2008). Economic Survey 2008. Government of Kenya.
Monde, Y. (1998). Toyota production system: An integrated approach to just-in-time (3rd ed.). Engineering & Management Press.
Ohno, T. (1988). Toyota production system: Beyond large-scale production, Productivity Inc.
Sanyu Consultants Inc. and KRI International Corporation. (2008). Master plan study for Kenyan
industrial development: Final report. JICA.
Takanashi, T. (2006). Benchimakingu nyumon [An introduction to benchmarking]. Seisansei Shuppan.

Websites
African Management Service Company (AMSCO) <http://www.amsco.org/>Country at a Glance Tables, World Bank <http://devdata.worldbank.org/>
Factory Improvement Programme, ILO <http://www.ilofip.org/>Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) <http://www.jica.go.jp/english/index.html>
Kaizen Institute < http://www.kaizen.com/>
Kenya Association of Manufacturers <http://www.kam.co.ke/>
Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE) <http://www.juse.or.jp/e/>

23

However, only a few vocational training centers globally implement the good practices of kaizen. One best practicelocation is the State Owned Tool Room & Training Centre in Bangalore, India, which incorporates kaizen in its training. (Source: Sanyu Consultants Inc. and KRI International Corporation (2008, p.140))

21

Chapter 3
Kaizen: Quality, Productivity and Beyond
Akio Hosono

The purpose of this chapter is to summarize relevant aspects of kaizen and quality and productivity
improvement efforts in Japan, as well as draw conclusions from cooperation to support similar efforts in Brazil and Central American countries.24
It is divided into two parts. Part one will explain how the quality and productivity improvements
originating in the United States (US) were adapted into kaizen movements in Japan through theefforts of Japanese experts, engineers and managers in companies. Part two will show three examples of Japan’s international cooperation in Brazil and Central America, and provide suggestions
for possibly extending kaizen in a variety of activities and to different country contexts.

1. Development of quality, productivity and kaizen movements in Japan
Most Japanese manufacturing companies implemented quality and productivity initiatives for the
first time after Dr. William Edwards Deming, a US statistician and consultant, gave a series oflectures on the statistical process control of production and quality for hundreds of Japanese engineers and managers in 1950.25 Only a few Japanese companies such as Toyota were aware of
the importance of the US derived statistical control of quality before. Dr. Deming came to Japan
in 1947 upon the request of US Armed Forces to assist in the planning of Japan’s National Census
to be carried out in 1951.26
Accordingly, Japanese companies first introduced the statistical quality control (SQC) approach,which was developed from the US practice of sampling and inspecting products in order to eliminate defective ones. Efforts were made to reduce the rate of defective products, or to improveyield rates (known in Japan as “budomari”).27 The quality control (QC) processes to attain thesegoals also improved productivity at the same time. The cost of a defective product consists not
24This paper is based partly on the author’s experiences in some Japanese cooperation projects in the areas of kaizen,
quality and productivity improvement, but does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the institutions which implemented such projects. The author would like to express a deep gratitude to Professor Izumi Ohno, National Graduate
Institute for Policy Studies (GRIPS), for her valuable comments and suggestions.
25
Regarding Dr. Deming’s contribution to the Japanese quality improvement movement as well as the Deming Prize,
see Kikuchi “JICA-Supported Project for Quality and Productivity Improvement in Tunisia,” Chapter 4 of this bookfor more details.
26
Deming’s work and his original recommendations on quality were ignored in his homeland before Japanese business
imported his ideas and made them work in Japan (Fukui et al., 2003, p.v). In 1954, Dr. Joseph M. Juran came to
Japan to talk on quality and productivity.
27
Theoretically, “yield rate (budomari)” = 1 – “rate of defective products.”

23

Chapter 3

only of its normal production cost (labor, machinery, materials, etc.), but also the cost of its elimination and/or destruction. In cases where a defective product has to be reused to produce a nondefective product, the total cost could be even more. Therefore, it became clear that quality, interms of the rate of defective products, is very important for productivity.28
Later, the productivity movement spread rapidly in Japan. As mentioned by Kikuchi (2009), thiswas inspired by similar movements in Europe and the US.29 The close relationship between quality
and productivity was widely recognized in Japan and these two words were often referred to together.
On the one hand, in order to clearly define the concept of quality, it is necessary to establish industrial norms or standards. This is because a product is considered defective only when it does
not satisfy the quality norm or standard. In Japan, Japan Industrial Standard (JIS) and Japan Agricultural Standard (JAS) were introduced by law in 1949 and 1950 respectively.30 JIS defines QC
as a part of quality management. On the other hand, at the world-wide level, ISO 9000 establishedby the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), is well known as the international
standard relating to quality management systems.31
When Dr. Deming introduced the concept of QC to Japan, he also presented, as a methodology to
improve quality, the PDCA Cycle which consists of Plan, Do, Check and Act.32 It is also called
the Deming Wheel (Cycle) or Shewhart Cycle, as it was proposed by Dr. Deming, Dr. Walter A.
Shewhart and others.
The Japanese way of QC was gradually consolidated when it was applied at the factory floor level.
Instead of the “top-down” approach common in the US and other countries, a “bottom-up” approach was adopted in Japan. A team commonly known as the “Quality Control Circle” (“QC Circle” or QCC) was either organized spontaneously or followed the guidance of QC specialists inmany Japanese companies.33 Several workers (normally more than 3 and up to 10) from the factory
floor participated in each QCC. They identified causes of defective products and possibilities for
improving products or production methods.
28

The Six Sigma approach developed by Motorola in the 1980s is a kind of statistical QC related to the probability ofsix standard deviations (i.e. six sigma) from the normal distribution, that is, 3.4 one-millionths (3.4 ppm).
29
See Kikuchi (2009) for more details regarding the productivity movement in Japan and the establishment of the Japan
Productivity Center (JPC) in 1955.
30
The Japanese Engineering Standard (JES) was established in 1921.
31
ISO 9000:2005 establishes the basic aspects and terminology of quality management systems and ISO 9001:2000
establishes the requirements of quality management systems.
32
In Six Sigma, PDCA is developed to MAIC: Measurement, Analysis, Improvement and Control. DMAIC: Define,Measure, Analysis, Improve and Control, is the Toshiba version.
33
Initially, there was no specialist or lecturer on this subject in Japan, so management and the engineers requested
JUSE spearhead a national radio-based campaign on QC for concerned parties, especially factory foremen. The engineers started introducing the concept in the workshop and tackled the quality problems with frontline operators,
teaching them simple statistical methods that resulted in fewer defective products. The frontline operators wereamazed with the results and from then on voluntarily tackled the problems in the workshop with their colleagues.
This voluntary activity was the start of QCCs. The first QCC was organized in 1962 (cited from Fukui et al., 2003,
p.2).

24

Kaizen : Quality, Productivity and Beyond

Whereas, in the US and other countries, companies’ QC departments were almost exclusively incharge of QC activities through testing or monitoring company products, in Japanese companies,
all factory workers and related employees were dedicated to controlling and improving quality
and productivity through the quality and productivity movement, together with the creation of
QCCs.34 The number of QCCs registered at the Union of Japan Scientists and Engineers (JUSE)
increased from 50,000 in the mid-1970s, to 420,000 in 2001. The number of participants of QCCs
increased from 500,000 to 3,200,000 during the same period.35 (Figure 3-1)
In this process, Japanese scholars and engineers such as Dr. Kaoru Ishikawa, Ex-Rector of theMusashi Institute of Technology (recently renamed Tokyo City University), considered the“founder of quality control in Japan” as well as the “father of QC Circle,” made very important
theoretical and practical contributions.36 Dr. Ishikawa is also known as the inventor of the Ishikawa
Diagram, a cause and effect analysis diagram. There are a large number of well known engineers
and managers who promoted quality activities in many Japanese companies. One of the mostprominent is Mr. Taiichi Ohno, Ex-Vice President of Toyota Motor Company. He is one of those
who consolidated the Toyota Production System (TPS).37 Another prominent Japanese engineer
who contributed much to quality activities is Dr. Shigeo Shingo, a consultant for Toyota and Panasonic, among others. Utah State University created “The Shingo Prize.”
Together with QCC, many Japanese methods of quality and productivity improvement have beendeveloped and have been continuously improved. One of the most widely implemented in Japan
is known as the “5S,” which consists of Seiri, Seiton, Seiso, Seiketsu and Shitsuke; these terms
stand for Structurize, Systemize, Sanitize, Standardize, and Self-discipline (While these five slogans can be variously translated, they roughly refer to removing unnecessary things, arranging
tools and parts for easy view, keeping the work place clean, maintaining personal hygiene and disciplined behaviour). Several methods, including 5S are commonly practiced by teams like QCCteams. PDCA, originally introduced by Dr. Deming and adapted to Japanese environment, hasalso been practiced by QCCs.
Kaizen has been one of the most important features of the Japanese QC approach, together with
QCC. Kaizen is a Japanese concept which can be translated, literally, as “continuous improvement.” It is not easy to define kaizen in a strict sense since it corresponds to evolving initiatives
and activities in the quality and productivity area and can very flexibly be adapted to each factory
floors’ context.

34

A QCC is defined by JUSE as follows: “A small group of frontline operators who continually control and improve
the quality of their work, products and services; they operate autonomously and utilize QC concepts, tools and techniques.”
35
Fukui et al. (2003, p.59).
36
Dr. Ishikawa is the son of Ichiro Ishikawa, the first President of the Nippon Keidanren, the Federation of Economic
Organization of Japan, and brother of Rokuro Ishikawa, former President of the Japan Chamber of Commerce andIndustry. They were very influential in Japanese business community in the postwar period.
37
Ohno (1988).

25

Chapter 3

Despite flexibility in its application, kaizen has, among others, common characteristics. It is: (a)not imposed by “top-down” orders or instructions, but is a “bottom-up process” implemented at
the initiative of each worker, based on their observations, experiences, knowledge, wisdom andso on; (b) not a one-shot activity, but is continuous and incremental; (c) not strictly limited to production itself, but covers all aspects of production including improvements in safety and morale,
as well as improvement in quality, in operation efficiency and in delivery.38
The Japanese way of QC was gradually scaled up from the factory floor level to the whole company. QC was introduced to cover design, marketing, after-service, purchasing of materials andmachinery, as well as other company departments. At the same time, all company employees, including managers, engineers, supervisors, office-workers, as well as factory workers participatedin QC. This “bottom-up” holistic approach developed in Japan is called the Japanese type Company-Wide Quality Control (CWQC) or Total Quality Control (TQC). (Figure 3-2 and 3-3)
On the other hand, Total Quality Management (TQM) is a kind of management system and strategy
based on CWQC or TQC,39 and widely promoted in the 80s.40 The Handbook for TQM and QCC
edited by the Development Bank of Japan (DBJ) and the Japan Economic Research Institute (JERI)and published by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) explains that: “Total Quality Management41 includes a number of management practices, philosophies and methods to improve theway an organization does business, makes its products, and interacts with its employees and customers. Kaizen (the Japanese word for continuous improvement) is one of those philosophies.”42
According to this handbook, “The success of Japanese business in Canada, Latin America, andthe United States as well as in Europe is attributable to TQM, a concept now widely practiced
throughout Asia.”43
Japanese TQM started as TQC back in the 1960s, when Japanese industry was in the midst of thehigh growth economy, after the liberalization of its markets. One of the significant impacts ofJapanese TQC is often explained by describing the development of the car industry during the oilcrises in the 1970s. During this period, TQC was extended to activities for energy conservationand measures for resource maintenance. It greatly impacted various industries and became more
38

Kaizen is cited as a holistic concept to support the Toyota Production System (TPS) (Liker, 2004, p.79). Fukui et al.
(2003) considers kaizen to be one of the philosophies of Total Quality Management (TQM), as cited later in thischapter.
39
Ishikawa also made a significant contribution to the development of CWQC or TQC as well as TQM. See Fukui etal. (2003, p.vii).
40
By the end of the 1980s, the TQM concept had become a recognized part of quality-related language. See Fukui etal. (2003, p.vii). TQM was widely practiced in the 1980s in both Japan and the US. However TQM in the US was
more top down compared with the Japanese bottom-up model. Regarding the different development of TQM in Japanand the US. See Fukui et al. (2003, pp.43-50).
41
According to Fukui et al. (2003), TQM is defined as: “a set of systematic activities carried out by the entire organization to effectively and efficiently achieve company objectives so as to provide products and services with a levelof quality that satisfies customers, at the appropriate time and price.”
42
Fukui et al. (2003, p.vii).
43
Ibid. The handbook adds: “To be fair, we cannot say that the quality management was the sole factor for vigorous
expansion of production and export; however, it was one of the major factors as many observers concur.”26

Kaizen : Quality, Productivity and Beyond

securely established as a valuable quality framework for Japanese industrial development.44
The Toyota Production System (commonly called TPS) can be considered one of the most systematic and advanced Japanese TQCs or TQMs, including kaizen,45 and was the basis of many
books on “Lean Production” in the US.46 These books were the result of the Massachusetts Instituteof Technology (MIT) research project entitled “Automobile Industry Program,” and were publishedaround 1990.47 Authors of these books mentioned clearly that their study is based on the TPS.48

Figure 3-1. Number of QC Circles and Members Registered at JUSE (Japan)
700,000

3,500,000

600,000

3,000,000

500,000

2,500,000

400,000

2,000,000

300,000

1,500,000

200,000

1,000,000

100,000

500,00001960 72

0
76

78 1980 82

84

86

88 1990 92

9496

98 2000

Number of QC Circles Registered (left scale)
Number of QC Circle Members Registered (right scale)

Source: Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (2001).
Notes: Data as of October 2001.

44

This paragraph is cited from Fukui et al. (2003, p.46).
In 1995, TQC at Toyota became TQM and as of 2001, Toyota had approximately 4,800 QCCs, all of them continuously aiming to improve the quality of their work and playing an important part in the company’s success, according
to Fukui et al. (2003, pp.8-9).
46
Liker (2004, pp.45-46).
47
Womack, Jones, and Roos (1991).
48
Liker (2004, pp.64-65).
45

27

Chapter 3

Figure 3-2. Trend of QC Circle Registration, by Industry in Japan
450,000
Hospital

Retailer

400,000
Nippon Telegraph andTelephone Corporation (NTT)350,000
300,000

Finance / Insurance Industry

250,000

Construction Industry

Central Japan Railway
Company (JR Tokai)

200,000
150,000

QC Circle Started:
Manufacturing Industry

100,000
50,0000’62 ’64 ’66 ’68 ’70 ’72 ’74 ’76 ’78 ’80 ’82 ’84 ’86 ’88 ’90 ’92 ’94 ’96 ’98 ’00

Circles

Source: Fukui et al. (2003, p.70), based on Union of Japanese Scientis and Engineers (2002).

Figure 3-3. Number of QC Circles Registered at QC Circle Headquarters (Japan)(a) According toindustry category(b) According tofunctional category

4.4

Manufacturing

8.2

Services

39.8

55.8

Construction
and otherIndustries

Sales andservice

14.8

Manufacturing

34.3

8.8
10.3

23.6

Research andtechnology
Indirect work
related to
manufacturing
General clericalwork
Other Industry

Services: commercial, financial,transportation, electric power,
and communications firms.

Source: Saito (1995).
Notes: n: 13,020; Unit=%; 1990, 1992 and 1994 average.

2. Case studies on Japan’s cooperation in Brazil and Central America
Kaizen, TQC and TQM, developed and widely practiced in Japan, are very effective approaches
for quality and productivity improvement. In addition, they achieve wider management goals including motivation of employees, customer satisfaction, and so on. They are a well known part ofJapanese management. However, it should be emphasized that kaizen as well as Japanese types of
TQC and TQM can be introduced to countries where the culture is very different from that ofJapan. Fukui et al. (2003) strongly endorses this view: “Are TQM and QCC Japanese things? Arethey effective only in some cultures in the world? Our answer is a firm, “No!” They are not andshould not be perceived to have such a narrow scope. Our firm belief is that they are applicable28

Kaizen : Quality, Productivity and Beyond

anywhere because they invoke universal values.”49
To illustrate, this paper looks at three Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) projects incountries with very different cultures from that of Japan, one in Brazil, and two in Central America,
where kaizen and TQC were introduced. In the first case, JICA’s Brazilian counterpart established
its own concept of quality and productivity, adjusted to promote a new movement for productivity
improvement in Brazil and meet the current requirements of the country. This concept is a comprehensive way of thinking which is not only for manufacturing but also related to company management, employment and socioeconomic development.
It was recognized that the situation of management in Central America is different from that ofJapan. However, there have been various positive impacts on productivity for companies that received consulting services of the second project. These include, among others: positive changes
in attitude among workers; introduction of 5S into companies, including participation of management and not just workers; simplification and standardization of production processes; improvements in team work; and, better awareness of international competition.
The third case is a project to apply kaizen to health care, a non-manufacturing sector, in Central
America. An Evidence Based Participatory Quality Improvement (EPQI) system has been introduced in order to continuously improve health care quality in hospitals. Participants in this project
implemented several pioneering EPQI projects in their respective countries and attained a considerable improvement in quality in health care. A regional network of EPQI was organized and regional conferences are now held every year with participants attending from the eight countriesof Meso America.
Japan’s cooperation with Brazil
JICA implemented the “Technical Cooperation for Brazilian Institute of Quality and Productivity
Project” from 1995 to 2000.50
In 1990, the Brazilian Government started the Brazilian Program for Quality and Productivity(PBQP, the Portuguese abbreviation) with the intention to upgrade quality and productivity, in addition to promoting reforms and deregulation such as import liberalization, introduction of foreign
investment and privatization of government-owned enterprises. From the mid-1980s, Brazil carriedout substantial economic reforms in order to transform its inward-looking economy into an outward-looking one accompanied by sound macroeconomic management. In this context, and toadapt to this new economic policy, improvement of quality and productivity was considered extremely important for Brazilian enterprises.

49
50

Fukui et al. (2003, p.x).
The author of this chapter was the Chairman of the Advisory Committee for the project.

29

Chapter 3

Furthermore, the Brazilian Government launched a plan to establish institutions to be in charge ofimprovement of quality and productivity in several states in the country, such as the Brazilian Institute of Quality and Productivity (IBQP).
With this background, the Brazilian Government requested the Japanese Government to commence
the “Technical Cooperation for IBQP Project” in 1994. The overall goal of the project (originallyestablished in 1995 and revised in 1998) was to attain that: “The concept and technology of productivity improvement will be disseminated among Brazilian society through IBQP-PR (abbreviation of IBQP of Paraná State).”51 The purpose of the project was to ensure that: “The IBQP-PR
will be able to upgrade and develop the technology and knowledge for productivity improvement.”52
As mentioned, the IBQP-PR attempted to establish its own concept of quality and productivity,
adjusted to promote a new movement for productivity improvement in Brazil and meet the current
requirements of the country. Importantly, the basic document of IBQP-PR emphasized that: “In amanner similar to Japan’s, Brazil must develop its own principle for productivity, examining andaddressing the needs and desires of all segments of society. Conceiving these concepts and achieving nationwide understanding are hard task. However they are vital to congruence of interests centered round a competitive Brazil.”53
This concept developed was a “comprehensive way of thinking which is not only for manufacturing but also related to company management, employment and socioeconomic development.”54
At the same time, the concept included consideration of environmentally sustainable development.
The “Model of Systemic Productivity” developed is explained as follows: “The constant improvement of Productivity in each organization must help to create the conditions of sustainable development and better quality of life. Thus the productivity has, above all, a social function and theconcept of systemic productivity is based on this function.”55
This concept reflected both the business environment and the eco-consciousness of Brazil, andespecially of the state of Parana. For example, Curitiba, Parana’s capital, where this technical cooperation project was implemented, is well known world-wide for its eco-friendly urban system,
especially its transport system.
Since the above-mentioned “productivity concept” proposed by IBQP-PR is a comprehensive one,“it has attracted many attentions outside such as Brazilian Service for the Support of Micro andSmall Enterprises (SEBRAE), and Ministry of Development for Industry and Trade (MDIC) for
public projects which are in accordance with the national policy, such as reinforcement of com51

JICA (2000, p.7).
JICA (2000, p.7).
53
Cited from “Organizational Identity of IBQP-PR.”
54
JICA (2000, p.15).
55
JICA (2000, p.136).
52

30

Kaizen : Quality, Productivity and Beyond

petitiveness of enterprises and export promotion.”56
During the period of this project (1995-2000), 12 long-term experts and 19 short-term experts
were dispatched from Japan. On the Brazilian side, 17 trainees were invited to Japan for capacity
development. During the project period, 82 seminars and 26 training courses on quality and productivity were organized with the participation of IBQP-PR.
Factory floor level consultation activities were carried out by Japanese and Brazilian experts formore than 20 enterprises. IBQP-PR had associate members for which it provided updated knowledge and information on productivity, promoted effective exchange of experiences on productivity
among members, and provided access to successful cases of productivity improvement throughspecialists. The associate members had access to services, consulting and advice from IBQP-PR
throughout. Furthermore, IBQP-PR organized “The Latin America Productivity Seminar,” inviting
representatives of productivity organizations in Central and South American countries. The joint
declaration of these organizations proposed the creation of the “Latin American Productivity Network.”
Due to the above activities, “IBQP became widely recognized as a leading productivity organization in Brazil.”57 For example, IBQP has recently created, jointly with the Ministry of Science andTechnology (MCT), the Studies and Projects Financing Entity (Finep) and the Federation of Industries of the State of Paraná (Fiep/PR), the Brazilian School of Systemic Productivity (EBPS).
The primary objectives of EBPS are to disseminate knowledge, technology and innovation and tosupport the economic and social development of the country, generating more employment, income
and quality of life for the society, through the invigoration of national companies. In line with
IBQP’s Education and Training guidelines, the EBPS proposal is to give Brazilian companies
better competitive conditions at the global market, through the amplification of the Systemic Productivity Model.58
Japan’s cooperation with Central American countries
Japanese ex-Foreign Minister Tadashi Kuranari, in his speech in the Republic of Guatemala in1987 after the Agreement of Esquiplas II59 was adopted by Central American countries, expressedthat Japan is ready to extend as much assistance as possible for reconstruction of the region once
peace is attained there.

56

JICA (2000, p.8).
JICA (2000, p.8).
58
This information is cited from the homepage of IBQP. According to the homepage, Systemic Productivity Model is
explained as follows: Developed by IBQP, the concept of Systemic Productivity is an integrated approach of thetechnological, strategic, cultural, social and environmental factors involved in the productive process, through theanalysis of indicators. These values seek to promote productivity in sustainable environments and increase employment levels in the country, aiming for the improvement of production, the fair distribution of productivity earnings
and the cooperation between management and workers.
59
By this agreement, Central American countries accepted the proposal of President Oscar Arias of Costa Rica regarding
negotiation on the end of the war in the region.
57

31

Chapter 3

A year later, as one of the concrete steps to follow up the Kuranari speech, the “Seminar on Hitozukuri (human resource development) in Central America” was organized by JICA in Tokyo.60 On
the basis of that seminar, a technical cooperation project started in 1992 in the Republic of Costa
Rica.
At that time, the Costa Rica Government’s policy was to “focus on accelerating promotion of science and technology for improving efficiency and production of industries, skills of labor forces
and increasing employment opportunities in order to achieve economic sustainability, enforcementof economic infrastructure, industrial development and improvement of living standard. Especially
productivity improvement is recognized as a principal subject that contributes industrial development of Costa Rica considerably through human resources development and modernization of
Costa Rican enterprises.”61
It was in this context that “the Technical Instructor and Personnel Training Center for Industrial
Development of Central America (referred to as CEFOF, the Spanish abbreviation) in the Republicof Costa Rica” was implemented by JICA from 1992 to 1997. Prior to this technical cooperation,
the buildings of CEFOF at the campus provided by the Costa Rican Government, were constructed
as part of Japanese cooperation efforts.
Afterwards, as “needs on productivity improvement had been diversifying due to globalization of
economic activities,” it was considered “necessary for CEFOF to improve its technical capacity
on business management, and to expand contents of services of CEFOF as a major institution fordisseminating technologies and information on productivity improvement.”62 The “Project of Productivity Improvement for Enterprises in the Republic of Costa Rica” started in 2001 for a periodof 5 years, with the overall goal that the productivity improvement activities through CEFOF
would be strengthened in Costa Rica and the Central American region.
The specific purpose of this project was to promote the concepts and practices of Japanese quality
and productivity improvement approaches in Costa Rica and other Central American countries.
The project also aimed at transferring these technologies from Japanese experts to Costa Ricancounterparts through “on the job activities,” which has resulted in the accreditation of management
consultant for the CEFOF counterparts.63
It should be mentioned that just after the termination of the previous technical cooperation project
by JICA, INTEL, a well-known micro-processor manufacturer invested in the country and started
its operation from 1998.64 The so-called INTEL effect took place and several companies related
60

The author of this chapter was the coordinator of this seminar.
JICA (2005, p.3).
62
JICA (2005, p.3).
63
CEFOF (2006, p.7).
64
INTEL invested 700 million dollars in Costa Rica creating jobs for 3,500 workers and professionals. The company’s
exports are equivalent to 20% of the total value of Costa Rica’s exports.
61

32

Kaizen : Quality, Productivity and Beyond

to INTEL located themselves in the country. Other foreign companies with no direct relationshipalso followed INTEL’s lead.
Regarding the effect of the second project, the project’s joint evaluation reported that: “various
kinds of activities for productivity improvement have been conducted by the project in the region(Central America) according to the request of regional countries. Through these activities, the project established and tightened network between CEFOF and the other public institutions / private
sector in these countries. The number of benefited companies through CEFOF’s activities was increased in the countries of the region and CEFOF is receiving recognition and reputation widelyfrom companies and respective institutes in the region. It is confirmed that there are lots of needs
and much expectation on CEFOF’s activities. In order to strengthen this regional activity in future,
initiative of the Costa Rican Government will be expected such as training courses to certify Central American counterparts in 5S and kaizen activities by CEFOF consultants.”65
Regarding the impacts of the consulting services implemented by the project, the above-cited Joint
Evaluation mentions that: “Consulting services have been used as a tool for capacity developmentof counterparts in the form of ‘on the job training.’ Results of consulting service conducted by
Japanese experts and counterparts are well appreciated.”66
More concretely the Evaluation states that: “there are various kind of positive impacts on productivity improvement for the companies that have received consulting services of the project, such
as: Correct and common understanding of key words at working place; Positive change of attitude
among workers (way of thinking, awareness of security and kaizen); Introduction of 5S into companies, which made positive contribution, because the program requires participation of everyone,
not only workers but also management, that secures sustainability of the 5S program; Improvementof motivation of employees; Simplification and standardization of production process, improvement of team work, better awareness of international competition in global business; Introductionof ISO9001-2000 which improved efficiency of company operation and provided more focus on
customers’ satisfaction.”67
For this project, 9 long-term experts and 24 short-term experts were dispatched by JICA fromJapan during the period of 2001-2005. 23 counterparts were invited to participate in training
courses in Japan. JICA provided machinery and equipment for the project.
Costa Rican Counterparts, together with Japanese experts made efforts to adapt Japanese concepts
and practices to the Central American context. The Quality Management Group of CEFOF understood that “the features of Japanese approach are ‘Kaizen activities’ by ‘working in team (small
group activities)’ and involvement of people, focusing on ‘workplaces’ and analysis and evaluation
65

JICA (2005, pp.7-8).
JICA (2005, p.11).
67
JICA (2005, p.11).
66

33

Chapter 3

by the facts due to quantitative data.”68
According to the report written by this group of CEFOF, “the situation of management activities
at organizations in Central America is different from that of Japan.”69 In particular, “involvementof people” and “working in teams or small group activity” are the special features. Implementing
these ideas in Central America means changing the corporate culture and reforming management.
Based on successful cases of companies in Costa Rica and El Salvador, the Quality Management
Group of CEFOF concludes that the key to successfully implementing the Japanese approach is:
firstly, to recognize and understand the Japanese approach to management regarding its effectiveness and efficiency; secondly, to practically apply this based on the faith of the managers in theJapanese approach; and, lastly ensure the enthusiasm of the employees for the activities.

Figure 3-4. Cooperation for the Technical Instructor and Personnel Training Center
for Industrial Development of Central America (CEFOF)

Project of Formation of Consultants for
Improvement of Productivity and Quality
CENPROMYPE

JICA

Costa Rica

Each country

Ministry of Education

Experts of JICA

Ministries for SMEs
University

Dispatch of consultantsof CEFOF

CEFOF
Regional cources

Publicorganizations

Network of development of SMEs

Source: JICA, Latin America and the Caribbean Department (Presented at Japan Central America Business
Workshop, Oct. 30, 2008, at JICA Research Institute).

68
69

CEFOF, Quality Management Group (2005, p.3).
This paragraph summarizes a part of the report of CEFOF, Quality Management Group (2005, p.9).

34

Kaizen : Quality, Productivity and Beyond

Japan’s cooperation with Central American countries: Evidence Based Participatory Quality Improvement (EPQI) system in health care
The Evidence Based Participatory Quality Improvement (EPQI) System is a management systemthat can continuously improve health care quality in hospitals. EPQI was introduced in the Philippines and Central American countries by a group of Japanese professors led by Dr. Nauro Uehara,
M.D. of Tohoku University’s School of Medicine.70
EPQI helps improve health care in hospitals by: (1) organizing and training Quality Assurance(QA); (2) establishing health system indicators for quality health assurance that are aligned withthe standards in the PHIC (Philippines Health Insurance Corporation) QA Benchbook; (3) establishing a QA Program and QA innovations in hospitals; and, (4) achieving better health outcomesand satisfied health care.
EPQI represents the concept and methodology that have been adopted from the work values contemplated in kaizen, such as 5S. EPQI national teams have voluntarily implemented projects designed to improve the quality of health care and services, focusing on the needs of patients andimproving related projects. For example, strongly motivated to improve health services in Honduras, former participants of EPQI training programs organized by JICA have dedicated their timeto promote projects related to patient safety under the EPQI methodology in three hospitals in
Tegucigalpa.71
The EPQI Mesoamerica Network was established by former participants of the EPQI training programs from eight countries: Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica,
Panama, and the Dominican Republic. The members of the network are expected to promote quality in a hospital. Their work consists of assisting project volunteers and creating a group responsiblefor developing activities in a designated work station.
In 2006 and 2007, the Central America Regional Conference on EPQI was held in Costa Rica andPanama respectively. The activities of the Mesoamerican Network were crucial for the preparationof these conferences. At the 2006 conference, the EPQI program was scaled up to be region-wide
cooperation project with support of the Panamerican Health Organization (PAHO, the Interamerican chapter of the World Health Organization (WHO)), as well as from ministers responsible forhealth in Central American countries. At that conference, 32 EPQI projects were presented anddiscussed with the participation of Mesoamerican countries and Dominican Republic. As thesecountries face similar situations regarding health care, for example the same diseases are trans-

7071This section is based on information provided by the School of Medicine of the Tohoku University, Japan.
For example, ex-participants, after their return to Honduras, executed an EPQI Project designed to reduce the waitingtime for medical attention in the pediatric unit of San Felipe General Hospital. “Before implementing the project, thewaiting period was six to eight hours; after the project, waiting was reduced to two hours.” Through rigorous coordination, EPQI Net members in Honduras have, since 2006, executed projects designed to control infection, solid
waste, hospital decorum and cleanliness, among others.

35

Chapter 3

mitted across borders, regionalization of the EPQI program is considered very timely and effective
for attaining the common goal of improving health care in the region. It has since been decided
that the regional EPQI conferences are to be held every year.

3. Conclusion
Based on the experiences of kaizen and quality and productivity improvement efforts in Japan, as
well as cooperation to support similar efforts in Brazil and Central American countries, the following implications can be applied in possibly extending kaizen in a variety of activities and todifferent country contexts.
First, kaizen as well as other quality and productivity improvement approaches (such as TQM),
were born and developed in Japan. However, they are applicable elsewhere because “they invoke
universal values,” as demonstrated by the experiences, namely those of Brazil and Central America,
explained in this chapter.72 Kaizen, TQM and other approaches are evolving processes that neverstop. These can be adapted to contexts with different cultures and business environments.
Furthermore, kaizen and other Japanese-made practices relating to quality and productivity are
not limited to profit-making business activities or the manufacturing sector. The second implicationfrom experiences shown in this chapter is that they are applicable to public organizations, nonprofit organizations and to non-manufacturing sectors such as transport, health care and other service sectors, among others. An interesting case of “evidence-based quality improvement” applied
to health care in Central America was explained in this paper for example.
The third implication from this research is that, in applying kaizen and other Japanese-made approaches, effort to adapt to the local context is essential. Strong engagement of both workers andmanagers, and experts and counterparts in case of cooperation projects, is the key for success. Ina similar manner to Japan’s, each country, society and enterprise must develop its own principle
for quality and productivity. This can be done by examining and addressing the needs and desiresof all enterprises and segments of society, as the report on Japan’s cooperation with Brazil emphasizes. Conceiving these concepts and achieving nationwide understanding are not easy tasks.
However, we can learn a lot about the adaptation and internalization of kaizen and related approach
to local context from different experiences in many countries.

72

Fukui et al. (2003, p.vii).

36

Kaizen : Quality, Productivity and Beyond

References
Centro de Formacion de Formadores y Personal Tecnico para el Desarrollo Industrial de Centroamerica (CEFOF). (2006). El enfoque Japones para el mejoramiento de la calidad y la
productividad.
CEFOF, Quality Management Group. (2005). Practical application of Japanese approach for quality and productivity improvement in Central America. In JICA, International development
survey.
Fujimoto, T. (1999). The evolution of a manufacturing system at Toyota. Oxford University Press.
Fukui, R., Honda Y., Inoue H., Kaneko N., Miyauchi I., Soriano S., & Yagi Y. (2003). Handbook
for TQM and QCC (Volume I: What are TQM and QCC?: A guide for managers). InterAmerican Development Bank (IDB).
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). (2000). Joint evaluation report on the Japanesetechnical cooperation for Brazilian institute of quality and productivity project.
JICA. (2005). Joint evaluation report on the project on productivity improvement for enterprisesin the Republic of Costa Rica.
Kikuchi, T. (2009). JICA-supported project for quality and productivity improvement in Tunisia.
Chapter 4 of this book.
Liker, J. K. (2004). The Toyota way, McGraw-Hill.
Ohno, T. (1988). Toyota production system: Beyond large-scale production. Productivity Press.
Saito, Mamoru. (1995). Appealing QC circle activities toward the twenty-first century. International convertion on quality control circles. Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers.
Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers. (2001). QC circle suishinsha kosu tekisuto (coursebook for leaders and facilitators). Tokyo: Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers. (inJapanese only)
Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers. (2002). QC circle No.489. Tokyo: Union of Japanese
Scientists and Engineers. (in Japanese only)
Womack, J. P., Jones, D. T., & Roos, D. (1991). The machine that changed the world: The storyof lean production. Harper Perennial.
Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (1998). Lean thinking. Free Press.

37

Chapter 4
JICA- Supported Project for
Quality and Productivity Improvement in Tunisia
Tsuyoshi Kikuchi73

This chapter aims to explain how Japan has been transferring its factory-level quality and productivity improvement (or kaizen) techniques to developing countries, by presenting a concrete caseof “The Master Plan Study for Quality and Productivity Improvement in the Republic of Tunisia”
supported by the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). This work is built upon the author’s experiences in serving as project leader of this technical cooperation, which lasted from August 2006 until July 2008.
The chapter is organized in three sections as follows. First, it provides detailed accounts of the
JICA project including the activities supported by the project, institutional arrangements such thecounterpart agencies responsible for the project and outputs produced by the project. It then analyzes factors for realizing successful results and draws lessons from the project. Third, it describes
Japan’s postwar experiences in improving quality and productivity, including how the quality andproductivity improvement movement started and became institutionalized in Japan, how Japanlearned from the American and European management systems, and what kinds of policies andmeasures were adopted for the promotion of industrial technology.

1. Project introduction: Master plan study for quality/productivity
improvement in the Republic of Tunisia
1-1. Projects objectives and background
Objective
The objective of the project was to formulate a comprehensive master plan and action plan that
includes institution building for quality and productivity improvement in Tunisia’s industries.
Background and course of the project
Following the conclusion of a partnership agreement between Tunisia and the European Union(EU) in 1995, Tunisia and the EU agreed to abolish tariff barriers by 2008. With this in mind,
Tunisia has been striving to bolster the international competitiveness of its domestic industries
since 1995. The EU has also provided support regarding the acquisition of international standard
certifications including the International Standard Organization (ISO) 9000 series, Hazard Analysis
73

This chapter is based on the author’s presentation at the seminar entitled “Methodology for Formulating Industrial
Action Plans—Experiences of East Asia and JICA Technical Cooperation,” co-hosted by the Ethiopian Development
Research Institute (EDRI) and JICA on December 15, 2008, in Addis Ababa.

39

Chapter 4

Critical Control Point (HACCP) and others geared to improving the quality of Tunisian enterprises
and thereby enhancing their competitiveness. As you may be aware, ISO9001 places requirementson the establishment of procedures (decision of work methods), documentation (compilation ofwork methods into documents) and recording (retention of records of work results) for quality
management. However, simply acquiring ISO9001 does not necessarily mean that quality will automatically improve or that productivity will be enhanced. Realizing this, the Tunisian Ministryof Industry, Energy and Small and Medium Enterprises (Ministère de l’Industrie, de l’Energie etdes PME: MIEPME) requested cooperation in this field from Japan, which has gained worldwide
attention for its successful industrial growth based on development of unique methods and techniques of quality control and production management.74
Counterpart agencies
The counterpart agencies to JICA were MIEPME and the National Quality Programme Unit(UGPQ), while the counterparts of the JICA consultant team were the technical staff of the publicTechnical Centers under MIEPME. More specifically, MIEPME has public Technical Centers ineach industrial sector. In the project, ten technical staff members participated as counterparts fromboth the electric and electronic and machinery sector (Centre Technique des Industries
Mechaniques et Electriques: CETIME) and the food processing sector (Centre Technique de l’Agro-Alimentaire: CTAA) respectively.
1-2. Study activities
This project was implemented over two years, starting in August 2006 and ending in July of 2008.
During this time, the JICA consultant team visited Tunisia five times and stayed for two or threemonths on each occasion. The study, including activities in Tunisia and Japan, was divided into
three phases. An outline of each phase is introduced below. Moreover, a bird’s eye view of the
project in table form is shown on page 53.
[Phase 1: August - December 2006]
In Phase 1, 83 Tunisian companies were visited in order to conduct a fact-finding survey of thequality and productivity improvement efforts of companies. The Tunisian Government requested
that the pilot project (PP) target two sectors: 1) electrical and electronic; 2) and food processing,and therefore the survey focused on these two sectors. The fact-finding survey targeted 33 companies in the electrical and electronic sector, 30 companies in the food processing sector and 20
companies in other sectors. Based on the survey findings, a total of 29 PP target companies, 15 in
the electrical and electronic sector and 14 in the food processing sector, were selected. Table 4-1
shows the products that are made by these companies.

74

Differences between the EU and JICA approaches to quality/productivity improvement in Tunisia are described in
the following paper: Kikuchi (2008) “The Quality and Productivity Improvement Project in Tunisia: A Comparisonof Japanese and EU Approaches,” Diversity and Complementarity in Development Aid-East Asian Lessons for African
Growth, edited and published by GRIPS Development Forum.

40

JICA-Supported Project for Quality and Productivity Improvement in Tunisia

Table 4-1. Pilot Project Target Companies and Major Products
SectorElectrical and electronic sector(15 companies)

Major Products of PP Target Companies
Domestic electrical appliances (2), wire harnesses and cables (2), current stabilizers (ballasts) (3), solar water heaters (1), connectors (1), batteries (1), plugoutlets (1), switches (1), circuit breakers (1), fluorescent lamps (1), others (1)Food processing sector Vegetable processing (4), olive oil (2), confectionery (2), beverages (1),(14 companies)
dates (1), meat (1), fish processing (1), wine (1), food additives (1)Note: At the start of the PP, there were 15 target companies in the electrical and electronic sector and 14 in thefood processing sector, however, these numbers dropped to 14 and 13 respectively by the end of the PP.

[Phase 2: January - October 2007]
Phase 2 was primarily the implementation phase for the PP.
There are numerous technologies and techniques for quality/productivity improvement (hereinafter,
technologies and techniques for quality/productivity improvement shall be referred to as “kaizen75
techniques”). The objective of the PP was to confirm which kaizen techniques are effective forwhich kinds of problems, and how far Japanese thinking and approaches can apply to countries
with differing social and cultural customs. In addition, the PP aimed to utilize these findings informulating a master plan for the future improvement of quality/productivity in Tunisian industries
covering all sectors.
In implementing the PP, a joint team comprising JICA consultants, counterparts and target companies was organized. Table 4-2 shows the composition of the teams organized in the target sectors.
Table 4-2. Pilot Project Implementation Team
Organized PP implementation teams
Electrical &Food processing
electronic
sector team
sector team
JICA
consultant
teamTeam leader
Member in charge ofinstitution building
Member in charge ofwork coordination

Electrical andelectronic
consultants: 2

Food processing
consultants: 2

7

Counterpart teamUGPQ director
Member in charge ofinstitution building
Member in charge ofwork coordination

Electrical andelectronic
technical staff: 5

Food processing
technical staff: 5

13

Top managers

Production
managers /Quality controllers
Employees incharge ofproduction

Production
managers /Quality controllers
Employees incharge ofproduction

PP target
companies
team

75

Number of teammembers from JICA,
counterpart, PP target companies

Numbers varied
depending on thecompany

The Japanese word “kaizen” has come to be internationally used in the area of production management. In English,
this is referred to as continuous improvement.

41

Chapter 4

In Phase 2, upon dividing the target companies into the electrical and electronic sector and thefood processing sector, a corporate diagnosis of each company was undertaken, two or three problems in terms of quality/productivity improvement were identified in each company, and the JICA
consultants, counterparts and target companies (top managers, production managers or quality
controllers) examined what kinds of kaizen techniques should be applied for resolving each issue.
Based on this, a PP implementation plan was prepared for each PP company. Each plan was implemented based on the premise of using existing machinery and equipment, i.e. exploring how
far quality/productivity improvement could be achieved without introducing new machinery andequipment. Figure 4-1 shows the overall view of the PP.
Figure 4-1. Concept of Pilot Project for Quality/Productivity Improvement< Quality/Productivity Improvement Team >UGPQ / JICA Joint Team
JICA
Consultants

A+B

UGPQ
Experts<ProblemsSolution>

Diagnosis(Identificationof Problems)Technical Centers
Private Sector(Federations, etc)

A

Kaizen
A: Transfer of Technology
for Diagnosis / Kaizen
B: Transfer of Training
SkillsModel Company
Production Manager(Quality/
Productivity
Improvement)

Source: Elaborated by the author.

During the PP, the JICA consultants and counterparts visited each company seven times on average.
Each time meetings were held to verify that homework given in the previous meeting had been
done, to check progress of improvement activities, to exchange opinions, and to determine whatshould be done by each PP company by the next visit. Rather than directly instructing solutions to
top management and line managers (i.e. production managers and quality controllers) of the PP
companies, effort was made to give hints and methods of thinking for solutions. The PP company
personnel were encouraged to discover problems for themselves and to strive for solutions on theirown, because it was deemed that this would give the companies a better chance at sustainable development.76

76

On this point, a manager of one of the PP target companies said, “The project didn’t give us fish but rather how tocatch the fish,” and this was the intent of the JICA consultant team.

42

JICA-Supported Project for Quality and Productivity Improvement in Tunisia

Outputs of the pilot project
Around nine months were spent implementing the PP. The following four items represent the main
outputs of the PP and can be the basis of successful implementation of similar projects.
1) Improvements were seen in quality and productivity in more than half of the PP target companies;
2) The quality and productivity awareness of PP company managers was reformed;
3) Basic technologies, including Japanese kaizen techniques for quality/productivity improvement
were transferred to the counterparts; and,4) Guidance manuals concerning quality/productivity improvement were prepared.
Outline descriptions of these outputs are given below.
1) Improvements were seen in quality and productivity in more than half of the PP
target companies
The PP was implemented over nine months from January to October 2007. More than half of thetarget companies experienced greater improvements than expected in the areas of quality/productivity.
During the PP period, the number of companies that were able to achieve numerically expressible
quality/productivity improvement using existing machinery and equipment was 9 out of 14 companies (64%) in the electrical and electronic sector and 4 out of 13 (31%) in the food processing
sector. For example, 8 companies achieved at least 20% higher productivity, 3 of which raised
productivity by at least 50%; another company cut its nonconformity rate from around 20% to
0%, while another company reduced die replacement times from 110 minutes to 70 minutes. Other
companies were unable to produce numerically expressible results during the PP period. However,they have the potential to produce outputs in the near future. Furthermore, even if they do not,they will at least be able to utilize the kaizen techniques acquired during the PP in their future corporate production activities (see Table 4-3).
2) The quality and productivity awareness of PP company managers was reformed
At the start of the PP, the techniques used for improving quality and productivity were so basic
that most of the top managers and line managers doubted whether such techniques could produce
good outputs. However, as the PP advanced and outputs started appearing, their awareness regarding quality/productivity improvement changed and more managers approached the work vigorously. In the final analysis, the best results were achieved in the companies where the managers
were the most enthusiastic about quality/productivity improvement. This outcome is indicated inTables 4-4 and 4-5.

43Chapter 4

Table 4-3. Results of Quality/Productivity Improvement in the PP(figures indicate the number of PP companies)
A
9
4

Electrical and electronic sector
Food processing sector

B
3
3

C
2
6

Source: Compiled from the Master Plan Study for Quality/Productivity Improvement in the Republic of Tunisia (Final
Report, July 2008), available from JICA homepage (http://www.jica.go.jp/).
Note: Rank A indicates companies that achieved conspicuous outputs in terms of higher awareness of quality/productivity improvement among top managers and line managers, higher per capita productivity, shortened operation and travel times in the factories, reduced defects and so on. Rank C indicates companies where
awareness of quality/productivity improvement among top managers and line managers was rather passive
and conservative and where no particular progress was made in terms of quality/productivity improvement(although at least the kaizen techniques were transferred). Rank B indicates companies situated somewhere
between these two extremes. Among the B-ranked companies, some realized increased productivity of 50%
or more during the PP period, although the awareness of top managers regarding the importance ofquality/productivity improvement remained rather weak. Such assessments were made by the JICA consultants and UGPQ/Technical Center staff, i.e. the counterparts.

Table 4-4. Electrical and Electronic Sector: Relationship between Enthusiasm of
Top Managers and Level of Improvement

Level of top management enthusiasm a
Level of top management enthusiasm b
Level of top management enthusiasm c

Improvement
Level A

Improvement
Level B

6
3

1
2

Improvement
Level C
1
1

Table 4-5. Food Processing Sector: Relationship between Enthusiasm of
Top Managers and Level of Improvement

Level of top management enthusiasm a
Level of top management enthusiasm b
Level of top management enthusiasm c

Improvement
Level A

Improvement
Level B

Improvement
Level C

2
2

3

3
3

Source: Both tables above are compiled from the Master Plan Study for Quality/Productivity Improvement in the
Republic of Tunisia (Final Report, July 2008), available from JICA homepage (http://www.jica.go.jp/).
Note: The meanings of improvement levels A, B and C are the same as explained in the notes under Table 4-3. a,b and c indicate the level of enthusiasm of top management regarding quality/productivity improvement activities: ìaî indicates very enthusiastic, ìcî indicates rather passive and conservative, and ìbî indicates somewhere in between.

3) Basic technologies, including Japanese kaizen techniques for quality/productivity improvement were transferred to the counterparts
During the PP implementation period, the JICA consultants transferred basic kaizen techniques
including Japanese improvement techniques to the counterparts and PP target companies via “On
the Job Training” (OJT) on production lines. Table 4-6 shows the types of kaizen techniques learned
and that can provide continued guidance for production managers and quality controllers in
Tunisian companies.77
77

The technologies and techniques transferred to the Tunisian side in this project were extremely basic, and there are
numerous other techniques for improving quality and productivity. It is anticipated that further improvement techniques will be acquired during the next phase of technical cooperation.

44

JICA-Supported Project for Quality and Productivity Improvement in Tunisia

Table 4-6. Types of Improvement (Kaizen) Techniques that were Acquired in the PP
and can be Autonomously Used by Counterparts in Future
Contents of Improvement Technique№ Improvement Technique
PQ analysis / Transfer distance analysis / Process proximity analysis78
1. Layout improvement
2. Improvement of work
Time research (stopwatch method) / Operation researchhuman-hours balance
3. Shortening of setup times Single setup (SMED) method / Vide analysis79
4. QCCs80
Analysis using 7 tools of QC / 7 areas of waste elimination81
5. 5S82
Tag method / Color display / Visual control / Dividing lines
Source: Compiled from the Master Plan Study for Quality/Productivity Improvement in the Republic of Tunisia (Final
Report, July 2008), available from JICA homepage (http://www.jica.go.jp/).

Since the counterparts compiled the manual describing these kaizen techniques under guidancefrom the JICA consultants during the PP period, they were able to gain understanding of the improvement techniques from both theoretical and practical viewpoints. In future, it is anticipatedthat counterparts will inform each other to further advance improvement techniques in these fiveareas, and build up diagnostic and guidance experience in company production environments. This
will allow them to nurture young engineers in their own Technical Centers (CETIME, CTAA) as
well as in other sector Technical Centers.
The kaizen techniques indicated in Table 4-6, i.e. layout improvement, improvement of the work
human-hours balance, shortening of setup times (SMED), QCCs and 5S, have produced particularly good results in the electrical and electronic sector. Among these techniques, 5S is an effective
technique in all companies across all sectors, and around half the targeted companies that applied
it in the food processing sector experienced positive results. In Japan, 5S is the most basic kaizen
technique for quality/productivity improvement and has been disseminated to almost all sectors,
regardless of the size of the enterprise. The Toyota Production System established by Toyota Motor
Corporation has generated outstanding results in terms of quality/productivity improvement, andthe 5S occupies an important position within this.
78

PQ analysis is an analysis technique that entails drawing P-Q charts (with the types of products targeted in production
P on the horizontal axis, and quantities Q on the vertical axis) and using them as the basis for layout planning.
79
SMED, which stands for Single Minutes Exchange of Die, is a method for eliminating wasted time in manufacturing
processes.
80
QCC (Quality Control Circle) refers to small groups of frontline workers organized with the goal of continuously
managing and improving the quality of products, services and work. There are three basic principles of activity: 1)
exercising human ability and bringing forth unlimited potential, 2) valuing human nature and creating cheerful workplaces where people feel rewarded by their work, and 3) contributing to improvement and development of the company’s stature (According to the Japan Industrial Management Association publication “Dictionary of Production
Management Terms, Japanese Standards Association,” 2005, 3rd edition (the first edition was published in 2002)).
81
In QC activities, data is frequently collected and quality improvement issues are tackled based on the information
obtained. The basic tools used to read various kinds of information from data are referred to as the “7 tools of QC”
and include Pareto diagrams, check sheets, histograms, scatter diagrams, control drawings, graphs and cause andeffect diagrams.
82
5S is taken from the initial letters of the Japanese words Seiri (sorting), Seiton (systematic arrangement), Seiso(sweep), Seiketsu (scrub) and Shitsuke (self-discipline). Seiri (sorting) refers to sorting necessary items from unnecessary items and tidying up the items that aren’t needed. Seiton (systematic arrangement) infers preparing items intheir set positions so that necessary items can be immediately used when they are needed. Seiso (sweep) refers to theremoval of foreign materials from necessary items. Seiketsu (scrub) refers to the maintenance of a clean state throughrepeated implementation of sorting, arrangement and cleaning. And Shitsuke (self-discipline) refers to always conforming to the things that have been decided (Japan Industrial Management Association, 2005).

45

Chapter 44) Guidance manuals concerning quality/productivity improvement were prepared
Under guidance from JICA consultants, the counterparts themselves compiled the improvement
techniques they learned via OJT into manuals to guide quality/productivity improvement for theelectric and electronic, and food processing sectors, in both English and French. On completionof the overall project in July 2008, the manuals in Arabic were also finished. This will be utilized
by the counterparts when they conduct guidance of quality/productivity improvement to technicalstaff of the public Technical Centers, as well as production line managers in Tunisian companies.
[Phase 3: November 2007 - July 2008]
In Phase 3, based on the results of the fact-finding survey of companies in Phase 1 and results of
PP implementation in Phase 2, the master plan and action plan including institution building fordisseminating the kaizen techniques were formulated. Within the master plan, the following four
points were proposed:
1) Strengthening general quality capability;
2) Promoting trainers’ training;3) Raising awareness among top management; and,4) Establishing an information dissemination setup (through a core organization).
These recommendations are outlined in the following paragraphs.
1) Strengthening general quality capability
Quality has a number of aspects. The type of quality targeted in the project in Tunisia was “qualityof manufacture.”83 In other words, it referred to the quality of products manufactured by processing
materials and assembling parts. However, no matter how good assembly technology is, good products cannot be made if the quality of parts is poor. Also, customer satisfaction cannot be attainedwith poor designs. In order for products of sufficient quality to prevail amidst international competition, it is necessary to improve “quality of manufacture,” “quality of parts” and “quality of design.” There is also the question of the “quality of marketing.” Therefore, in order to make productsthat provide satisfaction to customers at home and abroad (the final users), it is necessary to approach quality improvement from a comprehensive viewpoint.
Particularly in Tunisia, since most parts and materials for manufacturing companies are imported
from Europe, and these are processed and assembled into products for exporting back to Europe,
the processes conducted in Tunisia have the lowest added value within the value chain. Accordingly, with a view to one day enabling Tunisia to make its own parts and implement higher value
adding design processes, it was recommended that general quality capability be strengthened.

83“Quality of manufacture” is also referred to as the actual quality or the quality of finished products and services thatare manufactured or provided with a view to realizing the quality of design. “Quality of design” refers to the target
quality aimed for in the manufacture and provision of products and services.

46

JICA-Supported Project for Quality and Productivity Improvement in Tunisia

2) Promoting trainers’ training
In order to widely disseminate the kaizen techniques that were transferred in the PP, not only tostaff of the public Technical Centers but also to the companies of Tunisia, since the absolute number
counterparts is not enough, it is necessary to develop many more trainers. OJT on production lines
is the most effective method for nurturing trainers, and recommendations were given on how counterparts who received transfers of technology in the PP should develop trainers (mainly technicalstaff from the Technical Centers) and production line managers with Tunisian companies via OJT.
3) Raising awareness among top management
In order to achieve quality/productivity improvement, it was confirmed in the PP that changing
the awareness of top management is the most important point. So how can managers be encouraged
to change their awareness? It was proposed that guidance be carried out via OJT on productionlines and through effective training programs for managers.
4) Establishing an information dissemination setup (through a core organization)
In order for Tunisia to improve its international competitiveness in future, quality/productivity improvement is one of the most important issues it must tackle. There is no core organization at present to widely disseminate kaizen techniques and know-how to industries in Tunisia. It was proposedthat the UGPQ under the Ministry of Industry, which was the direct counterpart agency in the project, become the core agency and work with other related agencies in establishing an information
dissemination setup to help realize recommendations 1) – 3).

2. Lessons from the project in Tunisia: Conditions for success
More than half of the PP companies got better than expected results, while some PP companies
did not. What were the reasons behind those results? The following lessons were identified throughthe PP implementation.
1) The best results were realized in those companies where top management and production line
managers (production managers and quality controllers) both had high levels of awareness regarding quality/productivity improvement and, furthermore, worked positively towards making
changes. Conversely, companies where top management and production line managers held apassive attitude towards quality/productivity improvement did not improve much. The commitment level of top management is therefore especially important.84
2) The positive attitude of the counterpart, including agencies (MIPME and UGPQ) and the technical staff of the public Technical Centers, toward the acquisition and dissemination of kaizen
techniques contributed to achieving overall PP outputs.

84

Dr. W. Edwards Deming says “Where is quality made? Quality is made in the boardroom.” (Rafael Aguayo, foreword
by W. Edwards Deming (1991) Dr. Deming: The American Who Taught the Japanese About Quality, Fireside, New
York)

47

Chapter 43) It is indispensible for the consultants responsible for conducting the transfer of technology tohave ample expert knowledge and guidance experience concerning quality/productivity improvement.85 In the case of the project in Tunisia, JICA consultants possessed experience offactory management in Japan and other parts of Asia, as well as guidance of quality/productivity
improvement in Asian companies.
4) It is essential to have teamwork between the three stakeholders (top management and production line managers of companies, counterparts including agencies, and the consultants conducting the transfer of technology) who are all aiming for quality/productivity improvement(In the case of the project in Tunisia, the PP companies where this teamwork functioned well
were able to produce good improvement outputs, especially in electric and electronic sector).

3. Japan’s experience: How has Japan implemented quality/productivity
improvement?
Japanese industries were in a state of devastation at the end of WW2 (around 60 years ago). At
that time it was necessary to immediately modernize machinery and equipment and to promote
the innovation of production management. In spite of the extremely low level of manufacturing
technology, the Japanese continued to make products. Labor costs were certainly low at this time,
however, the quality of products was so poor that they were not fit for export. In overseas markets,
Japanese products had the reputation of being cheap and of poor quality. For example, Japanesewatches did not keep time, shoes soon became ragged, and radios were prone to making annoying
noises. However, today, Japanese products are internationally recognized for their high quality.
During the intervening period, Japan advanced research and development of its own unique kaizen
techniques geared to improve levels of quality and productivity. A number of these techniques
have become internationally famous, for example, 5S, QCCs, the 7 tools of QC, visual control,
the Toyota Production System and so on. The private sector was first to take the initiative in improving quality and productivity in Japan, then academics provided theoretical cooperation, while
the government provided indirect and direct support to complete the three-way collaboration
among industry, government and academia. Here, we will discuss the ways in which Japan improved quality and productivity in the postwar era.
3.1. Quality and productivity improvement movement in Japan
Quality improvement movement
Concerning quality control, large disparities between Japan and the United States (US) werestrongly recognized soon after the war, and Japanese industrial and academic circles displayed astrong interest in the advanced quality control techniques of America. The Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE86) was established in 1946 in order to introduce and disseminate
85

When discussing transfer of technology, the focus tends to be on the ability of those receiving and absorbing technology, however, attention should also be paid to those providing the specialist technical capability.
86<http://www.juse.or.jp/> Retrieved December 2008.

48

JICA-Supported Project for Quality and Productivity Improvement in Tunisia

American scientific quality control techniques in Japan. In 1950, JUSE first invited and received
guidance from Dr. W. Edwards Deming who proposed quality control based on statistical techniques. Industrial leaders were very interested in these techniques and records of his lectures became the first manual for spreading quality control in Japan. He had been invited to Japan every
year since then.87 Dr. Deming donated the royalties from those records to a fund that was used in
1951 to establish, within JUSE, the Deming Prize for companies realizing outstanding success inthe field of quality control. Although the Deming Prize was instigated by a private sector organization, it had honorary significance for Japanese companies and became the best possible advertising tool for selling high quality products in both Japanese and overseas markets. Winning thisaward became a major objective for many Japanese companies at this time, and it played an important role in raising the quality control level of Japanese companies. Furthermore, since academics conducted research and investigation into quality improvement and the government
supported the efforts of industry and academia, the movement towards quality improvement inJapan truly involved all elements of society.
In Japan, November is designated as Quality Month, and during this time symposiums on quality
control, lecture meetings and various other events involving the public are staged throughout thecountry. The Deming Prize is also awarded in November.88
Tunisia is now in the process of devoting nationwide resources towards creating a culture of quality.
The Tunisian Government has established an award system for companies displaying excellent
results in quality improvement, as well as the first ever “Quality Grand Prix” awards presented to
private sector companies in March 2008. A “Quality Week” has been established during Marchand during this time seminars and symposiums are staged and the Presidential Grand Prix awards
ceremony is held.
Productivity improvement movement
Concerning improvement of productivity, Japan was influenced by the productivity movement inEurope.
87“Deming predicted that within five years Japan would be economically competitive and that consumers worldwide
would clamor for Japanese goods. While many were skeptical, the presence of an American expert was compelling.
In order not to lose face they faithfully followed his instructions. Within eighteen months of the first lecture theJapanese saw tremendous improvements in the quality of their goods and in productivity. They beat Deming’s fiveyear timetable with a year to spare.” (Rafael Aguayo, 1991)
88
The Japanese Deming Prize and Quality Month have influenced quality improvement activities in countries throughout
the world. In the US, starting with the establishment of the Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Award in 1987, October was designated as the Quality Month in the US and Canada in 1988. During this month, quality improvement
activities are implemented all over the country and these activities are recognized as having contributed to economic
recovery. Moreover, on the second Thursday of November, which has been designated as World Quality Day at thesuggestion of the United Nations, quality improvement activities are carried out all over the world.
Concerning standardization too, World Standard Day was established to coincide with the standardization month ofOctober in Japan in 1969, and standardization reinforcement activities are implemented throughout the world during
this month (see http://www.juse.or.jp/).

49

Chapter 4

In the United Kingdom (UK), based on the belief that elucidating the secret of America’s highproductivity and applying it to British industry was the fastest way to postwar economic reconstruction, a productivity center was established and American management methods for raisingproductivity were introduced and disseminated. The US gave strong support to these efforts in the
UK. These activities spread to other European countries and the European productivity headquarters was established in 1951. The basic approach to improving productivity here entailed the simultaneous maintenance and expansion of productivity and employment based on harmonious
labor relations, and it aimed to realize fair distribution of outputs between top management, workers and consumers.
Inspired by such developments in the advanced countries of Europe and America, the momentum
to advance productivity improvement gained pace in Japan too. This culminated in the establishment of the Japan Productivity Center (JPC) comprising top managers, workers and academics in
1955. The JPC dispatched numerous missions to the US to collect information and materials on
American production management methods. This information then became common knowledge
for many companies following the dissemination of such information in report meetings and seminars. At the start, major corporations were primarily involved in such activities, however, small
and medium enterprises also became involved later on. Based on harmonious labor relations, various modern types of equipment were introduced and American management systems wereadopted. The objective here was to effectively and scientifically utilize resources, labor and equipment in order to reduce production costs, expand markets, boost employment and enhance real
wages and the standard of living, and thereby to enhance common benefits for management, workers and general consumers. Since this coincided with the start of Japan’s era of rapid economic
growth, productivity improvement signified the expansion of markets and production as well as
growth of employment and introduction of modern equipment and facilities. In addition, disputes
did not arise between labor and management.
The JPC was given the objective of approaching the productivity movement from a broader social
and international perspective and forming national consensus for the reform of socioeconomic
systems.
Quality improvement and productivity improvement: Higher quality leads to higher
productivity (Dr. Deming)
As mentioned previously, in Japan, nationwide movements for promoting quality improvement
and productivity improvement have been advanced through the initiative of both JUSE and JPC.
In addition to these two organizations, various other private sector organizations and research institutes have worked on improving quality and productivity. Needless to say, many corporations
have also developed their own unique systems, as in the case of Toyota Motor Corporation whichdeveloped the Toyota Production System (TPS) including Just-In-Time (JIT).
What is the difference between quality improvement and productivity improvement, and how are50

JICA-Supported Project for Quality and Productivity Improvement in Tunisia

the two related? A detailed explanation will not be given here, however, what is clear is that when
quality improvement is advanced, productivity improvement follows,89 and vice versa. In reality,
JUSE, which has promoted quality improvement, has various training programs and has also
worked on kaizen techniques for quality improvement as well as productivity improvement, while
the JPC has established the Japan Quality Awards system and encourages quality improvement incorporate management. In recent times, many work areas of the two organizations have come tooverlap. Even when quality improvement and productivity improvement are advanced separately,
the end results eventually overlap with each other.
3.2. Cooperation among industrial sector, academia and government
As has been described above, in Japan, in both quality and productivity improvement, first the industrial sector played a central role in instigating the movement. Then academic circles offeredsupport for surveys and research in the field, in combination with governments who backed up
struggling areas in the industrial sector. An important feature of Japan’s experience is that industrial
sector, academia and government collaborated on improving both quality and productivity. (InTunisia’s case, the government has taken the initiative and is striving to employ a quality/productivity improvement movement throughout the nation while collaborating with industry and academia.)
3.3. Policies and measures for the promotion of industrial technology
Since Japan was not blessed with natural resources, it had to rely on so-called processing trade,
whereby resources and raw materials were imported from abroad, processed and exported, in the
postwar years. For this reason, policies and measures were adopted with a view to raising the overall level of industrial technology including processing technology. In addition to the aforementioned promotion of quality/productivity improvement, the following policies and measures weretaken.
1) Introduction of the diagnosis and guidance system
A system for introducing management diagnosis to small and medium enterprises, conducting
management improvement based on results, and offering technical guidance as well as advice andguidance on the modernization of machines and equipment was introduced. Under this system,
small and medium business owners in regional areas were able to receive diagnosis, advice andguidance services concerning management and technology from advisors belonging to local governments.
2) Establishment of public test and research agencies
Public test and research agencies at the national and local government level were established allover the country, and test and research activities were conducted according to local industrial
89

Dr. W. Edwards Deming maintained that if quality improves, rework will be reduced, mistakes will be lessened,
there will be less delays, nonconformities and wasteful use of machines and materials, and as a result costs will be
reduced and productivity will be improved (Mary Walton, 2000), (1st ed., 1994).

51

Chapter 4needs. Moreover, such agencies could respond not only to the everyday technical inquiries of local
companies, but they could also work to resolve technical problems faced by local industries. In
recent times, public test and research agencies are advancing research and development geared topromoting local industries in new fields in collaboration with local universities.
3) Enactment of the Export Inspection Law
In the years immediately following the war, Japanese products were subject to endless complaints
from overseas markets for being bad quality or imitations of western products. In order to deal
with this, the Japanese Government enacted the Export Control Law and introduced an export
quality inspection system. This led to enactment of the Export Inspection Law making it necessary
to inspect the quality of all products before export. Thanks to this system, all poor quality products
were driven out and the flow of complaints regarding the quality of Japanese products werestemmed.
4) Establishment of the Industrial Standardization Law
In authorizing the JIS (Japanese Industrial Standards) mark, rather than simply reviewing the specifications of products, inspections came to be carried out on the state of quality control and machines and equipment in production plants and reviews focused on whether or not plants satisfied
the applicable standards. In particular, for small and medium enterprises, since products carrying
the JIS mark were seen to have quality recognized by the state, this became a major advantage
when selling to consumers and a lot of interest was paid to acquiring the JIS mark.
5) Enactment of the Machine Promotion Law
In postwar Japan, based on the view that promotion of the machine, electrical and electronic industries was important in terms of industrial strategy, first legislation was established, and thenindustrial sectors were designated with a view to widely promoting parts industries. As a result,modernization of supporting industries constituting the base of Japan’s machine, electrical andelectronic industries was advanced and this proved extremely effective in improving the standardof technology.
6) Enactment of the Basic Technology Promotion Law
Leaving aside the machine, electrical and electronic industries, in other industrial sectors, so longas machines and equipment are used, it is essential to manufacture and supply parts that constitutethem. Moreover, since high quality parts tend to be demanded in order to realize differentiation,
it is necessary to promote and evolve base technologies that go into making such parts. Against
such a background, legislation was established with the objective of developing the basic technologies of casting, pressing, dies, welding and machining among others.
Summing up, it can be seen that government policies and measures had beneficial impacts both
directly and indirectly on quality/productivity improvement and helped boost the international
competitiveness of Japanese industries in the postwar years.

52

53- Draft PP
implementation plan
preparation- Draft manual
preparation- Selection of modelcompanies- Setting of modelcompany selection
criteria<Preparation for PP>

Establishment ofdissemination setup by
the Tunisia side (systems,
organization, budget)- A/P and M/P compilation- Final report (manualcompletion)- Preparation of video of
successful cases- Trainers’ training(OJT/WS, etc.)- Training in Japan

Ԙ PP implementation plan
implementation (company
diagnosis, quality/productivity
improvement guidance, draft
manual utilization)- Around 15 electrical andelectronic companies- Around 15 food processing
companies
ԙ Draft final report preparation(including draft A/P and M/P,
etc.)

<Preparation for post-JICA>‫ޣ‬Phase III‫ޤ‬<PP implementation>‫ޣ‬Phase II‫ޤ‬Nationwide deployment (allindustries and all regions) ofquality/productivity improvementby the counterparts themselves<Implementation of M/P, A/P>

Implementation by Tunisia itself

Note: -PP: Pilot Project, M/P: Master Plan, A/P: Action Plan, OJT: On the Job Training, WS: Workshop-This figure was prepared at the start of the project (July 2006). Accordingly, the numbers of companies in each PP target sector and companies targeted in the PP
are the original numbers.
-Light blue areas refer to components (activities) assisted by JICA, and dark blue areas refer to future actions to be taken by the Tunisian Government.

Ԙ Survey of all industrial sectors(20 companies)ԙ Survey of the PP target sectors- Electrical and electronic(approx. 30 companies)- Food processing(approx. 30 companies)Ԛ Survey of policies, measuresand related legislation
ԛ Survey of current conditions ofsupport systems and agencies
Ԝ Survey of trends of other
donors<Fact-finding survey andextraction of issues>‫ޣ‬Phase I‫ޤ‬Scope of the Master Plan Study for Quality/Productivity Improvement in Tunisia (JICA support project)[Reference Materials] Overall View of the Master Plan Study for Quality/Productivity Improvement in Tunisia

JICA-Supported Project for Quality and Productivity Improvement in Tunisia

Chapter 4

References
Aguayo, R. (1991). Dr. Deming: The American who taught the Japanese about quality. Fireside.
New York.
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). (2008). Master plan study for quality/productivity
improvement in the Republic of Tunisia: Final report. (available from JICA homepage<http://www.jica.go.jp/>)Japan Industrial Management Association. (2005). Dictionary of production management terms,
Japanese Standards Association. (3rd ed.).
Kikuchi, T. (2008). The quality and productivity improvement project in Tunisia: A comparisonof Japanese and EU approaches. In GRIPS Development Forum (Ed.), Diversity and complementarity in development aid: East Asian lessons for African growth.
Walton, M. (2000). The Deming management method. Management Books 2000 Ltd.

54

Chapter 5
Productivity and Quality Improvement:
JICA’s Assistance in Kaizen
Takafumi Ueda

Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)’s assistance in kaizen90 dates back to 1983 when
it started a project in Singapore. Its assistance on this theme evolved over the years to cover countries in various regions of the world. In addition to implementing projects, JICA has sent shortterm and long-term experts on productivity and quality improvement missions. JICA also provides
training courses on this subject in Japan (e.g. “Group Training”), in other countries (“Third-Country
Training”), and via TV conference (“JICA-Net”) connecting Japan and participating countries.
In most cases, productivity and quality improvement is the project’s main purpose (i.e. “kaizenonly” projects); in others, this forms a component of the project. In cases of kaizen-only projects,
JICA has supported its counterpart, such as a national productivity agency, in its capacity development. Such kaizen projects can be categorized according to the development stages of the counterpart organization, i.e. the start-up, developmental and transition stages. Besides country specificprojects, there has been a regional project that has covered several countries.
Figure 5-1. Stages of Development for National Productivity Organizations

Transition stage

Stages ofdevelopment

Independent
AgencyDevelopmental
stage

Start-up stage

Government agency /MinistryTime

Source: Elaborated by the author.

90

In this chapter, “productivity and quality improvement” and “kaizen” are used interchangeably.

55

56

(on-going)

1995
1995

2001

2006

2009

Brazilian Institute of Quality andProductivity Project

Productivity Improvement forEnterprises Project

Study on the Master Plan for
Quality/Productivity Improvement

Project of Strengthening of
Paraguayan Quality and Productivity 2007
Center2007

Productivity Development Project

Productivity and Quality
Improvement Center Project

Study on the Diffusion Plan for
Business and Production
Management Technology for Smalland Medium Enterprises

4 Hungary

5 Brazil6 Costa Rica

7 Tunisia

8 Paraguay

9 Egypt

Source: JICA, as of August (2009).

1 0 Argentina(on-going)

1994

Quality and Productivity
Improvement Project3 Thailand(on-going)

2008

2006

2000

1999

2001

1994

1991

Productivity Development Program
for the Philippines

2 Philippines

1990

1983

Productivity Development Project

Project Title

Project
EndYear

1 Singapore

Country

Project
Start
Year

National Institute of Industrial
Technology (INTI)

Productivity and Quality
Improvement Center

Paraguayan Quality andProductivity Center(CEPPROCAL)

1957

2006

2005

2005

1992

Technical Instructor and Personnel
Training Center for Industrial
Development for Central America
National Quality Programme Unit

1995

1994

Brazilian Institute of Quality andProductivity in Paraná

Hungarian Productivity Centre

1962

1967

Productivity Development Center,
Development Academy of thePhilippines
Thailand Productivity Institute1972

Developmental

Start-up

Start-up

Start-up

Developmental

Start-up

Start-up

Transition

Developmental

Developmental

Stage of OrganizationalYear
Development under
Established
JICA Support

National Productivity Board

Counterpart Organization

Table 5-1. List of JICA Kaizen-only Projects
Chapter 5

Productivity and Quality Improvement: JICA’s Assistance in Kaizen

1. The first JICA project on kaizen: Supporting the developmental stage of
National Productivity Board in Singapore
The Productivity Development Project in Singapore was implemented from 1983 to 1990. Since
its counterpart agency, the National Productivity Board (NPB), had been established in 1972,
JICA’s assistance was provided during NPB’s developmental stage. The project’s high profile may
derive from the then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s personal request (it is said), to the then president of the Japan Productivity Center (JPC) which became responsible for this project on theJapanese side.
Before the project started, Singapore’s National Productivity Committee, consisting of representatives of employers’ and workers’ organizations, the Government and academia, made a recommendation to establish four principles of the productivity movement in Singapore in April 198191
as follows:
1) Productivity improvement will increase employment;
2) Labor and management will cooperate in order to consider and implement concrete steps toimprove productivity;
3) Employees will receive re-training as productivity improves; and
4) The fruits of productivity improvement will be fairly distributed among management, workers and consumers.
The JICA project developed the capacity of NPB in (a) management and supervisory training, (b)training in labor-management relations and small group activities, (c) occupational safety andhealth, (d) promotion of productivity, (e) development of resource centre, and (f) planning and research. Such capacity development was conducted through practical guidance, development oftraining materials, model/pilot company projects, seminars and workshops, preparation of papers,
and fellowship training.
As it was JICA’s first kaizen project, Japanese experts and their Singaporean counterparts had adifficult time at first. The Japanese, assuming that the same steps should be taken in Singapore asin Japan, started to instill basic concepts and principles in the Singaporean counterparts. They believed that it was necessary to take this step in order to form a solid base before teaching concrete
methods of productivity improvement. However, the NPB management was eager to achieve tangible results which had not materialized after one year of the project had passed. Part of the reason
for NPB’s demand for quick results could be that the Prime Minister had paid close attention to
the project. Based on the discussions between JICA and NPB, the role of the Japanese partners
changed. They no longer just trained their Singaporean counterparts in classrooms; they were now
providing services to enterprises side-by-side with their counterparts. In other words, they adopted

91

Three guiding principles of productivity improvement in Japan, set out in 1955, were: 1) expansion of employment,2) cooperation between labor and management, and 3) fair distribution of the fruits of productivity. <http://www.jpcsed.or.jp/eng/mission/principle.html>

57

Chapter 5

an on-the-job training method so that the counterparts were able to experience and learn how theirjobs could be done.92 With this approach, the NPB staff, with the support of JICA experts, wasnow achieving tangible results at the enterprise level.93
Besides providing training and consultancy services, NPB undertook major promotional activities.
For example, on 8 November 1985, Prime Minister Lee launched Productivity Month ’85 to raiseawareness and promote a “productivity culture” among workers, managers and government officials. “Quality Day” events were held at various companies and locations, seminars were held,
and an international exhibition of the quality circle convention was organized by NPB. These
events were extensively covered by the mass media.94
JICA’s assistance to NPB is considered a successful case of transferring “productivity technology.”95 The NPB acquired the capacity, not only to conduct productivity-related activities in the
country, but also to provide productivity training for other countries. For example, they provided
group training courses on productivity from 1990 to 1995 on behalf of JICA. From 1997 to 2000,
they organized productivity management courses in Singapore for 70 trainees from Southern
African Development Community (SADC) countries.96
In 1996, the NPB was merged with the Singapore Institute of Standards and Industrial Research
to form the Productivity and Standards Board (PSB). In 2002, PSB assumed a new responsibility
to promote innovation in Singapore and became known as the Standards, Productivity and Innovation Board (SPRING Singapore).97

2. Start-up and transition support
JICA’s assistance in the start-up stage has been seen in Hungary, Egypt and Brazil. The Productivity
Development Project in Hungary began in 1995 after the Hungarian Productivity Centre was established in the previous year. Until the project ended in 1999, in-company facilitators were trained,
company-level cases of short-term and long-term consultations were documented and kaizen was
promoted publicly. The technical capacities of the Centre’s staff were upgraded and the networkof experts was expanded. In Egypt, the Productivity and Quality Improvement Center nicknamed
the “Kaizen Center” was established in 2006 and the JICA project started in 2007.
92

Japan Productivity Center (JPC) (1990) “Singapore Productivity Improvement Project: Report on Technology Transfer Concept and Practice (a report in Japanese; the original title “Shingaporu Seisansei Kojo Purojekuto: Gijutsu Itenno Rinen to Jissen ni Kansuru Hokokusyo”).”
93
Under this project, a total of 149 short-term and long-term Japanese experts were sent to Singapore, and a total of
152 people from Singapore were trained in Japan (The Joint Evaluation of the project was attached as Annex 6 tothe above JPC report).
94
Joseph Prokopenko (1987) “Productivity Management; A practical handbook.” International Labour Organization,
Geneva. pp.261-2.
95
Japan Productivity Center, ibid.
96
Trainees came from Angola, Botswana, Congo, Ghana, Republic of Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
97<http://www.spring.gov.sg/>

58

Productivity and Quality Improvement: JICA’s Assistance in Kaizen

Before the JICA project was started in Brazil, in 1990 the Government of Brazil started to implement the Brazilian Program of Quality and Productivity (PBQP). This sought to improve the quality and productivity of enterprises through deregulation and liberalization policies, including
privatization of public enterprises and the introduction of foreign investments. Against this background, the Government decided to establish five Institutes of Quality and Productivity, one ofwhich was established in the Paraná State in 1995. Based on the Government’s request, JICA implemented a project from 1995 to 2000 to build staff capacity in the Brazilian Institute of Quality
and Productivity in Paraná (IBQP-PR) through seminars and training, as well as through on-thejob training (OJT). In 2002, the IBQP became “a non-profit private entity formed by associatedcompanies, governmental and non-governmental organizations entrepreneurial and workers’ representatives, technical and scientific institutions, universities and citizens.”98 The ex-post evaluation
conducted in 2004 showed that a positive impact was made; 61% of the companies surveyed confirmed their satisfaction with the services provided by IBQP-PR and only 16% expressed dissatisfaction.99
An important point to make about the project in Brazil is that IBQP-PR adapted the productivity
and quality improvement concept and established a unique concept of “Systemic Productivity”
that was appropriate in the Brazilian context. This has been defined as “an integrated approach of
the main factors related to the productive process: social, technological, cultural, economic andenvironmental issues.”100
In Thailand, JICA’s assistance was provided at the transition stage. The Thailand Management
Development and Productivity Center (TMDPC) was established in 1962 with the support of theInternational Labour Organization (ILO). In 1995, it was transformed into a more independent
organization, called the Thailand Productivity Institute (FTPI), in order to better serve private
sector enterprises. This foundation was formed jointly by the Ministry of Industry and the private sector.101 JICA’s “Quality and Productivity Improvement Project” was implemented from1994 to 2001 to enhance the capacity of FTPI in terms of productivity consulting services,human resource management and labor-management relations consultancy, research, and productivity campaigns and promotional activities.

3. Other forms of assistance
Creation of model companies
In the case of Tunisia, JICA took a different approach. In countries where kaizen was not well
98

IBQP website:<http://www.ibip.org.br/portal/home/index.php?pag=1&PHPSESSID=5af59ad9c15f8876493176406e8d0eca> accessed on 9 June 2009.
99
Rejane Ferreira dos Santos (2004) “Ex-post Evaluation Report on Brazilian Institute of Quality and Productivity(IBQP-PR),” JICA Brazil Office.
100
ibid.
101
This is why the English abbreviation of the institute includes an “F” for the Foundation.

59

Chapter 5

known, it was necessary to demonstrate the effectiveness of the kaizen approach first. Tunisia provides a good example where JICA assistance was provided under such circumstances. In the project
entitled “Study on the Master Plan for Quality/Productivity Improvement” (2006-08), after baseline
surveys conducted, pilot interventions were made at selected companies. Based on the lessons
learned from pilot activities, a master plan and an action plan were formulated. Further details of
the project are explained in Chapter 4, including the results of productivity improvements at theenterprise-level. As a follow-up to this study, a new JICA project is to start in 2009 in order toassist the Government of Tunisia to implement these plans. From the latter half of 2009, JICA
plans to take a similar approach in Ethiopia where the request for a kaizen project was made by
Prime Minister Meles Zenawi.
In addition to studies and projects that are dedicated to kaizen, another type of assistance includes
kaizen as one of many components in a project. In Bangladesh, for example, kaizen was piloted
for the jute sector in “The Study on Potential Sub-sector Growth for Export Diversification.” After
six months, four model companies achieved an average of 11.0% production growth in their spinning sections and machine stoppage reduced by 45.7%. In their weaving sections, the result wasa 13.4% increase in production and a 23.5% reduction in stoppage.102, 103
Table 5-2. Productivity Improvements in Bangladesh’s Jute Sector
CompanyA
B
C
D

Spinning
Machine stoppage
Production
38.8
18.4
24.2
13.6
53.8
6.2
65.9
5.6

Average

45.7

11.0

(Unit: %)Weaving
Machine stoppage
Production
27.7
13.0
11.1
15.1
19.8
9.8
35.5
15.7
23.5

13.4

Source: JICA & Unico International Corporation (2009).
Note: Performance in six months from January 2008.

Regional approach
In Central America, JICA is taking a regional approach. Building on the achievements of the project
to establish “The Technical Instructor and Personnel Training Center for Industrial Development
for Central America in the Republic of Costa Rica” from 1992 to 1997, a new project entitled“Productivity Improvement for Enterprises in the Republic of Costa Rica” was implemented from2001 to 2006. As explained in more detail, in Chapter 3, the project assisted the center (Centro deFormacion de Formadores y Personal Tecnico para el Desarrollo Industrial de Centroamerica;
CEFOF) to deepen its expertise on kaizen. JICA is currently engaged in a new project with CEFOF
102

JICA & Unico International Corporation (2009) “The Study on Potential Sub-sector Growth for Export Diversificationin the People’s Republic of Bangladesh: Pilot Project Completion Report.” pp.1-38.
103
Other examples of kaizen-as-a-component type of projects include “Project on Human Resources Development for
Small and Medium-sized Enterprises in Armenia,” “Project on Supporting Industries Development for Casting Technology in Indonesia,” “Upgrading Project for Plastic Molding Tool Technology in the Philippines,” and “Small andMedium Enterprises Supporting-Agency Reinforcement Project in Serbia.”

60

Productivity and Quality Improvement: JICA’s Assistance in Kaizen

to serve Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Belize, and the Dominican Republic.
Experts and training courses
Other forms of JICA’s assistance on kaizen include organizing various training courses, as well as
providing long-term and short-term experts104 and Senior Volunteers. Training courses take placein Japan or in third countries, or through a TV conference facility called “JICA-Net.”105 The numberof short-tem and long-term experts and training courses varies year by year, depending on the demand from recipient countries (Figure 5-2, Table 5-3). For example, 35 people were trained inseven courses on kaizen in 2008. Individual experts (i.e. those not attached to any projects) andSenior Volunteers to provide support in various aspects of kaizen have been dispatched to various
parts of the world (Table 5-4). It is noticeable that there have been very few of them for Sub-Saharan Africa.
Figure 5-2. Number of Trainees in Japan on Productivity/Quality
120

100

80

60

40

20

0
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Source: JICA.

Table 5-3. Number of Trainees and Courses in Japan on Productivity/Quality
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Trainees

55

81

70

110

49

75

78

66

57

68

45

67

35

Courses

15

25

15

21

8

13

12

11

8

9

9

11

7

Source: JICA.

104
105

For JICA experts, “long-term” means one year or more, while “short-term” means less than a year.
<http://jica-net.jica.go.jp/en2/index.html> The JICA-Net connects resource persons in Japan with the audience inother countries.

61

62

EuropeMiddle East

---

---

0

Malawi

ZambiaSub-total---

3

Tunisia

Ghana

3

Syria

14

6

Oman

Sub-total---

Morocco1Bahrain---41

Sub-total

Jordan2

Ukraine1

3

Slovakia

Iraq

10

Romania4

Moldova15

2

Hungary

Poland5

Experts

Bulgaria

Source: JICA.

AfricaCountry

3

1

1

1

6

1

3

---

1

1

---

---

0

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

Senior Volunteers

6
12
3
--1

Indonesia
Kazakhstan
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Malaysia

Sub-total

VietnamUzbekistan

ThailandPhilippines

Pakistan

Nepal

78

15

11

11

1

---

---

10

3

India

Mongolia

5

Experts

China

Country

28

4

---

8

---

3

3

1

1

1

---

---

7

---

---

Senior Volunteers

Latin America

Asia

29
5
2
9

BrazilChile
Costa Rica
Colombia(all regions)

Total

Sub-total

Venezuela

Uruguay

Peru

Paraguay

MexicoHonduras

El Salvador

Ecuador

196

63

2

5

---

1

3

---

1

1

---

2

Bolivia

Dominican Rep.

3

Experts

Argentina

Country

63

26

---

2

1

2

2

3

---

---

5

1

2

1

---

1

6

Senior Volunteers

Table 5-4. Geographical Distribution of Individual Experts and Senior Volunteers on Productivity/Quality (1981-2008)

Chapter 5

Productivity and Quality Improvement: JICA’s Assistance in Kaizen

4. Conclusion
Despite some initial misgivings, it has been demonstrated that kaizen can be put into practice in avariety of cultural settings. During the initial attempt in Singapore, JICA experts believed that introducing the productivity movement was the transfer of Japanese-style management practices. It
was sometimes considered that various aspects of Japanese-style management were essential forthe success of the productivity movement. However, we now know that kaizen can be applied inmany parts of the world. JICA’s experience in Asia, Latin America, Europe and now Africa, aretestimony to this. It is also possible, even necessary, to adapt it to the local context, as the Brazilian
case shows.
Kaizen centers evolve over time and JICA’s assistance needs to correspond to the specific capacity
development requirements of the time. The most dramatic, and perhaps most crucial period in thelife of productivity centers, is that of the transition from a purely public institution to a private orsemi-private entity. This transition derives, at least in part, from the dual role that kaizen centers
are expected to play. On the one hand, the centers have a public role to disseminate kaizen movements in a country and implement activities to promote kaizen such as research and development.
On the other, they have a private role, i.e. to provide private goods in the form of services to enterprises, whether through their own staff or by mobilizing expertise available in the private sector,
so that they can enhance their competitiveness and profits. For the latter, the centers should be receiving fees from their client enterprises. It is often the case that public sector institutions either
are not mandated to receive fees, or even if they can, the fees may be absorbed into the nationaltreasury and have no bearing on the budget that the centers may be allocated. In such cases, it isdesirable for the centers to be autonomous entities in order to provide effective services to enterprises. If not, for example, competent experts at the centers are likely to be recruited by private
sector enterprises that can pay much higher compensation. At some point, countries need to develop
and use private sector trainers and consultants who may be able to provide suitable services toclient enterprises, beyond only having such expertise in-house. In such cases, the centers may play
important roles in developing this expertise and continuing to spread kaizen messages.
Kaizen is “an attitude of the mind”; it is distinct from many other management tools. It is participatory; frontline workers are expected to contribute and benefit by using their brain power as wellas their hands. It is practical; various tools such as 5S and QC circles are available for use. It isalso complementary to other assistance such as the EU’s assistance in introducing International
Standards Organization (ISO) standards in Tunisia and the United Nations Industrial Development
Organization (UNIDO)’s assistance on benchmarking in Ethiopia. If there is a request from developing countries, JICA will be able to share Japanese expertise in kaizen, as it is one of the areas
where Japan has competitive advantages in providing assistance.

63

Chapter 5

References
Japan Productivity Center. (1990). Shingaporu seisansei kojo purojekuto: Gijutsu iten no rinen tojissen ni kansuru hokokusyo [Singapore productivity improvement project: Report on technology transfer concept and practice].
Prokopenko, J. (1987). Productivity management: A practical handbook. International Labour Organization. Geneva.
Rejane Ferreira dos Santos. (2004). Ex-post evaluation report on Brazilian Institute of Quality
and Productivity (IBQP-PR). JICA Brazil Office.
JICA & Unico International Corporation. (2009). The study on potential sub-sector growth forexport diversification in the People’s Republic of Bangladesh: Pilot project completion
report.

64