Search results

The purpose of this paper is to identify and analyze the operations strategies (OSs) adopted by six of the all seven automobile engine manufacturers in action in Brazil during the years of 2005 and 2006.

Semi-structured interviews were held with at least one of the top managers at each engine manufacturing plant to collect information about the aforementioned strategies. The questions were aimed at identifying possible changes, over a four years period, in some of the operations-related competitive priorities and decision areas.

This research revealed the strategies adopted by six of the all seven major automobile engine manufacturers installed in Brazil in 2005, enabling a discussion of relevant themes from both the theoretical and practical standpoints. Competitive priorities and decision areas form a very inter-related system and any significant change of OSs requires significant investments, effort and time.

Case studies were carried out in a specific context of the automobile market in Brazil in 2005 and 2006. Firms must treat operations as a system that changes continuously.

In dealing with operations as a system, managers should know and apply OS concepts. This is even more important at dynamic (economic) sectors/industries.

This paper describes and discusses – via qualitative research and in a comprehensive way – the OSs of two groups (established and entrant manufacturers) of firms in a relatively dynamic context in Brazil.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the strategic contingency of plant improvement capability and innovation capability.

Two forms of fit between the two capabilities and competitive priorities were empirically tested. Data collected from a sample of 238 manufacturing plants were used to test the hypotheses using regression.

The results provide partial support for fit as mediation. However, there was no evidence supporting fit as moderation. It was found that improvement capability and innovation capability are associated with different competitive priorities and also have varying impact on different operational performance dimensions.

There are two limitations to this research: only three operations management (OM) practices are included in each capability examined; and there are somewhat limited measures of competitive priorities and operational performance.

This study examines multiple forms of fit between competitive priorities and operations capabilities. The findings can inform managers to selectively implement OM practices for developing the needed operations capabilities given the chosen competitive priorities.

This study attempts to explain the components of competitive priorities of Malaysian service firms and to find out the competitive priorities of different service industries in Malaysia, and how these competitive priorities change across “low performance” and “high performance” service industries.

An empirical study of 254 firms from nine different service industries is conducted to answer the objectives of this study.

Four competitive priorities are identified: cost, quality, delivery and flexibility. Six service industries namely fast food, hospital, retail store, bank, private college and accountant industries are found to be focused on quality while three industries namely hotel, auto‐repair and architect prioritized delivery. For both high performance and low performance firms, quality remained the top competitive priority followed by delivery, flexibility and cost.

This is the first study that identifies competitive priorities in the Malaysian service sector

This study aims to investigate and test the impact of competitive priorities, in terms of quality, speed, dependability, flexibility, cost and patient engagement, on patient satisfaction with healthcare services. It considers patients’ rather than managers’ points of view to collect responses about competitive priorities.

This research employed a cross-sectional survey design to analyze a sample of customers through an empirical study of 488 patients in Qatar’s healthcare service context.

The confirmatory factor analysis results show that competitive priorities and engagement positively and significantly impact patient satisfaction.

Researchers can use this methodology to explore the role of competitive priorities in different service contexts and sectors. The researchers conducted the study in Qatar; therefore, the results are not generalizable to all healthcare sectors. However, regardless of geographic location, the research approach can be used in healthcare.

Managers can employ the developed scales to diagnose competitive priorities and improve customer service experiences.

The paper is original as it suggests using competitive priorities as a measurement tool for predicting patient satisfaction compared to prior research that mostly measured competitive priorities based on internal perspectives (managers’ perspectives). Further, this paper is original because it depends on the external perspective (customers’ perspective) for the competitive priorities for measuring patient satisfaction.

The purpose of this paper is to report and discuss the manufacturing competitive priorities (cost, delivery, quality, flexibility, and innovativeness) practiced by Kuwaiti manufacturers. It also investigates the possible impact of plant size and type of industry on the level of focus at different priorities. In addition, the level of association between different pairs of competitive priorities was investigated. This allowed testing the traditional competitive priorities trade‐off model which was frequently argued by early operations strategy researchers.

The data collection method used in this study is that of the questionnaire that was administrated in 62 Kuwaiti plants working in two different industries, food processing and refractors. Level of focus (on a five‐point Likert scale) at each of the five competitive priorities, type of industry and number of employees were the main research variables. Since ordinal scales are used in the current study to measure the plant focus on the five competitive priorities, Mann‐Whitney test for two independent samples was used to test for the effect of type of industry and Kruska‐Wallis test was utilized to investigate the relationship between plant size and the level of focus on each competitive priority. In addition, testing the level of associations between degrees of emphasis on different pairs of competitive priorities was through the Goodman and Kruskal's γ coefficients.

Empirical evidence is provided that plant size is a useful indicator of the emphasis on some competitive priorities. It shows that small and medium plants place significantly more emphasis on on‐time delivery while medium and large plants are distinguished by their strong emphasis on flexibility. However, difference size groups indicate the same level of focus on quality improvement, cost reduction and innovativeness. Noticeably, the two industrial sectors do not differ significantly in their level of focus on each of the five competitive priorities. The two industries focused on on‐time delivery and quality improvement strategies as the two main competitive priorities. Both flexibility and innovativeness were the least emphasized priorities in both sectors. The preliminary findings do not seem to support the main argument of the competitive priorities trade‐off model.

Owing to the limitation of data, only employment was the only indicator of plant size. Total revenue and total assets could be used in future studies to verify or deny these findings. Moreover, using a better multidimensional construct in measuring the level of focus on each competitive priority represents another way of improving this study.

The paper adds to the scarce body of empirical studies of manufacturing strategies in newly emerged economies. This is especially true in the Middle East and the Gulf areas. The findings augment the development of a better contingency theory of plant competitive priorities to capture the complexity of different plant characteristics.

This paper aims to examine how firms, operating in mature and growing industries, can improve the alignment of their operations strategy to fit situations characterized by varying rates of industry growth and technological changes.

The authors enhance the operations strategy typology presented by Lei and Slocum by incorporating an enhanced set of competitive priorities and supporting structure/infrastructure requirements into their four cell matrix. They then introduce a stage‐based model of environmental dynamism and complexity that can foster major transitions in operations strategy.

Industry growth and technological change interact to create alternative environments with varying levels of dynamism and complexity requiring realignment of operations strategy. With increasing rates of technological change, the authors emphasize an urgent need to include innovation as a competitive priority (along with cost, quality, delivery and flexibility) to proactively adapt operations strategy to fit changing environments. It is also necessary for managers to ensure a fit between their competitive priorities and the development of supporting structures/infrastructures to ensure effective implementation of competitive operations strategy.

Operations strategy literature has not focused attention on the basic goals and capabilities needed to implement or adapt to today's dynamic environments. This study adds innovation as a competitive priority and improves our understanding of adaptation of operations strategy to alternative environments created by the interaction of industry growth and technological change. Specifically, by focusing on competitive priorities and supporting capabilities in dynamic environments, the authors provide directions for implementing changes to operations strategy.

The purpose of this study is to explain the components of competitive priorities of Indian service firms, to find out the competitive priorities of different service industries in India and to find out how these competitive priorities change across low- and high-performing service firms.

An empirical study of 166 firms from five different service industries is undertaken in New Delhi and its surroundings.

The results reveal the presence of three competitive priorities in the services sector in India: cost, flexibility and quality/delivery, with quality/delivery being the most distinctive competitive priority. Hotel and auto-repair industries are found to be focused on controlling costs, while hospitals, banks and private colleges prioritized quality/delivery. For high-performing firms, cost is the top most competitive priority, followed by quality/delivery and flexibility, while for low-performing firms, quality/delivery remains the top most competitive priority, followed by flexibility and cost.

The paper enhances the understanding of competitive priorities in the Indian services sector. The identification of competitive priorities of different service industries in India and their dynamics across different industries add value to the current literature and fill an important research gap. Additionally, surveying diverse industries in this paper reveals a holistic picture of the Indian service industry and helps achieve some degree of cross-industry perspective.

States that manufacturing competence in organizations is determined by the competitive priorities of those organizations and the key operating decisions which they make to achieve those competitive priorities. Sets out to investigate whether manufacturing strategy can be applied to an industry which is not traditionally thought of as manufacturing by determining the industry’s competitive priorities and key decision areas and the relationship between them. Finds that there was a set of competitive priorities and key decision areas which apply to the Australian wine industry and that the most important key decision areas (plant capacity, quality assurance, plant and equipment, production planning and control, product design and top management involvement) were similar to those which apply to many other manufacturing industries.

Presents an integrated framework that would help manufacturing managers to select IT applications (manufacturing management systems) that are best suited to a given process structure and the intended competitive priorities of a firm. The proposed framework is based on the premiss that the process of matching IT applications to competitive priorities involves identification of key manufacturing tasks underlying different priorities and the corresponding process structures. The theoretic‐deductive approach is used to link the three vital elements ‐ competitive priorities, process structures and IT applications ‐ in the following application areas: product design, demand management, capacity planning, inventory management, shopfloor systems, quality management and distribution.

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.