Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
* Korespondenčni avtor / Correspondence author 234 
Prejeto: 6. junij 2020; revidirano: 17. julij 2020; sprejeto: 20. julij 2020. /
Received: 6th June 2020; revised: 17th July 2020; accepted: 20th July 2020.
DOI: 10.37886/ip.2020.014
Overlap Between Lean Production and Scientific 
Management 
Idriz Selimović* 
Faculty of organisation studies, Ulica Talcev 3, 8000 Novo mesto, Slovenia 
idrizselimovic@yahoo.com 
Faculty of organization studies, Ulica talcev 3, 8000 Novo mesto, Slovenia 
Abstract: 
Research question: Does the base of lean production include principles and factors of Taylor's 
scientific management? 
Purpose: The purpose of our research was to establish the value of overlap of the principles and 
factors of lean organization with basic principles and factors of scientific management. 
Method: We used an integrative review of technical literature of the last 20 years (from 2000 to 
2020) in which the principles and factors of scientific management and lean production were 
described.  
Results: The principles and factors of lean production predominantly contain principles and factors 
of scientific management (53 % of analysed contributions support the finding that the principles of 
lean production include principles and factors of scientific management, 29 % partly support this 
and 18% do not). 
Organization: Our conclusions will help the owners and top managers in organizations with the 
decisions about the induction of principles and factors of lean production. 
Society: The conclusions of the research will have theoretical and practical implications for 
everyone who deal with induction of principles and factors of lean production from the aspect of 
society's sustainable development. 
Originality: The original research from the field of overlap of the principles and factors of lean 
production and scientific management in the Republic of Slovenia. 
Limitations/ further research: We conducted an integrative review of technical literature in three 
world bases. 
Keywords: factors, company, overlap, lean production, scientific management. 
1 Introduction 
Lean organization is a philosophy and a concept of management based on waste and resource 
reduction which are used in the production process (the manufacture of products and 
performance of services (Parkes, 2016, p. 118). Chiarini (2013, p. 15) finds that the main 
concept not only lean organisation, but every system of legal excellence in general is based on, 
must be a perfect removal of losses from the business process. Kumar, Kumar & Sultan (2014, 
p. 2613) claim that it is not an easy task, as the mastery of production planning and performance
mirko.markic@guest.arnes.si 
University of Primorska, Faculty of Management, Cankarjeva 5, 6000 Koper, Slovenia
Mirko Markič
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
235 
is a complicated activity, which is affected by many variables. They differ according to the 
activities in which the organisation functions. Due to these findings, the predominant classical 
managing production paradigm should increasingly redirect to lean production.  
In our research we will compare the principles and factors of lean production with the classical 
managing organisation paradigm theory. With classical organisation theory we will limit 
ourselves to F.W. Taylor and his fundamental principles and factors of scientific management. 
Taylor's division of work, choices, training, teaching and development of the employees, 
cooperation among the employees and the responsibility for decision making about how the 
work should be done should also be strongly present in the era of information- communication 
society. The difference is only in the fact that manual worker was replaced by scientific worker 
and that Taylorism transformed into turbo-Taylorism (Ambrož & Ovsenik, 2010, p. 105). On 
the other hand, some authors are expressing a considerable measure of scepticism regarding the 
success of the principles of lean production. Kutin (2019, December) finds out that we 
constantly listen about the demand of lean production, lean administration and lean 
whatdoIknowwhat. We would be repeating something that is a synonym for Toyota Production 
System and rarely would we ask ourselves about its content. Hines, Taylor & Walsh (2018, p. 
16) cite that we might wrongly understand the traditional lean approach, which should be based
on practices, principles, processes, tools and techniques for waste reduction. Because of this, 
thinking about lean organisation from the aspect of its contents through the paradigm of 
scientific management principles is an intellectually exciting and socially responsible business. 
Based on the previous conclusions, we asked our fundamental scientific question, which goes 
like this: Do principles and factors of lean production overlap with principles and factors of 
Taylor's scientific management? We will conclude the study of principles and factors of lean 
production with paradigms of Taylor's scientific management with a final thought about the 
overlap of both principles. We assume that the majority of the principles and factors of lean 
production are already included in Taylor's scientific management.  For this purpose, we 
researched the technical literature and main authors from the field of lean production and 
scientific management. We assume that Taylor's principles sufficiently captured the work 
organisation in companies and throughout the history various authors assigned different 
terminology to these principles in order to adjust them more to the current reality. All this 
resulted in the emergence of concept of lean production. In the article, we were not dealing with 
the concepts which emerged between Taylor's scientific management and lean production. We 
assumed that these concepts were already described within scientific management and lean 
production and that they will be included in the research of overlap of these two concepts as 
such. The purpose of our research was to find out the level of overlap between lean production 
principles and factors and fundamental principles and factors of scientific management which 
were designed by F.W. Taylor in 1911. 
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
236 
2 Theoretical starting points 
2.1 Principles and factors of scientific management 
Taylor's scientific management, which prevailed as a major form of work organisation in 
companies and other institutions in the last century, should leave the leading position to other, 
more contemporary organisation paradigms. New forms of organisation are emerging in the 
21st century, such as TPS (Toyota Production System), Lean Organisation, Lean Production, 
Six Sigma and so on. With simple comparison of the contents of scientific management and 
new forms of organisation, we can see that they have at least two contents in common. Firstly, 
they had instructors for the induction of their principles and factors into the organisations and 
secondly, all the organisation approaches according to Taylor followed and took advantage of 
the achievements of scientific management. 
Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson (2011, p. 8) find out that the principles and factors of scientific 
management contributed to management practices in the 20th century, including the 
specialization of tasks, production practices, analysis and formation of work places, support 
schemes, person's adaptation to work and production quotas and surveillance. Taylor's 
principles and factors should cause the following: the emergence and establishment of the study 
of time and movement, the standardization of work processes and equipment and the 
improvement of management communication systems (Charron, Harrington, Voehl & Wiggin, 
2015, p. 38). 
Kulesza, Weaver & Friedman (2011, p. 20) write that the principles and factors of scientific 
management remain a lasting contribution to the development of science and profession of 
manager. Taylor's principles and factors of scientific management are a good starting point for 
further search for effective organisation controlling. Taylor's book about scientific management 
was also a base for Drucker's concept of Management by Objectives (Short 2011, p. 44). At the 
core of Taylor's scientific management - his mechanism as he called it himself - in which the 
workers are mainly active as objects which are run by rudimentary motives, is the performance 
of precisely created recurring tasks. Taylor also highlighted that around the mechanism there 
had to be an atmosphere of friendship, honesty and cooperation (Derksen, 2014, p. 164). 
In the formation of principles and factors of scientific management, Taylor originated from the 
assumption that the problem of poor efficiency of workers and low wages could have been 
solved for the collective good of both workers and owners. He would achieve this with four 
different principles, Taylor (1967. p. 190): 
 A scientific study of each movement (including the process, operation and so on.) of
work, which replaces the old rule-of-thumb method.
 Systematic selection, training, education and development of every workman
individually.
 Honest cooperation between workers in order to ensure that the work can be done in the
best possible way.
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
237 
 Managers should carry the responsibility of deciding about how the work should be
done, while the workmen carry the responsibility of getting the work done.
His main assumption was that for a certain amount of work there is only one best way to perform 
it. Ott in Shafritz (2001, p. 31) say that the organisations assumed that these methods existed 
and should have been discovered with careful scientific research and analyses. The principles 
and factors of scientific management were later taken over by Ford and he improved them with 
the introduction of the assembly line. The introduction of tayloristically-scientific work 
organisation in automotive industry and its fusion with Fordism should represent the most 
progressive form of capitalistic rationalisation of work process in the 20th century. It was not 
until the end of the 1960s and the beginning of the 1970s that this productive model – now 
structurally endangered - started to show signs of exhaustion (Budgen, Edwards, Linden & 
Thomas 2013, p. 23).  
2.2 Principles and factors of lean production 
Krafcik was the first one to use the term lean in context which it has today in Sloam 
Management Review magazine in the article Triumph of Lean Production Systems (Holland, 
2019, December). In the late 1980s, James Womack, the founder of Lean Enterprise Institute 
and the author of Lean Thinking and The Machine that Changed the World, significantly 
contributed to the further popularisation and final enforcement of the term lean production, 
from which the term lean organisation later developed. He was the leader of a research group, 
which created the term lean organisation in order to describe the Toyota concept. Womack, 
Jones & Roos state that lean production is lean because it consumes less in comparison to mass 
production: less human effort, less production space, less investments into tools, less engineers' 
working hours for the development of new product and so on (Womack, Jones & Roos, 1990, 
p. 13).
The vital fields which lean organisations cope with are how to please their customers and how 
to abolish all the losses in the production process. The responsibility for the achievement of 
excellent results in these two main areas rearranges itself and starts from the bottom up. 
Unterlechner, Meško Štok in Markič (2009, p. 144) define that a messy workspace and habitual 
inefficiency are the two main reasons for the emergence of waste in modern production 
processes. Both reasons for waste are most often the main point of kaizen workshops with which 
these wastes are abolished. Wittrock (2015, p. 95) claims that the main principles of being lean 
are the components of Japanese culture and that because of this finding the transportation of 
principles of lean production to other cultures is not easy. Schmidt (2011, p. 83) attaches to this 
saying that the understanding of principles of lean production and not accepting methods and 
principles is vital in the introduction of principles of lean production into organisation. In the 
following step it is crucial to evaluate which parts can be accepted and adapted to the 
circumstances and most importantly, what could be improved. In the literature, five principles 
of lean organisation are listed, Bateman, Esain, Massey, Rich, & Samuel (2006, p. 16-17): the 
definition of value from the customer's point of view, map the value stream and eliminate all 
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
238 
the waste from this stream, create the flow of materials and information without any 
distractions, Pull production system- producing only what the customer needs and seeking the 
perfection. The organisations use several tools for the induction of principles of lean 
organisation and functioning according to them. We will list only some of them: 
 5S is one of the most common lean manufacturing tools which are recommended by the
experts for usage. The purpose of 5S is the organisation and management by avoiding all
the waste and loss which originate from a disorganised work environment. The basic aim
of 5S is to establish a higher level of culture and efficiency at the workplace. It consists of
5 phases: sort (Seiri), set in order (Seiton), shine (Seiso), standardize (Seiketsu) and sustain
(Shitusuke). Charron, Harrington, Voehl, in Wiggin (2015, p. 255), Chiarini (2013, p. 83)
and Nicholas (2018, p. 88) describe 5S as a method which ensures the establishment and
maintenance of cleanliness of workspace and also enables the productivity growth,
improving the quality, security and induction of fundamental principles of visual control.
 Kaizien is a system of constant process improvements which we reach with simple steps. It
is preformed constantly. It means adding the value and lowering waste in the whole flow of
value. Chiarini (2013, p. 64) describes the activities of kaizen workshop as group activities
which strive for quick reduction of waste in a specific field. The pace of activity is the main
factor which decorates the kaizen workshop and it is its key to success.
 OEE Overall Equipment Effectiveness is a lean tool which is reasonably used in half- 
atomised and atomised work processes. Charron, Harrington, Voehl, in Wiggin (2015, p.
260) say that with this tool we measure the equipment efficiency, its availability and quality.
 SMED Single Minute Exchange of Dies The changes of tools and settings of the machine
do not represent added value, so it is not necessary to lower them to the lowest measure
possible. The author of SMED method, Shingo (1985, p. XIX) says that it is impossible to
replace every tool under ten minutes, but it is still an aim of all the tool replacements. The
practice shows that it is possible to reach it in surprisingly many cases.
 Production levelling (Heijunka) is a technique for an equal loading of production, which is
performed with the help of quantitative methods like: moving average, single exponential
levelling and double and triple levelling.
The authors warn that carefulness is required with lean tool selection. Thus, Marksberry
(2013, p. 1) says that the selection of lean tools is a dangerous doing and he compares the
co-dependence of organisations with gardening. As it is impossible to successfully
transplant a plant if the soil and environment are not the same, the transplantations of the
tools from one company to the other is not possible if the two companies do not have the
same culture, are not of the same size, are in different sectors and so on. Lewandowski (2014,
p. 2, 32) warns about the finding that every company has its own organisation culture. It is
important to consider this with the selection of a suitable tool for a certain organisation. The 
tool should be suited for the culture of the organisation and the collection of products or 
services. Some tools are universal and the others not so much. But with all this, the experts 
for lean production do not advise any expectations about the results being quick. 
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
239 
2.3 Overlap of lean production and scientific management 
In the article, we derive from the assumption that there is a predominant overlap of principles 
and factors of lean production and principles and factors of Taylor's scientific management. 
Charron, Harrington, Voehl & Wiggin (2015, p. 66) see this while treating lean production as 
a more improved version of endeavours for higher production which should be based on other 
authors such as Taylor or Ford. Their false assumptions are eliminated. The comparison of 
overlap of Taylor's scientific management and lean production is impossible when comparing 
Taylor's original work Scientific Management and for instance Liker's The Toyota Way. With 
every single Toyota's principle and factor we would establish a suitable principle and factor 
from Taylor's Scientific Management. It should be necessary to interpret him in terms of what 
would Taylor change in every single principle and factor of his, if he knew what for example 
Taiichi, Ohno, Liker, Womack and others did. We could also turn the comparison upside down 
and, for example, for each of Taylor's principles and factors of scientific management establish 
which Toyota principles and factors he influenced or devised. Thus, Evangelopoulos (2011, p. 
71) represents the pyramid of discourse about Taylorism. The author represents an intellectual
area of practices, ideas and philosophies, which were launched by Taylor and indicates that 
Taylor's initial work from 1911 is still very important. Rawlinson in Wells (1996, p. 194-195) 
say that Shingo was a devoted follower of Taylor's work and usage of principles in the industrial 
engineering at Toyota, which greatly impacted Shingo's way of thinking and the production 
organisation. Likert (2004, p. 158) lists an example of a joint factory, built in California by 
Toyota and General Motors, where the workmen follow very detailed standardized procedures, 
but there are many group leaders and a clearly set up hierarchy. Time, expenses, quality and 
security were planned in detail. In NUMMI (acronym for Toyota and General Motors joint 
company) they had prevailing characteristics of bureaucratic and mechanic organisation which 
overlaps with endeavours of Taylor's scientific management. Tang (2017, p. 119) also gave an 
indirect connection between principles and factors of lean production in Taylor's scientific 
management. Tang (ibid, p. 119) explained every single Taylor's principle and factors of 
scientific management from the point of view of modern organisation bases. The first principle 
should be used with the measuring of knowledge production (Jones & Womack 2003). Total 
Quality Management (TQM) should be applied in the selection of co-workers in the postmodern 
era (Daniel, 1995). The scientific co-worker selection should be based on co-workers' flexibility 
to perform a different kind of work (polyvalence) and not preforming only one task. The usage 
of principles and factors of education and development of workmen would mean an integration 
of employees into decision-making. The principle and factors should develop for the 
authorization of the co-workers and the domination over them (Clegg, 1990). The fourth 
principle and factors should exist in team work in postmodern organisations. Ribeiro (2015, p. 
77) talks about the synthesis of Taylorism, Fordism and Toyotism.
2.4 Principles and factors of scientific management in lean production 
 5S – (Seiri- sort, Seiton- set in order, Seiso- shine, Seiketsu- standardize, Shitsuke- sustain)
Principle and factors of lean production for an organized workspace
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
240 
In his work, Shop Management, Taylor (1967, p. 83) recommends that every worker keeps 
his machine clean and oiled. A written document which the workers signed (in order to 
confirm the performance of machine examination on a particular day because the majority 
of the workers were illiterate) probably did not follow Taylor's recommendations about the 
maintenance of machine cleanliness. 
 Total Productive Management (TPM) a tool for the boost of machine efficiency and total
maintenance management and Single minute exchange of dies (SMED), a tool for the
reduction of tool change times.
Taylor (1967, p. 227-228) also tested the capability of the machines in industrial plants. The
evolution of the skills and science of cutting metal lasted for 26 years with occasional
breaks. Between 30 000 and 50 000 experiments were performed altogether. We can
recognize the SMED method in Taylor's description of the change of drive belt. The experts
tackled with measurement of time for individual phases of production process.
 The analysis of value stream
Taylor (1967, p. 94) explains the function of planning department in scientific management
as crucial for a sequence of operations. In the case of a well-planned flowchart, an even
process is guaranteed. It is necessary to create a perfect analysis of the sequence of
operations, which will be conducted on individual pieces (determine the exact stream
through the process, which must be passed over every single part of the machine). Taylor
(1967, p. 243) also mentions the system of determining the movement of products through
the production, which is comparable to the following of the stream of value formation.
 Standardized work
Standardized work is one of the principles and factors of lean organisation which
completely overlaps with principles and factors of Taylor's scientific management.
Corbacioglu (2017. p. 81) says that the connection between productivity and the way in
which workers complete a certain task is evident from the case of worker Schmidt. The
managers need to find the best method for every task with the help of researchers and make
sure that the task for every kind of work is done properly.
 Kaizen, the continual improvement process
The continual development and improvement were some of the components of factors in
Taylor's scientific management. Taylor (1967, p. 242) suggests the worker should be
stimulated in order to suggest any improvements, regardless of whether it is an improvement
on the tools or the process. Managers should closely analyse the suggestion and conduct a
series of experiments in order to get to know its value. If the new suggestion is better than
the old one, it should be introduced as a standard into the organisation unity as a whole. The
workers which hand over such a suggestion for improvement are entitled to a money prize
and a recognition award for endeavours.
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
241 
 Visual management
Visualisation of results of the process is an important principle and factor with which we
signal the employees how well their job is being done. In lean organisation we choose a
certain collection of KPIs (Key Performance Indexes) and visualize them so they are
accessible and visible to all the employees. Taylor (1967, p. 289-290) explains visualisation
management with the help of two sheets of paper in different colours (white or yellow). In
case that both sheets were white, the worker knew that everything was alright. If one of
them was yellow, it meant that his results from the previous day were not satisfying. The
worker knew that the supervisor would visit him if he had found yellow sheets in his closet
for three days in a row. In the previous chapter we presented the basic theoretical principles
and factors of scientific management, principles and factors of lean production and overlap
of lean production and scientific management and principles and factors of scientific
management in lean production. The aim of our research was to establish the value of
overlap of the principles and factors in lean production and basic principles and factors in
scientific management.
3 Method 
In the empiric part of the research the author of this article used an integrative overview of 
literature from academic databases from the field of lean production and Taylor's scientific 
management. On the integrative examination of the literature the author of this article based a 
research question which has not yet been asked, but it offers a new perspective over the already 
known problem, Torraco (2016, p. 19). The author of this article formed hypothesis H1 based 
on the previous theoretical conclusions H1: The overlap between lean production and Taylor's 
scientific management is more than 50 %. The author of this article included technical literature 
in searching which referred to production organisations (production and service organisations) 
and chose technical literature which included descriptions of principles and factors of Taylor's 
scientific management and lean production. Starting choice of the classics from the field of 
scientific management (Taylor, 1967) and lean production (Liker, 2004 & Womack, 2003) was 
crucial for the better depiction of both designs and other authors in the last 20 years (the period 
between 2000 and 2019). A graphical representation of our research is shown Figure 1. 
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
242 
Figure 1. Research model 
The technical literature the author of this article used was chosen after the examination of the 
bases of scientific articles in Wiley Library (onlinelibrary.wiley.com), web browser Google 
Scholar (scholar.google.si) and tool browser for citation editing Mendeley desktop 
(www.mendeley.com). Key words which the author of this article used in the search for material 
were: fact fiction frederick w taylor, lean manufacturing implementation, frederick w taylor 
myth and reality, taylor lean manufacturing and frederick  taylor, which are represented in table 
1.  
Table 1. Results of the literature review by keywords 
Data base Key words Number of 
results 
Selected results 
Mendeley deskotop 
fact fiction frederick w taylor 78 1 
lean manufacturing implementation 3.316 3 
frederick w taylor myth and reality 1.748 2 
Google scholar 
fact fiction frederick w taylor 1.010 6 
lean manufacturing implementation 3.930 19 
frederick w taylor myth and reality 3.380 17 
Wiley  library 
taylor lean manufacturing 2.956 1 
lean manufacturing implementation 3.389 5 
frederick  taylor 772 3 
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
243 
For the decision about whether to include or exclude the results in further processing, the author 
of this article took into consideration the content adjustment to our research question: Does the 
base of lean production include principles and factors of Taylor's scientific management? In the 
research, the author of this article included articles which either compared scientific 
management and lean production or described the principles of scientific management and lean 
production in detail. The process of reduction of studied material is shown in Figure 2. Firstly, 
the author of this article evaluated whether the results (there was 20 759 of them) covered the 
field we were researching, based on their titles. The author of this article chose 321 titles whose 
abstracts we read and decided whether to keep or discard the article. Based on the content of 
matching the abstracts we limited ourselves to a closer overlook of 58 bibliographic units and 
49 of them were included when looking for an answer to our research question. 
Figure 2. The process of reduction of studied material 
Total number of 
results in databases 
n = 20.759 
Identificati
on of 
results 
Narrowing 
the 
selection 
according 
to the title
Mendeley n = 5.142 
Google scholar 
n=8.323
Wiley library 
n=7.117 
Total number of 
titles selected 
n=321 
Mendeley n=97 
Google scholar 
n=122 
Wiley library n=102 
Narrowing 
the 
selection 
according to 
the abstract 
Total number of 
titles selected 
n=58 
Mendeley n=10 
Google scholar 
n=35 
Wiley library n=13 
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
244 
4 Results 
In table 2 we listed the literature and authors the author of this article used when searching for 
an answer to our research question: Does the base of lean production include principles and 
factors of Taylor's scientific management? The author of this article showed our estimation of 
author of the analysed publication based on our scientific question. In the second column of the 
table there are names of authors, in the third there is a title of the work we analysed and in the 
fourth the evaluation of author's attitude towards our research question (true, partly true, not 
true). In the end, we created a graph and figure which show how our evaluations are arranged 
(Table 2.), (Figures 2.). The analysed article was marked with grade true if the author lists that 
the principles and factors of lean production originate from scientific management. With grade 
partly true we marked the articles where author's point of view about the principles and factors 
of lean production overlapping the ones of scientific management is not entirely clear. The 
grade not true was given to all the articles where authors do not mention the influence of 
scientific management when describing the history of lean production.  
Table 2. The evaluations of the attitude of authors of analysed publications according to our scientific question, 
whether the concept of lean production includes the principles of scientific management. 
Ord N.  Autor Publication 
Does the base of lean 
production include 
principles and factors of 
Taylor's scientific 
management? 
1  Adams, D.E., Smith, T., & 
Urick, M.J,(2017) 
Taylorism and Operational Excellence Improving on 
the "One Best Way" True 
2 Hines P., Holweg M., & Rich N. 
(2004) 
Learning to evolve A review of contemporary lean 
thinking Partly true 
3 
Pruijt H. (2003) Teams between Neo-Taylorism and Anti-Taylorism True 
4 
Hop W. J. (2018) 
Positive lean: merging the science of efficiency with 
the psychology of work Partly true 
5 
 Vijai, J. P., Somayaji, G. S. R., 
Swamy, R. J. R., & Aital, P. 
(2017) 
Relevance of F.W. Taylor’s principles to modern 
shop-floor practices: a benchmarking work study  True 
6 
 Mtar, K., & Smondel, A.(2019) 
JIT inventory control and manufacturing SME 
performance Not true 
7 
Lubnina, A. A., & all (2018) 
Innovative strategy for improving the 
efficiency of industrial enterprises 
management True 
8 
Palla, A. K., & Billy, I. (2018) 
Scientific management: its inapplicability to 
contemporary management challenges Not true 
9 
Wilson, J.(2018) 
Deconstructing the reinvention of operations 
management True 
10 
Tsukamoto, W. S. (2007) 
An Institutional Economic Reconstruction of Scientific 
Management: On the Lost Theoretical 
Logic of Taylorism True 
11 
Corbacioglu, S.(2017) 
Influence of Taylorism on Deming’S Quality 
Management True 
12 
Turan, H. (2015) 
Taylor’s “Scientific Management Principles”: 
Contemporary Issues in Personnel Selection Period Not true 
13 
Kemp, L. J. (2013) 
Modern to postmodern management: developments in 
scientific management True 
»to be continued« 
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
 
245 
14 
Derksen, M. (2014) 
Turning men into machines? scientific management, 
industrial psychology, and the “human factor” True 
15 Rask, K 
Johansson, J. (2008) 
Similarities and Differences between Lean Production, 
Tayloristic and Socio-Technical Systems Revealed in 
the Methodology Characteristics Map Partly true 
16 
Emiliani, M.L. (2006) Origins of lean management in America True 
17 
Evangelopoulos, N. (2011) 
Citing Taylor:Tracing Taylorism’s Technical and 
Sociotechnical Duality through Latent Semantic 
Analysis True 
18 
Paxton J. (2011) 
Taylor’s Unsung Contribution: Making 
Interchangeable Parts Practical True 
19 Giannantonio, C.M., & Hurley-
Hanson, A.E. (2011) 
Frederick Winslow Taylor: Reflections on the 
Relevance of The Principles of Scientific Management 
100 Years Later True 
20 
Handel, M. (2014) 
Theories of lean management: An empirical 
evaluation. Not true 
21 
Hernaus, T. (2017) Teorija organizacije Partly true 
22 
Wren,D. A. (2011) 
The Centennial of Frederick W. Taylor’s The 
Principles of Scientific Management: A Retrospective 
Commentary Partly true 
23 Kulesza, M.G., Weaver, P.Q., & 
Friedman, S. (2011) 
Frederick W. Taylor's presence in 21st century 
management accounting systems and work process 
theories True 
24 
Kutin, M. (2019) Vitka organizacija in kriza ali cesarjeva nova oblačila True 
25 
Melton, T. (2005) 
The Benefits of Lean Manufacturing 
What Lean Thinking has to Offer the Process 
Industries Not true 
26 
Liker, J. (2004) 
The Toyota Way - 14 management principles the 
world's greatest manufacturer Partly true 
27 
Parks, Charles M. (2003) 
The bare necessities of lean: 10 things your lean guru 
may not tell you about making just-in-time work. Partly true 
28 Iuga, M., V., & Kifor, Claudiu, 
V., (2013) Lean manufacturing: the when, the where, the who True 
29 
Balle, F., & Balle, M. (2020) Lean nor Sigma True 
30 Nepal, P.B.,Yadav, O.P.,  
Rahaman, M., & Lal, V. (2017) 
Lean Implementation and Organizational 
Transformation Not true 
31 
Brennan, L. L (2011) The Scientific Management of Information Overload Partly true 
32 
Ohno T. (1988) Workplace Management Partly true 
33 
Parkes, A. (2016) Lean Management Genesis Partly true 
34 
Pech, M., & Vaneček, D. (2018) 
Methods of Lean Production to Improve Quality in 
Manufacturing True 
35 Stentoft Arlbjørn, J., & Vagn 
Freytag, P. (2013) 
Evidence of lean: a review of international peer‐
reviewed journal articles True 
36 Johansson, J., & Abrahamsson, 
L. (2009) 
The good work – A Swedish trade union vision in the 
shadow of lean production True 
37 
Ribeiro, A.F. (2015) Taylorismo, fordismo e toyotismo Partly true 
38 
Smith, S. (2014) Muda, Muri and Mura True 
»to be continued« 
»continued« 
to be continuedto be
con«
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
246 
39 
Teehan, R., & Tucker, W. (2010) A simplified lean method to capture customer voice. Not true 
40 
Short, J.C. (2011) 
The Debate Goes On! A Graphic Portrayal Of The 
Sinclair-Taylor Editorial Dialogue True 
41 Karim, A., & Arif‐Uz‐Zaman, K. 
(2013) 
A methodology for effective implementation of lean 
strategies and its performance evaluation in 
manufacturing organizations True 
42 
Tang, H. (2017) The Implications of Taylorism… True 
43 
Howison, J. D. (2009) 
A Tough “Cell”: Implementing Lean Production at 
Toledo Jeep Partly true 
44 Koskela, L. J., Sacks, R., & 
Rooke, J. A. (2020) A brief history of the concept of waste in production. Partly true 
45 Hummels, H., & de Leede, J. 
(2000) 
Teamwork and Morality: 
Comparing Lean Production 
and Sociotechnology Not true 
46 Womack J.P., & Jones, D.T 
(2003) Lean thinking Partly true 
47 
Wittrock, C. (2015) 
Reembedding Lean: The Japanese Cultural and 
Religious Context of a World Changing Management 
Concept Not true 
48 
Zuffo, R.G. (2011) 
Taylor is Dead, Hurray Taylor!The “Human Factor” in 
Scientific Management: Between Ethics, True 
49 
Smith, C., & Vidal, M. (2019) 
The lean labour process: Global diffusion, societal 
effects, contradictory implementation True 
Figure 2.  The results of the research about the integration of scientific management into the concept of 
lean production 
5 Discussion 
When analysing the articles, we included in the research we were seeking an answer to the 
research question: Does the foundation of lean production include principles of scientific 
management? We got an answer by individually evaluating authors' attitudes towards our 
research question. We concluded that 26 of the authors confirmed that the principles of lean 
production do include the principles of scientific management, 14 of them partly support this 
and 9 of them do not agree. The majority of the authors we analysed find out that the 
14
26
9
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Partly true .True Not true
N
u
m
b
er
 o
f 
cl
ai
m
s
Claims
»continued« 
to be continuedto be
con«
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
247 
contribution of scientific management to the development of organisational science is 
enormous. The differences among the authors occur in the following questions: 
 How big the historical contribution of scientific management to the organisation science
actually is?
 Various authors interpret Taylor's principles of scientific management differently; from
the inhumane treatment of workers to being the pioneer of humane relationship towards
the employees (Derksen, Tang).
 Some authors claim that lean organisation has roots in scientific management and that
there are similarities between them, whereas others strongly deny this (Ott & Shafritz,
Budgen, Edwards, Linden & Thomas, Charron, Harrington, Voehl & Wiggin,
Corbacioglu).
 Taylor is not credited for his scientific approach (there is no science in observing worker
Schmidt shifting iron with a spade), but others greatly appreciate his approach
(Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson, Kulesza, Weaver & Friedman, Short, Charron,
Harrington, Voehl & Wiggin, Rawlinson in Wells).
 Taylor's impact on the modern organisation; in individual environments and other
institutions Taylor' way of managing the organisations prevails, while others speak
about the extinction of his methods (Evangelopoulos, Liker, Ribeiro).
 Based on the analysed articles we confirmed hypothesis H1: The overlap between lean
production and Taylor's scientific management is more than 50 %. From the table it is
evident that the overlap between lean production and Taylor's scientific management is
53 %. We did not come across any author specially searching for an answer to the
question Does the foundation of lean production include the principles and factors of
Taylor's scientific management? or this kind of question being partly or without further
explanation debated as a part of the discussion of some other issue. We would like to
point out the big differences between the times when Taylor's scientific management
was in making and times when the concept of lean production was in development. The
social conditions were different and the law did not protect the worker as it does today,
the majority of the employees were illiterate, the production workers knew the work
process better that the managers, the market was not demanding and there was a lack of
goods in general. Our opinion is that Taylor would also have his own concept of
scientific management equal to what we call today the concept of lean production, if we
assume that the conditions he lived in resembled the ones we have today. The difference
would be merely in the naming of the tools and methods. Some lean tools like pull
system were useless in Taylor's times, as the market was predominated by shortage. The
introduction of pull system would be a pure lean production waste in Taylor's times and
without any added value. Similar is in force today, the foundation of lean production
inside its concept should not include anything what does not bring an added value. It
does not include what could turn out to be very useful in for example 2050.
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future,  Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
 
248 
6 Conclusion 
The main aim of our research was to establish the stage of overlap of the principles of lean 
production and the principles of scientific management which were conceived by F. W. Taylor 
in 1911. In the empirical part of the research we used an integrative overlook of technical 
literature from the field of lean production and Taylor's scientific management. The technical 
literature that we used was chosen after the examination of bases of scientific articles in Wiley 
library (onlinelibrary.wiley.com), online browser Google Scholar (scholar.google.si) and tool 
browser for citation editing Mendeley desktop (www.mendeley.com). Among 20759 results we 
chose 321 titles, read their abstracts and decided whether to keep or discard the article. 
According to the content of the abstract we limited the examination to a closer overlook of 58 
bibliographic units and 49 of them were later included in answering to our research question.  
We concluded that the principles and factors of lean production prevailingly include the 
principles and factors of scientific management (53 % of the analysed articles support the 
finding that the principles and factors of lean production include the principles and factors of 
scientific management, 29 % partly support it and 18 % do not support it at all). 
 
The contribution of findings from the articles to the management science and profession is 
theoretical, empirically-investigative and practical. In the theoretical part of the research, we 
gained and presented in one place new knowledge about the factors of lean production and 
scientific management which enable the creation of conceptual model and forming scientific 
question and hypotheses. In the empirical part of the research, we came to new knowledge about 
the level of overlap of principles and factors of lean production and basic principles and factors 
of scientific management with the help of the analysis of the articles. The overlap of principles 
and factors of lean production and principles and factors of scientific management is more than 
50 %. The overlap of the principles and factors of lean production with the principles and factors 
of scientific management will also have practical implications for the economic companies in 
the Republic of Slovenia and beyond. Our findings will help the owners and top managers with 
the decisions regarding the principles and factors of lean production. 
 
While conducting the research we faced individual assumptions and restrictions. We originated 
from the assumption that in domestic and foreign researches about the overlap of principles and 
factors of lean production and basic principles and factors of scientific management so far, the 
study with such point of view has not yet been conducted. We assumed that the function of 
production is among the fundamental functions in every company and institution and is mostly 
inconsistent with other fundamental functions like marketing or financing. The research was 
limited to the selection of publicly accessible bases of scientific articles: Wiley Library, Google 
Scholar and using Mendeley desktop. In the analysis of the overlap of the principles and factors 
of lean production and the principles and factors of scientific management we did not study the 
impact of the overlap of these principles and the key performance indicators of production 
processes like for example OEE, 5S, TPM, A3 and so on. 
 
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future,  Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
 
249 
The research from the field of overlap of the principles and factors of lean production and the 
fundamental principles and factors of scientific management have not been conducted yet in 
the Republic of Slovenia, so our results cannot be compared to any similar or comparable one. 
The results we got from the integrative examination of the technical literature could be a good 
base for a possible further research from various aspects, theoretical as well as methodological. 
Further research could be conducted by examining the technical literature and other publicly 
accessible scientific articles like for example JStor, Emerald, Ebsco, Proquest, Springer and so 
on. Further on, the research could be substantively continued in the course of establishing the 
impact of factors of lean production and scientific management on individual or composite 
indicators of successfulness of the (business, technological or comprehensive) organisation. 
 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 
The article was written as part of project no. P5-0049, co-financed from the state budget by 
Slovenian Research Agency. 
 
 
References 
1. Adams, D. E., Smith T. & Urick M. J. (2017). Taylorism and Operational Excellence Improving 
on the "One Best Way". Journal of Leadership and Management, 9(10), 7-21.  
2. Ambrož, M., & Ovsenik, M. (2010) Celovitost in neznatnost organizacije. Ljubljana: Inštitut za 
management. 
3. Balle, F., & Balle, M. (Pridobljeno 19.04.2020.) Lean nor Sigma. 
https://www.lean.org/Downloads/leanorsigma.pdf 
4. Bateman, N., Esain, A., Massey, L., Rich, N., & Samuel. D. (2006). Lean Evolution:Lessons from 
the Workplace. New York: Cambridge Univesitiy Press.  
5. Brennan, L.L. (2011). The Scientific Management of Information Overload. Journal of Business 
and Management, 17(1), 121-134. 
6. Budgen, S., Edwards, S., Linden, M., & Thomas, P. (2013). Exploring the role of lean thinking in 
sustainable business practice: A systematic literature review. Historical Materialism Book Series. 
Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV 
7. Charron, R., Harrington, H. J., Voehl, F., & Wiggin, H. (2015). The lean management systems 
handbook. Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis Group. 
8. Chiarini, A. (2013). Lean Organization: from the Tools of the Toyota Production System to Lean 
Office. Milan: Springer. 
9. Corbacioglu, S. (2017). Influence of Taylorism on Deming’S Quality Management. Sarajevo 
Journal of Social Sciences Inquiry, 2(2), 77-78. doi: 10.21533/isjss.v2i2.85 
10. Emiliani, M.L. (2006). Origins of lean management in America. Journal of Management History, 
12(2), 167-184. doi: 10.1108/13552520610654069. 
11. Evangelopoulos, N. (2011). Citing Taylor: Tracing Taylorism’s Technical and Sociotechnical 
Duality through Latent Semantic Analysis. Journal of Business & Management, 17(1), 57-72. 
12. Derksen, M. (2014).  Turning men into machines? scientific management, industrial psychology, 
and the “human factor”. Journal ofthe History ofthe Behavioral Sciences, 50(2), 148–165. doi: 
10.1002/jhbs 
13. Giannantonio, C. M. & Hurley-Hanson, A. E. (2011) Frederick Winslow Taylor: Reflections on 
the Relevance of The Principles of Scientific Management 100 Years Later. Journal of Business & 
Management, 17(1), 7-10. 
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future,  Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
 
250 
14. Handel, M. J. (2014). Theories of lean management: An empirical evaluation. Social Science 
Research, 44, 86–102. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.10.009 
15. Hernaus, T. (2017). Teorije organizacije. Organizacija 26, 27-66. 
16. Hines, P., Holweg, M., & Rich, N. (2004). Learning to evolve, International Journal of Operations 
& Production Management, 24(10),  994 – 1011. doi: 10.1108/00251749810239504 
17. Hines, P., Taylor, D., & Walsh, A. (2018). The Lean journey: have we got it wrong? Total Quality 
Management and Business Excellence, 0(0), 1-18. doi: 10.1080/14783363.2018.1429258 
18. Holland K. (2019, 05. december). “Lean” 25 Years Later. Pridobljeno na: https://www.lean-
news.com/lean-25-years-later/ 
19. Hop, J. W. (2018). Positive lean: merging the science of efficiency with the psychology of work. 
International Journal of Production Research, 56(1-2), 398-413.  
20. Howison, J. D. (2009). A Tough “Cell”: Implementing Lean Production at Toledo Jeep. Critical 
Sociology, 35(5), 689–696. doi:10.1177/0896920509337614 
21. Hummels, H., & de Leede, J. (2000). Teamwork and Morality: Comparing Lean Production and 
Sociotechnology. Journal of Business Ethics, 26(1), 75–88. doi:10.1023/a:1006242516664 
22. Google Scholar. https://scholar.google.com/ 
23. Iuga, M., V., & Kifor, Claudiu, V., (2013). Lean manufacturing: the when, the where, the who. 
Land Forces Academy Review, 18(4), 404-410. 
24. Johansson, J., & Abrahamsson, L. (2009). The good work – A Swedish trade union vision in the 
shadow of lean production. Applied Ergonomics, 40(4), 775–780. 
doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2008.08.001 
25. Jones, D. T., & Womack, J. P. (2003). Lean thinking: banish waste and create wealth your 
corporation. New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc.  
26. Karim, A., & Arif‐Uz‐Zaman, K. (2013). A methodology for effective implementation of lean 
strategies and its performance evaluation in manufacturing organizations. Business Process 
Management Journal, 19(1), 169–196. doi:10.1108/14637151311294912 
27. Kemp, L. J. (2013). Modern to postmodern management: developments in scientific management. 
Journal of Management History, 19(3), 345–361. doi:10.1108/jmh-02-2011-0005 
28. Koskela, L. J., Sacks, R., & Rooke, J. A. (pridobljeno 19.04.2020.) A brief history of the concept 
of waste in production. Pridobljeno na: http://usir.salford.ac.uk/23082/ 
29. Kulesza, M. G., Weaver, P., & Friedman, S. (2011). Frederick W. Taylor's presence in 21st 
century management accounting systems and work process theories. Journal of Business & 
Management, 17(1) 105-119. 
30. Kumar, R., Kumar, V., & Singh, S. (2014). Effect of Lean Principles on organizational efficiency. 
Applied Mechanics and Materials, 592, 2613-2618. doi: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.592-
594.2613 
31. Kutin, M. (2019, 12. december). Vitka organizacija in kriza ali cesarjeva nova oblačila. 
Pridobljeno na:  https://www.razgledi.net 
32. Liker, J. K. (2004). The Toyota way. New york: McGraw-Hill.  
33. Lewandowski, R. G. (2014). Beyond Lean Production; Emphasizing Speed and Innovation to 
Beath the Competition. Boca Ration, NW: Taylor & Francis Group 
34. Lubnina, A. A., Shinkevich, M. V., Ekaterina, N. Yalunina, E. N., Gaidamashko, I. V., Savderova, 
A. F., & Komissarova, M. A. (2018). Innovative strategy for improving the efficiency of industrial 
enterprises management. Revista espacios, 39(09), 1-25.  
35. Marksberry P. (2013). The modern theory production system of the Toyota. Boca Ration, NW: 
Taylor & Francis Group 
36. Mendeley. www.mendeley.com 
37. Melton, T. (2005). The Benefits of Lean Manufacturing. Chemical Engineering Research and 
Design, 83(6), 662–673. doi:10.1205/cherd.04351 
38. Mtar, K., & Smondel, A. (2019). JIT inventory control and manufacturing SME performance. 
Human Systems Management, 38(3), 243–255. doi:10.3233/hsm-180413 
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future,  Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
 
251 
39. Nepal, P.B.,Yadav, O.P.,  Rahaman, M., & Lal, V. (2017). Lean Implementation and 
Organizational Transformation: A Literature Review. EMJ - Engineering Management Journal, 
19(1), 2-16. doi: 10.1080/10429247.2016.1263914. 
40. Ohno, T. (1988). Workplace Management. Cambridge: Productivity Press 
41. Ott, J. S., & Shafritz, J. M. (2001). Classical Organization Theory. Harcourt College Publishers,  
Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando. 
42. Parks, C. M. (2003). The bare necessities of lean: 10 things your lean guru may not tell you about 
making just-in-time work. Industrial Engineer, 35(8), 1-39. 
43. Paxton, J. (2011). Taylor’s Unsung Contribution: Making Interchangeable Parts Practical. Journal 
of Business and Management, 17(1): 75-83 
44. Palla, A. K., & Billy, I. (2018). Scientific management: its inapplicability to contemporary 
management challenges. The Business and Management Review, 9(3), 459-463 
45. Parkes, A. (2016). Lean Management Genesis. Management, 19(2), 106-121. doi: 
10.1515/manment-2015-0017. 
46. Pech, M., & Vaneček, D. (2018). Methods of Lean Production to Improve Quality in 
Manufacturing. Quality Innovation Prosperity, 22(2), 1-15. doi: 10.12776/qip.v22i2.1096 
47. Pruijt H. (2003). Teams between Neo-Taylorism and Anti-Taylorism. Economic and Industrial 
Democracy, 24(1), 77-101. 
48. Rask, K., & Johansson, J. (2008). between Lean Production, Tayloristic and Socio-Technical 
Systems Revealed in the Methodology Characteristics Map. Flexible Automation and Intelligent 
Manufacturing, 995-1001.  
49. Rawlinson, M., &  Wells, P. (1996). Taylorism, lean production and the automotive industry. Asia 
Pacific Business Review, 2(4), 37-41.  
50. Ribeiro, A.  F. (2015). Taylorismo, fordismo e toyotismo. (Taylorism, Fordism and Toyotism) 
Lutas Sociais, 19(35), 65-79. 
51. Schmidt, S. (2011). From Hype to Ignorance – A Review of 30 Years of Lean Production, 
International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic, Business and Industrial 
Engineering, (5)1, 82-85 
52. Shingo, S. (1985). A Revolution in Manufacturing: The SMED System. Boca Ration, NW: Taylor 
& Francis Group.  
53. Short, J. C. (2011). The Debate Goes On! A Graphic Portrayal Of The Sinclair-Taylor Editorial 
Dialogue. Journal of Business & Management, 17(1) 43-56. 
54. Smith, C., & Vidal, M. (2019). The lean labour process: Global diffusion, societal effects, 
contradictory implementation. Cambridge University Press. Pridobljeno: 
https://pure.royalholloway.ac.uk/portal/en/publications/the-lean-labour-process(8036a351-ff65-
4e1c-830f-8a7f0df44cbe).html 
55. Smith, S. (2014). Muda, Muri and Mura. ASQ Six Sigma Forum Magazine, 13(2), 36-37. 
56. Stentoft Arlbjørn, J., & Vagn Freytag, P. (2013). Evidence of lean: a review of international peer‐
reviewed journal articles. European Business Review, 25(2), 174–205. 
doi:10.1108/09555341311302675 
57. Taylor, F. W. (1967) Naučno upravljanje (Scientific Management). Beograd: Izdavačko preduzeće 
Rad.  
58. Taylor, F. W. (1967) Upravljanje pogonom (Shop management). Beograd: Izdavačko preduzeće 
Rad. 
59. Teehan, R., & Tucker, W. (2010). A simplified lean method to capture customer voice. 
International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 2(2), 175–188. 
doi:10.1108/17566691011057348 
60. Tsukamoto, W. S. (2007). An Institutional Economic Reconstruction of Scientifi Management: On 
the Lost Theoretical Logic of Taylorism. The Academy of Management Review, 32(1)105-117 
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future,  Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
 
252 
61. Tang, H. (2017). 4th International Conference on Education & Training, Management and 
Humanities Science 2018 (str. 119-122). Wuhan, China: Wuchang University of Technology, 
Wuhan, 
62. Turan, H. (2015). Taylor’s “Scientific Management Principles”: Contemporary Issues in Personnel 
Selection Period. Journal of Economics, Business and Management, 3(11), 1102-1105. doi: 
10.7763/joebm.2015.v3.342 
63. Wilson, J. M. (2018). Deconstructing the reinvention of operations management. Journal of 
Management History, 24(2), 128–155. doi:10.1108/jmh-06-2017-0028 
64. Wiley. www. onlinelibrary.wiley.com 
65. Wittrock, C. (2015). Reembedding Lean: The Japanese Cultural and Religious Context of a World 
Changing Management Concept, International Journal of Sociology, (45), 95–111. doi: 
10.1080/00207659.2015.1061852 
66. Womack, J. P., Jones, D., T., & Roos D. (1990). The Machine that changed the World. New York: 
Rawson Associates. 
67. Wren, D.A. (2011). The Centennial of Frederick W. Taylor’s The Principles of Scientific 
Management: A Retrospective Commentary. Journal of Business and Management, 17(1): 11-22 
68. Zuffo R. G. (2011). Taylor is Dead, Hurray Taylor! The “Human Factor” in Scientific 
Management: Between Ethics, Scientific Psychology and Common Sense. Journal of Business & 
Management 17(1) 23-37. 
69. Vijai, J. P., Somayaji, G. S. R., Swamy, R. J. R., & Aital, P. (2017). Relevance of F.W. Taylor’s 
principles to modern shop-floor practices. Benchmarking. International Journal, 24(2), 445–466. 
doi:10.1108/bij-02-2015-0019 
70. Torraco, R. J. (2016). Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Using the Past and Present to 
Explore the Future. Human Resource Development Review, 15(4), 404-428. doi: 
10.1177/1534484316671606 
71. Unterlechner, M., Meško Štok, Z., & Markič, M.(2009). Inoviranje, kakovost in Lean Six Sigma v 
proizvodnem procesu. Koper: Fakulteta za management. 
 
 
*** 
Idriz Selimović Idriz Selimović received a master's degree from the Faculty of Organisation Studies in Novo 
mesto in the field of modelling organisation changes. For thirty years, he has been working in economy on different 
assignments. He is employed in Rotis Ltd as an assistant to production director. 
 
*** 
Mirko Markič obtained a PhD from the Faculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Maribor in the field of 
organisation sciences on the topic of innovation. After twelve years of working in economy he got employed at 
the Faculty of Management, University of Primorska. He is a full professor in the field of management and 
scientific advisor and a leader or a member of 17 research projects and projects connected to economy. His 
bibliography includes more than 600 units from the fields of administrative and organisation sciences and public 
health (safety at work). 
*** 
 
Povzetek: 
Sovpadanje vitke proizvodnje in znanstvenega menedžmenta 
 
Raziskovalno vprašanje (RV): Ali zasnova vitkega proizvajanja vsebuje načela in dejavnike 
Taylorjevega znanstvenega menedžmenta? 
Namen: Namen naše raziskave je bil ugotoviti vrednost sovpadanja načel in dejavnikov vitkega 
proizvajanja s temeljnimi načeli in dejavniki znanstvenega menedžmenta.  
Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future,  Članek / Article 
November 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 4, str. / pp. 234-253. 
 
253 
Metoda: Uporabili smo integrativni pregled strokovne literature za preteklih 20 let (od 2000-2020) 
v kateri so bila opisana načela in dejavniki znanstvenega managementa in vitkega proizvajanja. 
Rezultati: Načela in dejavniki vitkega proizvajanja prevladujoče vsebujejo načela in dejavnike 
znanstvenega menedžmenta (53 % analiziranih prispevkov podpira spoznanje, da načela in dejavniki 
vitkega proizvajanja vsebujejo načela in dejavnike znanstvenega menedžmenta, 29 % jih delno 
podpira in 18 % ne podpira tega). 
Organizacija: Lasnikom in vršnim menedžerjem v organizacijah bodo naše ugotovitve pomagale 
pri odločitvah o uvajanju načel in dejavnikov vitkega proizvajanja. 
Družba: Ugotovitve iz raziskave bodo imele teoretične in praktične implikacije za vse tiste, ki se 
ukvarjajo z vpeljevanjem načel in dejavnikov vitkega proizvajanja iz vidika trajnostnega razvoja 
družbe.  
Originalnost: Izvirna raziskava s področja sovpadanje načel in dejavnikov vitkega proizvajana in 
znanstvenega menedžmenta v Republiki Sloveniji. 
Omejitve/nadaljnje raziskovanje: Integrativni pregled strokovne literature smo opravili v treh 
svetovnih bazah. 
 
Ključne besede: dejavniki, podjetje, sovpadanje, vitko proizvajanje, znanstveni menedžment. 
 
Copyright (c)  Idriz SELIMOVIĆ, Mirko MARKIČ 
 
 
Creative Commons License 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.