Search results

The assessment of the success of Performance Management Systems (PMS) is difficult because there are many success factors, they are mutually dependent on each other, and located at different hierarchical levels of an organization. Therefore, there is a need to describe the complete logical chain, which makes PMS successful for an organization and to find out a comprehensive list of key factors (KF) affecting the success of PMS. The objective of this research paper is to develop a method to assess success of a PMS based on a logical chain of 14 KF.

The research first develops a logical chain based on the 14 KFs on the basis of prior studies and then carries out a survey about these KFs (15 check points) of PMS and their connection to organizational performance for a small sample of firms from two EU countries.

There are next findings of this study which indicate following: KFs of PMS affect organizational performance; successful PMS improves organizational performance; PMS is successful for the organization when the completeness of the logical chain in PMS is high.

The practical contribution of this study is that findings show that firms can assess their own PMSs and compare their check point values against the values of successful PMS group. This kind of analysis indicates directly improvement potential for the different check points in PMS.

Why is it that highly trained and seasoned executives fail? On the surface, this doesn’t make sense because they are very successful; yet research in the organization sciences provides no shortage of evidence to prove just that. From the classic Mann Gulch fire disaster of Weick’s famous collapse of sensemaking study, to studies of myopia of learning, escalation of commitment, threat-rigidity, dominant logic, the architecture of simplicity, the Icarus Paradox, to core competencies turning into core rigidities, and navigating new competitive markets using “old” cognitive maps, and many more such examples point to a ubiquitous phenomenon where highly trained and experienced professionals find themselves “stuck” in the heat of battle, unable to move and progress. On the one hand, for some, there is a desperate need for change, but are unable to do so, due to their trained incapacities. On the other hand, some simply cannot see the need for change, and continue with their “business as usual” mentality. For both, their visions of the world shrink, they have a tendency to cling onto their past habitual practices and oversimplify the complexity of the situation. In moments like these: DROP YOUR TOOLS and UNLEARN! This book chapter introduces a framework (grounded in clinical psychology) that has had consistent success in helping seasoned executives and key decision-makers open up the alternatives whenever they find themselves stuck with complexity.

This paper reports on research investigating the process of formation of manufacturing strategy in six UK manufacturing small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs). Realised manufacturing strategy can be considered to be the pattern formed in the stream of actions taken within a firm’s manufacturing function. The research aims to locate the source of that stream by identifying the causal origins of strategic manufacturing actions using a strategy charting method. The findings indicate that, for these companies, realised manufacturing strategy is predominantly formed through a bottom‐up emergent process, arising from the preferences of personnel within the manufacturing function. For most strategic manufacturing actions, there is no demonstrable link to business strategy. As such, these firms are not following best‐practice manufacturing strategy literature, which advises that manufacturing strategy be derived from business strategy in a top‐down deliberate process. This is the case despite differences in the size, products, customers, ownership structures and histories of the companies. The paper speculates that, in UK SMEs, more widely, manufacturing strategy may similarly not arise from the pursuit of business objectives. This may be because the concept of manufacturing as a potential strategic weapon is absent in the SME community, or because the formalised top‐down deliberate process of developing manufacturing strategy associated with this concept is inappropriate in the dynamic environments in which most SMEs operate.

Research into manufacturing strategy is increasing in popularity but there are no well established research methodologies which are specific to the field. Briefly reviews current methodologies, identifies their shortcomings, and notes areas for improvement. Then discusses a research methodology which was developed to address these. This three‐stage methodology has been successfully applied to the process of formulating manufacturing strategy and suggests that similar methodologies might be appropriate for future strategy research.

The paper aims at increasing the understanding of how manufacturing strategy formulation can be facilitated in SMEs.

The research presented in this paper follows a four-stage logic. Initially, a literature review was conducted identifying a number of manufacturing strategy frameworks. Thereafter, theoretical and practical assessment criteria were established. The SME requirements were identified through five case studies. Based on these assessment criteria, identified manufacturing strategy formulation frameworks were evaluated. When a framework was found that fulfilled most of the requirements set out, a detailed analysis of the framework was done, based on criteria related to specific SME characteristics.

In total, 15 different manufacturing strategy formulation frameworks were identified in the literature. To evaluate the suitability of these frameworks in SMEs, a number of assessment criteria were established, both in theory and in practice. These assessment criteria were grouped into three parts based on their character: procedure, realisation and contextual issues. The assessment of the 15 frameworks revealed that among the identified frameworks there was one framework that stood out and fulfilled several of the criteria. However, the frameworks still need to be adapted to the specific SME characteristics.

Although a number of manufacturing strategy frameworks exist, their usability in practice has seldom been investigated. The results presented provide valuable knowledge for the continued work of rendering manufacturing strategy frameworks suitable and thereby useful for SMEs.

A methodology for implementing CAPM systems is described. The research was motivated by evidence of dissatisfaction with the performance of current systems, and the existence of no generic methodology. A superposition process was employed. Areas of functional management were explored for sources of implementation methodologies and yielded a number of attributes for successful implementation. The emergent structure was then validated against field studies. The result, a methodology for improving control, is a three‐level hierarchy. The first level assesses the ability of the organisation to absorb change. The next considers the options for better control. The lowest level is concerned with implementation.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and test a quality management system (QMS) implementation process for a medical devices manufacturer, which are covered by ISO 13485:2007 and RDC No. 59:2000 and based on operations strategy content definitions.

The research strategy is based on the Cambridge approach which is supported by action research techniques for producing “application” processes. This research strategy is also known as the “Process Approach” or “the Engineering Approach” and was developed in the mid-1990s by researchers from the “Institute for Manufacturing” (IFM/University of Cambridge).

The results reveal how real conditions “shape” implementation, indicating solutions for integrating procedures for performance and control indicators that represent manufacturing strategy objectives. The regulatory framework and the manufacturing environment offer these real conditions. The operations strategy that is underlying implementation shows how to reconcile regulation and strategy through its content.

The developed process can be improved by increasing the number of test cases until they bring no new contributions for its evolution. However, because it is a long-term and complex implementation process, the present research was concluded with a full understanding of process development.

The QMS implementation process based on the Cambridge Engineering approach creates several opportunities for discussing QMS design requirements, but also in testing procedures for quality policy deployment. Learning by doing is a practical contribution of the process as a participative component effectively applied in different moments at the mentioned workshops – WSH. The logical organization of the QMS implementation process shows causalities among manufacturing strategy, QMS and performance measurements, creating strategic coherence among the connected elements.

Although many studies had approached the QMS implementation, few of them actually addressed the system integration with the business strategic objectives. None of the studies to date related the implementation to the ISO 13485:2003 and the RDC No. 59.

Artifacts are rarely used today to visualize thoughts, insights, and ideas in strategy work. Rather, textual and verbal communication dominates. This is despite artifacts and visual representations holding many advantages as tools to create and make sense of strategy in teamwork. To advance our understanding of the benefits of visual aids in strategy work, I synthesize insights from cognitive psychology, neuroscience, and management research. My analysis exposes distinct neurocognitive advantages concerning attention, emotion, learning, memory, intuition, and creativity from visual sense-building. These advantages increase when sense-building activities are playful and storytelling is used.