Rethinking process improvement: from diffusion to translation

Purpose Despite firms’ growing investments, process improvement (PI) programs often fail to deliver the expected benefits. In this paper, we argue that the widespread adoption in PI research of a paradigm founded in positivism plays a primary role in deriving these conclusions and limits the development of PI theory and practice. Design/methodology/approach We examine the main characteristics of the dominant paradigm in PI research and then propose an alternative perspective drawing on research in management innovation and complexity. Findings from two empirical case studies in a pharmaceutical and an automotive firm are reported to support our theoretical argument. Findings The proposed perspective highlights the interaction between various PI approaches – such as lean, Six Sigma and total quality management (TQM) – and the context-dependence and experiential aspects of PI. We argue that this perspective can better account for where, by whom and how PI approaches are shaped and used and, ultimately, can more effectively advance both theory and practice. Originality/value This study suggests that PI approaches should be considered as adaptable rather than static, in combination rather than as single entities and as continuously interpreted and translated by organizational actors rather than homogeneously diffused across companies and business units. In this paper, we discuss the substantial conceptual, methodological and practical implications of adopting this perspective.