Search results

Contends that in order to be successful with many quality improvement techniques ‐ such as TQM, empowerment, re‐engineering and continuous improvement ‐ it is vital that employees be able to articulate their ideas and inquiries. An atmosphere that facilitates and encourages brainstorming will enhance employees’ desire and ability to articulate their viewpoints. Elaborates on the importance of this aspect of employee empowerment and also addresses implementation issues.

Whereas inventory theory traditionally assumes the periodic review inventory model (R, T), with an order‐up‐to level R, has a random demand and lead time coupled with a deterministic review interval T, firms often deviate from a strict adherence to a fixed review interval when they attempt to capture transportation scale efficiencies. Employing this policy introduces additional supply chain variability. This paper aims to provide an expression for the standard deviation of demand during the protection period, important in setting safety stock, as well as an expression for the amount of order variance amplification induced by a stochastic review interval.

Analytical modeling is used to develop the expression for the standard deviation of demand during the protection period as well as the calculation for the amount of order variance amplification induced by a stochastic review interval.

In terms of the variance of demand over the protection period, a stochastic review interval has a similar effect to that of a stochastic lead time, but its impact on demand variance amplification within the supply chain differs fundamentally. Specifically, a stochastic review interval creates an order batching bullwhip effect not identified in existing literature.

This study offers an expression for the standard deviation of demand during the protection period when stochastic review intervals are employed. The expression can be used to more effectively set safety stock. The paper also offers an expression for the order variance amplification induced by a stochastic review interval.

The study offers suggestions for retailers and suppliers regarding when the use of a stochastic review interval is effective in terms of cost efficiencies.

While the existence and effect of lead time variability is well‐established in the literature, traditional approaches the periodic review inventory model ignore the stochastic nature of review interval. This paper highlights the use of stochastic review intervals as a contributing factor to the bullwhip effect.

This research aims to consider the impact of common inventory system inaccuracies that occur in retail outlets on the inventory levels, fill rate, and service level of those outlets by simulating daily customer demand and random error in the inventory system.

The simulation experiments vary the amount of inventory system error, the frequency of inventory record error correction, the size of the daily demand, the number of days in the replenishment system's review interval, and the replenishment system's customer service level.

Inventory system error and the frequency with which the error is corrected are statistically significant for fill rate and service level. Thus, inaccuracies in inventory levels affect a retail outlet's ability to service its customers, though at the single SKU level, the results do not indicate a practical impact due to countervailing effects.

Retail outlets must be aware that error exists and can influence the behavior of their replenishment systems, but the overall impact may not be as significant as it might appear.

This research extends prior work on the effects of inventory inaccuracies and clarifies the debate pertaining to their ultimate effects on retail performance outcomes.

The accurate measurement of demand variability amplification across different nodes in the supply chain, or “bullwhip effect,” is critical for firms to achieve more efficient inventory, production, and ordering planning processes. Building on recent analytical research that suggests that data aggregation tends to mask the bullwhip effect in the retail industry, the purpose of this paper is to empirically investigate whether different patterns of data aggregation influence its measurement.

Utilizing weekly, product-level order and sales data from three product categories of a consumer packaged goods manufacturer, the study uses hierarchical linear modeling to empirically test the effects of data aggregation on different measures of bullwhip.

The authors findings lend strong support to the masking effect of aggregating sales and order data along product-location and temporal dimensions, as well as the dampening effect of seasonality on the measurement of the bullwhip effect.

These findings indicate that inconsistencies found in the literature may be due to measurement aggregation and statistical techniques, both of which should be applied with care by academics and practitioners in order to preserve the fidelity of their analyses.

Using product-weekly level data that cover both seasonal and non-seasonal demand, this study is the first, to the author’s knowledge, to systematically aggregate data up to category and monthly levels to empirically examine the impact of data aggregation and seasonality on bullwhip measurement.

With a global drive towards implementing total quality management (TQM), the number of TQM failures is also increasing. One of the major reasons cited for these failures is lack of management commitment. However, no attempt has been made to diagnose why it occurs. Examines one possible determinant of this lack of commitment. Claims that if managers perceive a link between their firm’s product quality and the customers’ view of their product quality, then they will be motivated to improve product quality. Tests this argument empirically using a sample of 248 purchasing managers. Finds that there is a strong relationship between managers’ perception of the quality of their product and managers’ perception of customers’ view of the firm’s product quality, and provides some evidence that management’s lack of recognition of the importance of product quality in serving the customers is probably not a reason for lack of management commitment to quality. Represents an early attempt to diagnose the underlying causes of the determinants of TQM failures.

The TQM revolution of the 1980s has led to a formal adoption of TQM by many firms. However, several organizations fail in their campaigns because of a variety of reasons ranging from lack of top management commitment to focus on tools instead of approach. Through a focused survey of 359 manufacturing firms in a single industry answers two critical questions: is it necessary for a firm to embark on a formal TQM campaign to manage quality effectively?; and is it worthwhile for a firm to embark on a half‐hearted TQM campaign? Using a criterion of existence of a formal TQM campaign in a firm and quality of products offered by the firm, classifies firms into four groups: high performance TQM firms, low performance TQM firms, high performance non‐TQM firms, and low performance non‐TQM firms. Compares them along ten literature‐based, empirically‐validated TQM constructs and derives the following major conclusions: it is not necessary for a firm to implement a TQM campaign formally in order to practise elements of TQM philosophy and thereby manage quality well; a firm should implement a formal TQM campaign only if it plans to execute the TQM constructs to their full extent, or it is better off by not investing in the formal campaign; and the product quality of a firm improves with the extent of the rigour associated with TQM implementation. Discusses implications of these findings for TQM research and practice.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the current state of implementation of lean production practices in China as compared to the USA. Moreover, an institutional‐theoretic framework is developed that explores the interplay among economic, socio‐cultural and regulative forces that may shape the adoption process of lean production practices in China.

The paper draws its conclusions from an analysis of survey data from samples of Chinese and US manufacturing executives. Lean production implementation is measured via a survey instrument, and the data are analyzed via regression analysis.

The results suggest that the degree of implementation of lean production in China is equal to, if not greater than lean production implementation in the USA. While the results are fairly consistent across industries, they vary across different lean production practice bundles. In light of these findings, an institutional theory perspective is adopted to develop further insight into the potential drivers of and barriers to lean production implementation in China. It is argued that, while several economic factors function as enablers for the implementation of these practices, various social processes and cultural traits in China still hinder the full adoption of lean production.

Larger‐scale empirical studies are required for further hypothesis testing and enhanced validity. In particular, the explicit measurement of institutional forces and the statistical analysis of their effects on lean production adoption are recommended for future research.

This is the first study to systematically compare the adoption of lean practices in China and the USA. The analyses and discussions provide a basis for further theory building and hypothesis testing research. In addition, the insights offered in this study may help firms gain a better understanding of the unique opportunities and challenges associated with adoption of lean production in China.

The purpose of this paper is to adopt and contribute to the further development of the relational view by examining the drivers of retailer-supplier collaboration and its effect on the performance of both the retailer and the supplier.

The paper draws its conclusions from a structural analysis of dyadic survey data collected from consumer packaged goods suppliers and retailers in Brazil. In addition, objective retailer performance measures (retailer in-stock performance) are included in the data set.

The results indicate that a supplier's customer orientation is an important determinant of supplier relationship-specific investments and, ultimately, supply chain collaboration. The empirical results also indicate that retailers stand to benefit the most from a supplier's collaborative efforts. In addition, there is evidence that a supplier's customer orientation is positively related to its own performance.

The limited sample size – a result of the dyadic nature of the data – constitutes a limitation and, at the same time, presents opportunities for future, larger-scale studies. Nonetheless, this study highlights the value of customer orientation and collaboration in terms of driving performance outcomes for both suppliers and buyers, while invoking the notion that the benefits of supply chain collaboration accrue differentially over time from the retailers’ and suppliers’ perspectives.

While many of the relationships set forth in this research have been implicitly assumed by proponents of the relational view, this study furthers the development of the relational view by explicitly modeling supplier relationship-specific investments and customer orientation as antecedents of collaboration. Moreover, the study contributes to the literature on buyer-supplier collaboration by simultaneously exploring to what extent both suppliers and retailers derive benefits from such collaboration.

The Howard Shuttering Contractors case throws considerable light on the importance which the tribunals attach to warnings before dismissing an employee. In this case the tribunal took great pains to interpret the intention of the parties to the different site agreements, and it came to the conclusion that the agreed procedure was not followed. One other matter, which must be particularly noted by employers, is that where a final warning is required, this final warning must be “a warning”, and not the actual dismissal. So that where, for example, three warnings are to be given, the third must be a “warning”. It is after the employee has misconducted himself thereafter that the employer may dismiss.