"Lean production" is the name given to the Toyota Production System by john-krafcik in his 1988 article triumph-of-lean-production-system and adopted by james-p-womack, daniel-t-jones, and daniel-roos as the organizing concept of machine-that-changed-the-world (1990). The naming itself — choosing "lean" to describe Toyota's methods — was a decisive act of translation that shaped how the Western world understood Japanese manufacturing.
The Naming
Krafcik chose "lean" because the Toyota system used less of everything compared to mass production: half the human effort, half the manufacturing space, half the investment in tools, half the engineering hours to develop a new product in half the time. "Lean" captured this economy of means. The term was functionally descriptive, positively valenced (lean is desirable; "lean" versus "fat"), and culturally neutral — it didn't require invoking Japanese management philosophy or Toyota-specific terminology.
The alternative labels that "lean" displaced included "Japanese manufacturing," "the Toyota system," "just-in-time production," and "world-class manufacturing." Each carried baggage: Japanese manufacturing implied cultural specificity; JIT described only one element; world-class was vague. "Lean production" offered a clean, memorable label that implied universality.
The Three Systems
machine-that-changed-the-world presents lean production through a three-way comparison:
1. Craft production: skilled workers using general-purpose tools to make exactly what the customer asks for. High quality, high cost, low volume. Pre-industrial model.
2. Mass production: semi-skilled workers using specialized machines to make standardized products in high volume. Lower cost per unit but high inventory, long changeover times, and tolerated defect rates. The Ford/Sloan model that dominated the 20th century.
3. Lean production: multi-skilled teams using flexible, increasingly automated machines to make products in volume with variety. Combines craft production's quality aspirations with mass production's cost and volume — while eliminating the waste inherent in both.
The IMVP study (mit-imvp) provided the empirical evidence: head-to-head comparisons of Japanese (primarily Toyota), American, and European assembly plants showing that lean producers achieved 2:1 or 3:1 advantages in productivity, quality, and space utilization.
What "Lean" Captured and Missed
The term captured the efficiency dimension of TPS — doing more with less. It resonated with Western managers focused on cost reduction and operational improvement.
What it missed or underemphasized:
The Transition to "Lean Thinking"
By lean-thinking (1996), Womack and Jones dropped "production" from the name and moved to "lean thinking" — signaling that the framework extended beyond manufacturing. The five-lean-principles are principles of thinking, not production techniques. This evolution from lean production to lean thinking to lean-enterprise to lean-consumption shows Womack and Jones progressively abstracting from the factory floor to general management philosophy.