Lean Office in Administrative Billing and Vendor Payment Processes: A Systematic Literature Review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.57152/malcom.v6i3.2711Keywords:
Administrative Billing, Lean Office, Systematic Literature Review, Vendor Payment, WasteAbstract
Administrative billing and vendor payment processes frequently experience delays due to document waiting times, repeated verification, and fragmented information flows. Although Lean Office has been widely adopted to reduce non-value-added activities in office environments, evidence regarding its implementation remains fragmented, particularly in billing and vendor payment processes. This study systematically reviews Lean Office implementation in administrative activities, focusing on billing, document verification, approval flows, and vendor payments. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, literature was collected from Scopus and Google Scholar using keywords related to Lean Office, administrative waste, billing, vendor payments, document verification, and non-value-added activities. From 59 initial records, eight articles met the inclusion and quality criteria and were analyzed using thematic synthesis. The findings reveal that waiting, extra processing, defective information, and document transportation are the most common forms of waste. Value Stream Mapping, Process Activity Mapping, root cause analysis, and standardization are the predominant analytical approaches. The review links major waste categories with practical improvement strategies, including document standardization, simplified approval procedures, digital integration, service-level targets, and early document validation. These findings provide practical guidance for redesigning billing and vendor payment processes to improve administrative efficiency, transparency, process reliability.
Downloads
References
J. P. Womack and D. T. Jones, “Lean Thinking Banish Waste and Create Wealth in your Corporation,” J. Oper. Res. Soc., vol. 48, no. 11, pp. 1148–1148, Dec. 1997, doi: 10.1038/sj.jors.2600967.
T. Joosten, I. Bongers, and R. Janssen, “Application of Lean Thinking to Health Care: Issues and Observations,” Int. J. Qual. Heal. Care, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 341–347, Oct. 2009, doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzp036.
Z. Radnor and S. P. Osborne, “Lean: A Failed Theory for Public Services?,” Public Manag. Rev., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 265–287, Feb. 2013, doi: 10.1080/14719037.2012.748820.
F. Wijnhoven, D. Beckers, and C. Amrit, “Reducing Waste in Administrative Services with Lean Principles,” in International Conference on Information Systems, 2016, pp. 1–18.
P. Hines and N. Rich, “The Seven Value Stream Mapping Tools,” Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 46–64, Jan. 1997, doi: 10.1108/01443579710157989.
M. Monteiro, C. Pacheco, J. Dinis-Carvalho, and F. Paiva, “Implementing Lean Office: A Successful Case in Public Sector,” FME Trans., vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 303–310, 2015, doi: 10.5937/fmet1504303M.
J. C. Magalhães, A. C. Alves, N. Costa, and A. R. Rodrigues, “Improving Processes in a Postgraduate Office of A University Through Lean Office Tools,” Int. J. Qual. Res., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 797–810, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.24874/IJQR13.04-03.
J. V. A. Costa, M. C. F. de Oliveira, and P. W. S. de Oliveira, “Lean Office Application in Management Flow of a Billing Department,” Int. J. Eng. Trends Technol., vol. 67, no. 11, pp. 23–26, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V67I11P204.
L. Di Pietro, R. G. Mugion, and M. F. Renzi, “An Integrated Approach between Lean and Customer Feedback Tools: An Empirical Study in the Public Sector,” Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell., vol. 24, no. 7–8, pp. 899–917, Aug. 2013, doi: 10.1080/14783363.2013.791106.
D. A. de Jesus Pacheco, D. Møller Clausen, and J. Bumann, “A Multi-Method Approach for Reducing Operational Wastes in Distribution Warehouses,” Int. J. Prod. Econ., vol. 256, p. 108705, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2022.108705.
M. Dotoli, N. Epicoco, M. Falagario, N. Costantino, and B. Turchiano, “An Integrated Approach for Warehouse Analysis and Optimization: A Case Study,” Comput. Ind., vol. 70, pp. 56–69, Jun. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.compind.2014.12.004.
M. J. Page et al., “The PRISMA 2020 Statement: an Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews,” BMJ, pp. 1–13, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
J. Thomas and A. Harden, “Methods for the Thematic Synthesis of Qualitative Research in Systematic Reviews,” BMC Med. Res. Methodol., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–10, Dec. 2008, doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Princeca DW Islamicsia, Putu Dana Karningsih

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright © by Author; Published by Institut Riset dan Publikasi Indonesia (IRPI)
This Indonesian Journal of Machine Learning and Computer Science is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.










