Search results

The article discusses the relevance of Advanced Manufacturing Technology (AMT) at the strategic level. Based on a research project involving 20 UK users of AMT innovation, the article concludes that the approach to AMT implementation determines the type of competitive gains to be expected. It was found that the competitive behaviour of AMT users tends to follow one of two rules: An aggressive competitive approach means that AMT is at the heart of competitive strategy, playing a specific role for cost, and differentiation objectives. A defensive approach means that AMT is limited to a local role for the provision of economic gains.

The ideas expressed in this work are based on those put into practice at the Okuma Corporation of Japan, one of the world′s leading machine tool manufacturers. In common with many other large organizations, Okuma Corporation has to meet the new challenges posed by globalization, keener domestic and international competition, shorter business cycles and an increasingly volatile environment. Intelligent corporate strategy (ICS), as practised at Okuma, is a unified theory of strategic corporate management based on five levels of win‐win relationships for profit/market share, namely: ,1. Loyalty from customers (value for money) – right focus., 2. Commitment from workers (meeting hierarchy of needs) – right attitude., 3. Co‐operation from suppliers (expanding and reliable business) – right connections., 4. Co‐operation from distributors (expanding and reliable business) – right channels., 5. Respect from competitors (setting standards for business excellence) – right strategies. The aim is to create values for all stakeholders. This holistic people‐oriented approach recognizes that, although the world is increasingly driven by high technology, it continues to be influenced and managed by people (customers, workers, suppliers, distributors, competitors). The philosophical core of ICS is action learning and teamwork based on principle‐centred relationships of sincerity, trust and integrity. In the real world, these are the roots of success in relationships and in the bottom‐line results of business. ICS is, in essence, relationship management for synergy. It is based on the premiss that domestic and international commerce is a positive sum game: in the long run everyone wins. Finally, ICS is a paradigm for manufacturing companies coping with change and uncertainty in their search for profit/market share. Time‐honoured values give definition to corporate character; circumstances change, values remain. Poor business operations generally result from human frailty. ICS is predicated on the belief that the quality of human relationships determines the bottom‐line results. ICS attempts to make manifest and explicit the intangible psychological factors for value‐added partnerships. ICS is a dynamic, living, and heuristic‐learning model. There is intelligence in the corporate strategy because it applies commonsense, wisdom, creative systems thinking and synergy to ensure longevity in its corporate life for sustainable competitive advantage.

This article investigates the relationship between the functional areas of manufacturing and human resources by analysing the practices of human resource management associated with the competitive priorities of manufacturing strategy, e.g. quality, delivery performance, flexibility and cost. Within strategic business management, both the competitive priorities of manufacturing and the practices of human resource management need to be observed by the whole organisation. In this way, this study presents how human resource management practices are aligned to business strategies based on cost reduction, quality, delivery performance and product innovation. These practices may also be arranged in different ways in a particular competitive strategy.

The main purpose of this study is to understand how collective operational practices are adapted or stimulated by a firm's competitive strategy.

This study employed a data set drawn from 124 plant managers and directors of Indian manufacturing firms. Multiple regression was used to examine the impact of operational practices of lean, total quality management (TQM) and supply chain management (SCM) within competitive clusters of cost leadership, differentiation and focus strategy.

Results of the study show that the pattern of impact of operational practices on firm's performance varies according to type of the competitive strategy employed. All the three competitive strategy clusters have reported that TQM is the most important trigger for Indian manufacturing firms with relative effect of TQM practices on firm's performance being higher than that of lean and SCM practices.

Cross-sectional data from Indian manufacturing firms were used, and it would be interesting to test the analytical framework of the study for more sectors and countries. Future studies can take a longitudinal research approach to strengthen the findings of the study.

The findings explain how operational practices are aligned with competitive strategies for practitioners so that they can assign limited resources to build diverse operational capabilities based on their strategic choices.

Although very few classical studies are reported in various contexts involving competitive strategy, operational practices and firm's performance, no existing study focuses on how these three domains are linked together in the context of Indian manufacturing sector.

Sets out an exploratory study to give an alternative viewpoint of manufacturing logistics.

Based on causal analysis, the relationship between competitive strategy and manufacturing logistics was explored. Variables, including both positioning and competitive dimensions, in the competitive strategy that interacted with manufacturing logistics were identified. The elements of manufacturing logistics for this study included master production scheduling, capacity requirements planning, material planning, purchasing, and inventory control. A weighted business performance index was used to segregate the sample firms into three groups: high‐, average‐, and low‐performing organizations. For each of the performance group, the causal relationships between strategic elements and the performance of manufacturing logistics were then analyzed.

The results showed a significant relationship between competitive strategy and manufacturing logistics system performance.

Not all the elements in manufacturing logistics may contribute to the logistics performance. The construct of manufacturing logistics depends on a particular set of strategic variables that the organization designs.

Extends the study of manufacturing logistics beyond its boundary through a broader strategic perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to understand the competitive priorities of manufacturers in India, and examine the level of agreement or strategic consensus between senior executives and manufacturing managers on manufacturing competitive priorities in light of the prevalent culture.

Survey data collected from 156 respondents from 78 manufacturing units based on a national sample in India are used to test the hypotheses using the paired samples t‐tests and multivariate analysis of variance.

A relatively high emphasis by both levels of managers on quality, compared to the other three competitive priorities, is noteworthy and consistent with the global trends. The emphasis on delivery is a close second. Differences in competitive priorities exist across managerial levels in India despite the high power distance and low individualism.

The effect of ownership as private or public company was examined and no significant differences found, but data could not be collected on the ownership structure such as wholly owned domestic firms, foreign subsidiaries, or joint ventures. and whether a firm is a supplier to a multinational company. It may also be noted that a majority of the manufacturing companies in this paper came from three industries – chemicals, fabricated metals, and electronic and electrical equipment – and, hence, the findings of the paper might have been unduly influenced by the prevalent practices in these industries.

The paper informs global managers and firms seeking to outsource to, or invest in, India that the Indian managers place significantly high emphasis on quality and delivery, but not as much on product variety or ability to make frequent changes to product design and production volume. The managers in India need to take note of prevailing differences in managerial priorities and efforts need to be made such that the priorities are aligned and manufacturing strategy may be unified and coordinated.

In the Indian context, this is the first study that deployed multiple respondents to understand the manufacturing competitive priorities, and also the first to examine strategic consensus in operations strategy.

Extant manufacturing strategy research dichotomizes the trade‐off model and the cumulative model, but fails to explain each strategic result. The purpose of this paper is to propose four key antecedents of a trade‐off versus a cumulative model by manufacturing business units (MBUs), and in turn, their association with business performance.

The authors first review literature pertaining to the history and major themes of manufacturing strategy. Next, the authors present a theoretical model with explanations of the methodology and research design used. The model is empirically tested, and conclusions, managerial implications, and future research opportunities that stem from this research effort are provided.

Strategic time orientation, as well as manufacturing practices of supply chain integration intensity and advanced manufacturing technology, are empirically found to be associated with MBUs' combinative competitive capabilities. More specifically, manufacturers following these practices are more apt to realize higher levels combinative capabilities, as depicted by the cumulative model.

The paper shows that these manufacturing practices may extend the time within which the MBU reaches its capability frontiers, and therefore, increase the odds that it can exploit its current resources. Moreover, MBU size negatively moderates the relationship between advanced manufacturing technology and the cumulative model.

Lean and agile manufacturing are two initiatives that are used by manufacturing plant managers to improve operations capabilities. The purpose of this paper is to investigate internal and external factors that drive the choice of lean and agile operations capabilities and their respective impact on operational performance.

Lean and agile manufacturing are each conceptualized as a second‐order factor and measured through a bundle of distinct practices. The competitive intensity of industry and the competitive strategy are modeled as potential external and internal drivers, respectively, and the impact on quality, delivery, cost, and flexibility performance is analyzed using structural equations modeling. The model is tested with data from the high performance manufacturing project comprising a total of 211 plants from three industries and seven countries.

The results indicate that lean and agile manufacturing differ in terms of drivers and outcomes. The choice of a cost‐leadership strategy fully mediates the impact of the competitive intensity of industry as a driver of lean manufacturing, while agile manufacturing is directly affected by both internal and external drivers, i.e. a differentiation strategy as well as the competitive intensity of industry. Agile manufacturing is found to be negatively associated with a cost‐leadership strategy, emphasizing the difference between lean and agile manufacturing. The major differences in performance outcomes are related to cost and flexibility, such that lean manufacturing has a significant impact on cost performance (whereas agile manufacturing has not), and that agile manufacturing has a stronger relationship with volume as well as product mix flexibility than does lean manufacturing.

Cross‐sectional data from three industries and seven countries are used, and it would be interesting to test this model for more industries and countries.

The results provide insights into the factors that influence the choice of lean or agile manufacturing for improving operations, and the results that can be obtained.

To the authors' knowledge, this is the first large‐scale empirical survey of leanness and agility simultaneously, using data from manufacturing firms in Europe, Asia, and North America. The model incorporates a wide perspective on factors related to lean and agile manufacturing, to be able to identify similarities and differences.

Proposes a model of strategic planning as a basis to overcome the identified shortcomings in the past empirical research. The basic assumption of the proposed model is that an appropriate strategic analysis is necessary in order to ensure appropriate strategic decisions.

Shortcomings related to empirical research in the past were identified with the aim of discussing some possible reasons why the concept of manufacturing strategy had not been more widely adopted in practice and of developing the model of strategic planning. Based on the proposed model and relating to previous research, an empirical study of two relationships has been performed: first, between business strategic competence of an enterprise and business performance, and second, between business strategic competence and manufacturing strategic decision areas.

The goals of analysis in the process of strategic planning have been explained. Empirical findings about a positive relationship between business performance and business strategic competence confirmed the results of previous research. Some empirically significant relationships between strategic decision areas and manufacturing competitive priorities results were identified.

In order to guarantee effective decision making, the role of the analysis in the process of planning has to be understood. This phase of the planning process is not getting enough attention from practitioners. This results in decision making for which quick jumping to solution‐seeking is characteristic, without appropriate determination of problems beforehand.

The paper emphasises the importance of strategic analysis and problem identification to appropriate strategic decision making. This holds true not only of practical strategic decision making inside specific companies, but also of design and implementation of empirical research.

Competitive performances of manufacturing firms are affected by the strategies they selected. The implementations of strategies, as usually assumed, rely on the effectiveness of work teams. The performances of teams, to a large degree, are directed by team leaders. Therefore, the compatibility between competitive performances, manufacturing strategies, and the functions of team leaders should be explored. Based on the statistical findings obtained from other literature as well as an analysis of an international survey of manufacturing strategies. It is proposed that the compatibility is basically the relationship between the knowledge seeking behavior of team leaders and the knowledge required for improving competitive performances. We also discovered that it is worth further investigating two particular types of team leaders, i.e. shaper and company builder. Their characteristics may provide a basis to expand our understandings of team leaders’ performances and the competence‐based organizations of today.