Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide evidence on how smart manufacturing (SM) affects work organization at both micro-level – i.e. work design, described in terms of operator job breadth and autonomy, cognitive demand and social interaction – and at macro-level – i.e. organizational structure, described in terms of centralization of decision making and number of hierarchical levels in the plant.

The paper reports on a multiple-case study of 19 companies implementing SM.

Results present four main configurations differing in terms of technological complexity, and micro and macro work organization.

The paper contributes to the academic debate about the interplay between technology and work organization in the context of SM, specifically the authors find that the level of technology complexity relates to different characteristics of micro and macro work organization in the plant.

Findings offer valuable insights for practice, with implications for the design of operator jobs, skills and plant organizational structure, in light of the challenges generated by the implementation of SM technology. Guidelines on how policymakers can foster the implementation of SM technology to enhance social sustainability are proposed.

This study advances a novel focus in studying SM, i.e. work organization implications of this new manufacturing paradigm instead of its mere technological implications.

Gives results of a survey on the application of the just‐in‐time (JIT) approach in Italy, based on a sample of 173 industrial companies. The methodological framework used to evaluate JIT application was described in a previous article (International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 9 No. 8, 1989). Interest in JIT is wide and is growing. The evidence shows the compatibility and complementarity of JIT with different classes of innovation; the need for an integrative approach emerges. Pull‐controlled flow, supply quality certification, preventive maintenance, job enlargement/enrichment and product modularization emerge as the core features of JIT, even though most are widely adopted in JIT implementation. In terms of operating conditions, the most significant improvements obtained by those who adopt JIT are: a speed‐up in production flow and synchronization between production and market and between the different productive and logistic phases. Consequently, major benefits in production system performance are achieved in terms of mix flexibility, working‐capital productivity and productivity of both direct and clerical labour. Success in JIT adoption seem not to be related to certain exogenous factors, such as company size and type and the nationality of ownership. As the strategic profile of a firm also seems irrelevant to the aims of JIT adoption JIT confirms itself as an instrument suitable for different application contexts and diverse strategic objectives.

Part of a research programme being undertaken in Italy on the applicability of the just‐in‐time (JIT) approach. The programme includes both the development of methodological concepts to evaluate JIT applicability and an extensive survey of the value of JIT implementation as seen by Italian industry. Two levels of performances are identified: o First, the various performances at system level (critical manufacturing tasks) where the dimensions and measurement of productivity, service, quality and flexibility are defined; o Second, “operating conditions” being the variables describing the characteristics of single production factors and their interconnection (such as efficiencies, capability, process flexibility and lead times) The set of JIT techniques in the area of product, process, organisation, planning and control and supply are classified, the ways the techniques impact on operating conditions and, through them, on performance at production system level are analysed. A paradigm of JIT approach results, which explains the changes in the traditional trade‐offs within overall performance.

The evolution of production models raises a number of questions on the changes which are taking place, on the continuity of or break with consolidated models, and on whether new production paradigms are emerging. Traces back this broad and multi‐faceted debate to five theses which summarise the principal interpretative approaches: the emergence of lean production as the dominant model; the indeterminacy of production models and the unpredictability of their evolution; the existence of a number of different models which are strongly dependent on context; the asymptotic convergence over time of different models on a single point of reference which is not lean production, while the latter will decline or be revised; and the emergence of a new unifying paradigm which leaves room for and even requires specific variations and adaptations. Reassesses these positions in the light of the life‐cycle of management models and in support of the fifth thesis, i.e. the emergence of a new paradigm. Among the different possible formulations of the new paradigm, that termed “strategically flexible production” is presented.

In recent years, time‐based competition (TBC) has drawn the attention of several practitioners and academicians. Much evidence has been put forward from case studies in order to show the benefits that derive from time compression. Nevertheless, there is a lack of conceptual models and operating tools to support lead‐time reduction. Provides a conceptual framework for modelling the lead time of business processes in order to design effective re‐engineering. Two levels of lead‐time modelling have been identified: an aggregate level, which accounts for the relationships between lead times of different phases of a process, and a detailed one, which allows the mechanisms of lead‐time making to be clearly understood. Reviews existing time models and proposes two new detailed models in order to cope with the growing need for process re‐engineering. Presents these models in terms of time components and composition laws. Suggests a process taxonomy to select the suitable lead‐time models depending on the process characteristics at both the aggregate and detailed level. Finally, shows how detailed models could be used to link lead time to process performances on the one hand and to managerial levers on the other. Thirteen time‐drivers, affecting the lead time of a given process and its basic components, have been identified.

Many post‐Fordist experiences seem nowadays to converge on an emerging manufacturing paradigm that the authors have named strategically flexible production (SFP). The process of diffusion and assimilation of SFP is influenced by extra‐firm factors and country‐specific conditions. Explores the role of regional infrastructures and services to support the adoption and running of manufacturing systems that are oriented to the SFP. Uses the case of Lombardy, one of the most industrialized regions in Europe, as the empirical field of investigation. Discusses ten cases studies in three industries ‐ electronic, textile and mechanical ‐ in order to identify the needs for extra‐firm infrastructures at the company level. In‐depth evidence provides insights on the demand for extra‐firm infrastructures and services induced by SFP and allows one to infer implications and guidelines for policy making. Concludes that SFP induces a selective demand for extra‐firm services and infrastructures.

Defines a new manufacturing paradigm and investigates its adoption and performances, within the assembly industry on a global basis. The definition of the paradigm is based on a set of basic principles to design and manage production systems which discard the traditional way of organizing manufacturing activities, and pool companies which pursue different manufacturing strategies and implement different innovative techniques. The paradigm is characterized by the simultaneous implementation of three principles: strategic multi‐focusedness, integration of business processes across functions, and process ownership. Starting from an operationalization based on fuzzy logic, explores the hypotheses about the adoption and the performance improvements of the multi‐focused manufacturing paradigm using a sample from the International Manufacturing Strategy Survey (IMSS) database. The paradigm has been adopted widely across countries and industries involved in the IMSS survey. Shows that process ownership is poorly implemented by most of the companies at the moment, while multi‐focusedness and integration are more on hand. Companies which have adopted the paradigm are improving their performance significantly better and quicker than partial or non‐adopters. Highlights different possible patterns that the companies can follow to reach core adoption of the multi‐focused manufacturing paradigm.

Industrial relationships among companies within the supply chain and procurement processes are changing to cope with new threats and opportunities arising from Internet technologies. The adoption of Web‐based tools in the procurement process allows firms to either reduce transaction costs or improve internal procurement process efficiency, or even increase collaboration with suppliers. The aim of this research is to analyze and understand main factors driving the adoption of Internet‐based tools in customer‐supplier relationships. The evidence presented is based on four in‐depth case studies (two European and two American) carried out within a joint‐research project of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Politecnico di Milano.

A scholarly collaborative partnership is a capability that develops over time. Its quality is an outcome of the collaborative context, the alignment of purpose, development of work and learning processes, development of shared language and success stories. In this chapter, the authors engage in a metalogue where their shared reflection on the formation and development of their collaborative scholarship in the field of organization development and change is itself an instance of a process of shared scholarship. By adopting the format of a metalogue, they provide the voices of their individual thinking and their reflective conversation so as to offer an expression of the process of theorizing to scholars who wish to embark upon or study shared scholarship.