Search results

The purpose of this study is to develop a methodology to help manufacturers determine and rank key internal business processes based on critical success factors (CSF).

First, company CSF and key performance measures were determined based on vision, mission and strategic objectives statements. Second, most important CSF were prioritized according to rating scores such as cost savings, necessary improvement, and own discretion using a balanced scoreboard procedure and a prioritization matrix. Third, CSF were related to internal business processes based on “strength of relationship” in order to define the most critical internal processes. Fourth, possible differences in the perception of CSF and strategic objectives among different management levels were compared. Fifth, the methodology was validated in three furniture manufacturing companies.

It was found that when a firm is missing vision or mission statements, it is imperative to define them before CSF can be identified. The CSF found through this case study were related to customer service, manufacturing management, quality and price of the products. The key internal business processes identified for the companies in this study were customer engagement, product operations and supply chain management. Conclusions show that better results were obtained when this methodology was applied to highest‐level of management.

This study has proved to be a useful tool to determine a strategy based on CSF and their relationship to internal business processes. Plant managers in our case studies were able to prioritize the critical internal business processes for their plants based on the most important CSF.

This study aims to examine the relationship between top‐performing US furniture manufacturers and industry's best manufacturing practices.

In the past studies, best manufacturing practices were mostly determined using qualitative methods. In this paper, a quantitative evaluating method to determine best manufacturing practices was designed by taking into consideration qualitative criterions. A sample of 122 manufacturing practices was observed in six US furniture companies, two of them considered world‐class performers and the other four considered average. A logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between best manufacturing practices and top‐performing companies.

Statistical analyses showed a positive relationship between top‐performing companies and use of best manufacturing practices by these companies. A database of best manufacturing practices was created and shared with the participant companies.

One limitation of this study is that the causal relationship between performance and best practices was not considered. Future studies could employ statistical methods such as structural equation model to better understand this causality. Other methods could possibly be developed to audit and classify manufacturing practices.

It is believed that the database of best manufacturing practices will help average or below‐average performing companies to identify and adopt best manufacturing practices. It will also help top‐performing companies in the cycle of continuous improvement.