Search results

The purpose of this paper is to detail the reasons behind, and the successful process adopted for, the introduction of a six sigma programme within a leading, and award‐winning, UK manufacturing business.

The paper outlines the driving factors behind the adoption of six sigma at Renishaw plc, and details how the training, along with the introduction process, has been focused on helping build firm foundations and overcome internal “scepticism”. The study also reviews successful six sigma projects undertaken within the company that have delivered significant manufacturing and transactional process improvements.

Despite initiative fatigue, ongoing business success and a culture wary of any approach that may hinder the innovation that is driving this success, the six sigma programme at Renishaw, which has been supported by a specialist training organisation, has taken root and is now starting to deliver significant business benefits.

Many companies have various concerns over implementing six sigma, including the belief that the “strict” process requires too much effort and that it can stifle innovative thinking. This case study details how one company's successful six sigma implementation programme is overcoming these and other “internal” hurdles.

PurposeThe issue of manufacturing flexibility has been widely discussed in the literature. One major area of focus has been the development of taxonomies for flexibility. This paper aims to review the contributions in this area and to propose a new classification and a framework for analysing flexibility in manufacturing companies.Design/methodology/approachThe study adopts a case study methodology approach. The framework proposed is used to analyse the implementation of flexibility in four UK manufacturing plants in four major industrial sectors: electronics, process, household and general goods and food.FindingsFrom the empirical analysis, various enablers of flexibility are identified. These are classified into three broad sources of flexibility namely fundamental enablers, indirect enablers and generic enablers as well as flexibility avoidance strategies referred to as flexibility evaders.Practical implicationsThe implication is that a mix of flexibility solutions rather than a single solution may be the most appropriate way for delivering flexibility in an organisation. However, the drivers of the need for flexibility have to be correctly identified in order to determine the best solutions for delivering system flexibility.Originality/valueThe development of a refined framework for analysing manufacturing flexibility as well as the identification of various enablers of strategic flexibility are the major contributions of this paper.

To show how the integration of standard sensors with software has produced a very powerful aid to food‐safety compliant product labelling in the production environment.

A review of the requirements of food labelling for traceability is followed by a description of the Cobalt Sentinel system for validating the packaging process. The advantages of biometric authentication over passwords for operator access control, and the installation and commissioning options are explained. Further, information is given about the range of sensors and software enhancements supplied by the company.

Cobalt IS has a lot of experience with the hardware needed for high quality product labelling, and writes its own software to configure it to meet application requirements. The Cobalt Sentinel ensures labelling equipment is correctly set up for each run, and links to the factory network for further checks against the production scheduling database. It aims to pay for itself within 12 months.

Informs food packaging companies of a practical solution to the increasing demands of regulation and customer expectation for food traceability.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐17; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐17; Property Management Volumes 8‐17; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐17.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.