Editorial Standards & Independence

Our Mission

Lean Community makes practical management knowledge easier to understand, evaluate and apply. We publish real-world experience related to Lean Management, continuous improvement, Training Within Industry (TWI), Theory of Constraints (TOC), Toyota Kata, Six Sigma, Hoshin Kanri, S&OP and IBP, TPM, SMED, quality, supply chain, leadership, digital transformation and responsible uses of artificial intelligence.

Practical experience is valuable, but it is not universal proof. Authors should explain the context, assumptions, limitations and evidence behind their conclusions so readers can judge what may—or may not—transfer to their own organisations.

Our editorial principles

• Practical relevance: content should help practitioners understand a problem, test a countermeasure or make a better decision.
• Evidence before certainty: claims should be supported by experience, transparent data, credible sources or clearly labelled expert judgment.
• Context matters: methods should be presented with their conditions, limitations and measurement period whenever possible.
• Plurality of methods: we do not treat one method, school or provider as the answer to every problem.
• Respect for people: criticism should address ideas, decisions, systems and evidence—not attack individuals.
• Transparency: authorship, sources, relationships, sponsorship and material AI assistance should be visible when relevant.

Editorial Governance

Editorial decisions are currently made by the Lean Community editorial team. An editor checks relevance, clarity, attribution, evidence, conflicts of interest and compliance with these standards. When specialist scrutiny is needed, the editor may invite a qualified practitioner or subject-matter reviewer.

Reviewers must disclose relevant commercial, professional or personal conflicts. Their names are published only with permission.

Editors may accept, request changes to, postpone or reject a submission. Publication is not guaranteed, and editorial decisions cannot be purchased.

What we review

• author identity and relevant experience;
• originality, attribution and permission to publish;
• accuracy of names, dates, quotations, links and important numerical claims;
• the distinction between evidence, interpretation and opinion;
• commercial relationships and other conflicts of interest;
• protection of confidential, personal and company information;
• clarity, usefulness and rights to images or other supporting material.

Editorial review is not academic peer review and is not a substitute for legal, financial, medical, safety or other professional advice. Publication does not certify a method, provider, product or result.

Authors, Ownership and Consent

We publish original submissions and material for which we have documented permission to edit and publish. Authors are credited unless a different arrangement is justified and agreed in advance.

Before attributed publication, the author should be able to review substantial edits that could change meaning, claims or professional reputation. Routine language, formatting and link corrections may be made without separate approval when meaning is unchanged.

Unless agreed otherwise in writing, authors retain copyright in their original work. Publication rights, reuse, translation and promotional excerpts should be agreed before publication. Authors remain responsible for having the right to share all text, data, quotations, images and company information included in a submission.

We do not promise publication in exchange for access, membership, services, sponsorship or advertising.

Adaptations from LinkedIn and Other Platforms

A public social-media post is not automatic permission to republish it as an article.

When an article is substantially adapted from a named person’s post, Lean Community will:

• obtain documented permission from the author or rights holder;
• preserve accurate authorship and link to the original post when available;
• state that the article was adapted and edited with permission;
• verify important factual claims where reasonably possible;
• ask the attributed author to approve substantive additions or changes.

Without permission, we may use a short, properly attributed quotation where legally permitted and create original editorial analysis around it. Such an article must not be presented as written or endorsed by the person whose post inspired it.

Artificial Intelligence Policy

AI may support editorial work, but it does not replace human accountability. Supporting uses may include language correction, transcription, translation, outlining, headline alternatives and discovery of possible sources. A human author or editor must verify every factual claim, quotation, reference and number.

Lean Community does not permit:

• fabricated sources, quotations, cases, credentials, data or results;
• publication of unreviewed AI-generated text;
• false authorship, endorsement or imitation of a living person’s voice;
• uploading confidential or sensitive personal information to an AI service without authority and safeguards;
• naming an AI system as the accountable author.

Material use of generative AI—where it shaped the substance, examples, analysis or conclusions—should be disclosed in an editorial note. Minor use for spelling, grammar or formatting normally requires no public label. A named human remains accountable for the final publication.

Corrections, Updates and Retractions

Readers and authors can report a possible error to contact@leancommunity.org. Please include the page URL, disputed passage and supporting evidence.

• Minor correction: spelling, formatting or a broken link may be fixed without a note when meaning is unchanged.
• Material correction: an error affecting evidence, attribution, interpretation or a conclusion receives a dated correction note.
• Update: new information may be added with a visible updated or last-reviewed date.
• Retraction: content may be withdrawn when central evidence is unreliable, permission was invalid, plagiarism is confirmed or publication could cause unjustified harm. Where appropriate, a notice remains at the original URL.

A request for change does not guarantee removal when the information remains accurate, lawful and in the public interest.

Conflicts of Interest and Sponsored Content

Authors, editors and reviewers should disclose relationships a reasonable reader might consider relevant, including employment, ownership, consulting, speaking fees, partnerships, gifts, close personal relationships or direct competition. A conflict does not automatically prevent publication, but it must be managed and clearly disclosed.

Paid or partner-supported material must be clearly labelled as “Sponsored”, “Partner Content” or “Supported by”, with the supporting organisation identified. Commercial support does not buy a favourable conclusion, an author byline, a place in a ranking or removal of justified criticism.

Sponsors may check factual information about their own organisation but may not present advertising claims as independent editorial judgment. Affiliate links, complimentary access, travel support and other material benefits should be disclosed when relevant.

How Rankings and Recommendations Are Produced

Every Lean Community ranking or comparative guide should state:

1. Purpose and scope: market, geography, audience and review period.
2. Eligibility: what was considered and what was outside scope.
3. Criteria: factors used and, where scores are shown, their weights or rules.
4. Evidence: review date and sources, with organiser or vendor claims identified as self-reported.
5. Verification status: confirmed results, estimates, forecasts and editorial judgments remain distinct.
6. Conflicts: relevant relationships with ranked organisations are disclosed.
7. Commercial independence: payment, sponsorship and advertising do not purchase a position.
8. Freshness: the page states when its evidence was last reviewed.

Where evidence is incomplete, the ranking should say so. Ties or close results should not be separated by unsupported precision. Organisations may submit documented corrections but cannot approve the final editorial position. Recommendations describe fit against published criteria; they are not universal guarantees.

Privacy and Contact

We publish only the professional profile information needed to explain an author’s experience and contributions. Personal telephone numbers, private email addresses and other direct contact details should not appear publicly unless the person has expressly chosen to publish them.

Authors and readers may request correction or removal of personal information, subject to applicable law and legitimate archival or public-interest considerations. Form submissions are handled under our Privacy Policy.

For submissions, visit Publish Your Work. For editorial questions, corrections, rights or privacy requests, email contact@leancommunity.org.

Editorial Standards FAQ