To read the full version of this content please select one of the options below:

Making manufacturing flexibility operational – part 2 : distinctions and an example

Carl‐Henric Nilsson (Research Fellow in the Department of Industrial Engineering, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund, Sweden)
Håkan Nordahl (Research Fellow in the Department of Industrial Engineering, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund, Sweden)

Integrated Manufacturing Systems

ISSN: 0957-6061

Article publication date: 1 April 1995

Abstract

Structures the concept of flexibility by making clear distinctions in three generic dimensions, describes the use of the framework for manufacturing flexibility by working through a concrete example. The framework was presented in “Making manufacturing flexibility operational – part 1: a framework”, IMS, Vol. 6 No. 2. Makes distinctions between the concept of flexibility in the three generic dimensions: utilized flexibility versus potential flexibility, external flexibility versus internal flexibility, and requested flexibility versus replied flexibility. The framework makes a clear distinction between the internal and the external factors impinging on the company, and brings together the market demand for flexibility, the characteristics of the production system, and the flexibility of the suppliers. Furthermore, pursues the connection from the strategic level to the single resource characteristics in the production system. Using the framework as a systematization for handling flexibility related issues in companies, can be especially useful for managers.

Keywords

Citation

Nilsson, C. and Nordahl, H. (1995), "Making manufacturing flexibility operational – part 2 : distinctions and an example", Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 4-10. https://doi.org/10.1108/09576069510082084

Publisher

:

MCB UP Ltd

Copyright © 1995, MCB UP Limited