Artikelen
Article 1: product process matrix
Cause of article: his paper reports on an empirical investigation of three propositions
concerning the relationships between process choice, product plans, competitive priorities,
and manufacturing performance.
1) Does the process choice correspond to product plans?
2) Does the process choice correspond to the selected competitive
priorities?
3) Do firms operating on or close to the di- agonal of the product-process matrix outperform
those with extreme off-diagonal positions?
Strong correlation between process choice, product customization and competitive
priorities. Process related with degree of customization, with emphasis placed on quality &
cost competitivity.
Job/ batch shop: more product customization, higher costs, higher quality. Use of
commonality & flexible automation to achieve more customization-> better performance
Process focused: job shops producing low-volume, customized products. Shops set aside a
single area for each process and products move from one process to another.
-> by organizing equipment and work force around the process, resource often can be better
utilized
Product focused: continuous flow shops producing high volume, highly standardized
products. Equipment and work force organized around the product, allows more simplified
and efficient workflows, but duplicates operations which can be a disadvantage when
volume isn’t high enough.
Product plans determine the degree of product customization and volume that process
choice should accommodate.
Nice players= firms operating in the near vicinity, but not exactly on the diagonal. Also firms
in the process of change but not completed the transition fully.
Off the diagonal: companies which leave the operations function out of strategic planning
process over time can find themselves in such mismatched positions. In other occasions it
might be that business and operations strategy were compatible at earlier times, but gradual
changes in products did not trigger concomitant adjustments to the process choice.
Example: when product life cycle moves quickly toward standardization, the manufacturing
process may not be able to move quickly toward a line flow process
Specifically, the growing interest in modular designs, part commonality, group technology
and flexible automation can make these positions profitable. These techniques may allow
plants to achieve customized products in mass volumes or multiple standardized products in
low volumes.
,Literature
Proposition 1: As noted earlier, demand characteristics define the principal competitive
priorities which, in turn, define a reasonable range for process choice. Thus, the other
competitive priorities are the additional factors for fine tuning the process choice.
Proposition 2& 3: We measure the overall performance of operations in two ways. The first
measure rates a plant's performance relative to corporate performance criteria. The second
measure rates the performance of the operations function relative to plants owned by other
companies in the same industry. these two measures are highly correlated, they convey a
quite different message in the evaluation of the operations function. Both measures are
used to test prop 3.
Data
The survey covered a wide range of issues including competitive priorities, process
choice, and performance measure. Each plant in the sample was either a single-plant
corporation, part of a division in a multi-division corporation, or a part of a multi-plant
corporatio
results
proposition 1: association between product plans & process choice, customized products->
negative correlation, hypothesis rejected. Significant relation between process choice and
volume.
Proposition 2: relationships between competitive priorities and process choice-> product
flexibility and quality are the two most important competitive priorities for job shops. Cost
dimension= unimportant
For the other three process types, quality is the top competitive priority
No link of delivery time and dependability of delivery on process choice.
product flexibility (PFLEX) loses its importance as process choice moves away from a job
shop towards a continuous flow shop
Moreover, product flexibility, which we measure as the degree of customization, is the only
priority with statistically significant differences between the means of the four process
choices. This priority seems to be the key discriminator between process choices, just as
initially proposed by Hayes and Wheelwright.
Proposition 3: x
conclusion
Our study shows that manufacturing firms' choice of production process by and large agrees
with the emphasis they place on product customization. ur findings support the expectation
that firms with different process choices emphasize different competitive priorities. Our
findings show that some continuous flow shops use common parts and subassemblies to
achieve customization. However, when customization in continuous flow shops is not
supported by these programs, manufacturing performance suffers.
Limitations
First, the wording of the cost question was inconsistent with the rest of the questions and
could have caused some interpretation difficulties. Second, the product flexibility dimension
only captured the customization aspect of flexibility. Third, our cross-sectional study did not
, test the dynamics of the product-process matrix covering plants with products and processes
advancing through their life cycles
Implication for future research:
First, the use of common parts and subassemblies and flexible manufacturing systems has
allowed some continuous flow shops to achieve customization in mass quantities.
Second, collecting data regarding a dominant product line produced in a particular plant
makes it possible to clearly investigate the differences between alternative process choices
and their competitive priorities. Future surveys and empirical studies might benefit from
separating their analyses for different process choices or including process choice as an
explanatory variable in the model. Third, customization appears to be the competitive
priority with the greatest discriminating power between different process choices.
Finally, batch shop and production lines operate along a wide spectrum of product plans.
Article 2: defining the missing link
Doel
A basic set of definitions of strategy, and particularly manufacturing strategy, is then
provided, followed by some observations on why manufacturing strategy is so important and
what seems to be required to realize its potential.
Whether they are stated explicitly or only implied, such elements of an organization's
philosophy and culture are extremely important. They serve as an umbrella over various
elements of strategy, and guide decision making within the organization. Such philosophy
not only establishes the context within which day-to-day operating decisions are made but
also sets the bounds for the strategic options considered by the firm
Dominant orientation
A company often experiences considerable trauma when it ventures outside of its dominant
orientation
Diversification patterns
Generally speaking, the more variety in the businesses, the more likely there is to be variety
in the business strategies pursued and thus in the corresponding manufacturing strategies.
Recent personal observations suggest that the greater the variety of manufacturing
strategies, the less likely it is that senior-level managers will view manufacturing as a
potential competitive weapon, simply because there are not enough common threads that
they can exploit from their position, and the less likely it is that a strong philosophy will be
shared throughout the organization.
Perspective on growth
For some, growth represents an input to the company's or business unit's planning process.
For others it is an output.
A company's acceptance of a low rate of growth, which a given orientation and pattern of
diversification are more highly valued than growth.
Other companies, however, are so structured and managed that a certain rate of growth is
required if they are to function properly. If their current set of products and markets will not
permit that desired rate of growth, they will seek new ones to 'fill the gap'.
Article 1: product process matrix
Cause of article: his paper reports on an empirical investigation of three propositions
concerning the relationships between process choice, product plans, competitive priorities,
and manufacturing performance.
1) Does the process choice correspond to product plans?
2) Does the process choice correspond to the selected competitive
priorities?
3) Do firms operating on or close to the di- agonal of the product-process matrix outperform
those with extreme off-diagonal positions?
Strong correlation between process choice, product customization and competitive
priorities. Process related with degree of customization, with emphasis placed on quality &
cost competitivity.
Job/ batch shop: more product customization, higher costs, higher quality. Use of
commonality & flexible automation to achieve more customization-> better performance
Process focused: job shops producing low-volume, customized products. Shops set aside a
single area for each process and products move from one process to another.
-> by organizing equipment and work force around the process, resource often can be better
utilized
Product focused: continuous flow shops producing high volume, highly standardized
products. Equipment and work force organized around the product, allows more simplified
and efficient workflows, but duplicates operations which can be a disadvantage when
volume isn’t high enough.
Product plans determine the degree of product customization and volume that process
choice should accommodate.
Nice players= firms operating in the near vicinity, but not exactly on the diagonal. Also firms
in the process of change but not completed the transition fully.
Off the diagonal: companies which leave the operations function out of strategic planning
process over time can find themselves in such mismatched positions. In other occasions it
might be that business and operations strategy were compatible at earlier times, but gradual
changes in products did not trigger concomitant adjustments to the process choice.
Example: when product life cycle moves quickly toward standardization, the manufacturing
process may not be able to move quickly toward a line flow process
Specifically, the growing interest in modular designs, part commonality, group technology
and flexible automation can make these positions profitable. These techniques may allow
plants to achieve customized products in mass volumes or multiple standardized products in
low volumes.
,Literature
Proposition 1: As noted earlier, demand characteristics define the principal competitive
priorities which, in turn, define a reasonable range for process choice. Thus, the other
competitive priorities are the additional factors for fine tuning the process choice.
Proposition 2& 3: We measure the overall performance of operations in two ways. The first
measure rates a plant's performance relative to corporate performance criteria. The second
measure rates the performance of the operations function relative to plants owned by other
companies in the same industry. these two measures are highly correlated, they convey a
quite different message in the evaluation of the operations function. Both measures are
used to test prop 3.
Data
The survey covered a wide range of issues including competitive priorities, process
choice, and performance measure. Each plant in the sample was either a single-plant
corporation, part of a division in a multi-division corporation, or a part of a multi-plant
corporatio
results
proposition 1: association between product plans & process choice, customized products->
negative correlation, hypothesis rejected. Significant relation between process choice and
volume.
Proposition 2: relationships between competitive priorities and process choice-> product
flexibility and quality are the two most important competitive priorities for job shops. Cost
dimension= unimportant
For the other three process types, quality is the top competitive priority
No link of delivery time and dependability of delivery on process choice.
product flexibility (PFLEX) loses its importance as process choice moves away from a job
shop towards a continuous flow shop
Moreover, product flexibility, which we measure as the degree of customization, is the only
priority with statistically significant differences between the means of the four process
choices. This priority seems to be the key discriminator between process choices, just as
initially proposed by Hayes and Wheelwright.
Proposition 3: x
conclusion
Our study shows that manufacturing firms' choice of production process by and large agrees
with the emphasis they place on product customization. ur findings support the expectation
that firms with different process choices emphasize different competitive priorities. Our
findings show that some continuous flow shops use common parts and subassemblies to
achieve customization. However, when customization in continuous flow shops is not
supported by these programs, manufacturing performance suffers.
Limitations
First, the wording of the cost question was inconsistent with the rest of the questions and
could have caused some interpretation difficulties. Second, the product flexibility dimension
only captured the customization aspect of flexibility. Third, our cross-sectional study did not
, test the dynamics of the product-process matrix covering plants with products and processes
advancing through their life cycles
Implication for future research:
First, the use of common parts and subassemblies and flexible manufacturing systems has
allowed some continuous flow shops to achieve customization in mass quantities.
Second, collecting data regarding a dominant product line produced in a particular plant
makes it possible to clearly investigate the differences between alternative process choices
and their competitive priorities. Future surveys and empirical studies might benefit from
separating their analyses for different process choices or including process choice as an
explanatory variable in the model. Third, customization appears to be the competitive
priority with the greatest discriminating power between different process choices.
Finally, batch shop and production lines operate along a wide spectrum of product plans.
Article 2: defining the missing link
Doel
A basic set of definitions of strategy, and particularly manufacturing strategy, is then
provided, followed by some observations on why manufacturing strategy is so important and
what seems to be required to realize its potential.
Whether they are stated explicitly or only implied, such elements of an organization's
philosophy and culture are extremely important. They serve as an umbrella over various
elements of strategy, and guide decision making within the organization. Such philosophy
not only establishes the context within which day-to-day operating decisions are made but
also sets the bounds for the strategic options considered by the firm
Dominant orientation
A company often experiences considerable trauma when it ventures outside of its dominant
orientation
Diversification patterns
Generally speaking, the more variety in the businesses, the more likely there is to be variety
in the business strategies pursued and thus in the corresponding manufacturing strategies.
Recent personal observations suggest that the greater the variety of manufacturing
strategies, the less likely it is that senior-level managers will view manufacturing as a
potential competitive weapon, simply because there are not enough common threads that
they can exploit from their position, and the less likely it is that a strong philosophy will be
shared throughout the organization.
Perspective on growth
For some, growth represents an input to the company's or business unit's planning process.
For others it is an output.
A company's acceptance of a low rate of growth, which a given orientation and pattern of
diversification are more highly valued than growth.
Other companies, however, are so structured and managed that a certain rate of growth is
required if they are to function properly. If their current set of products and markets will not
permit that desired rate of growth, they will seek new ones to 'fill the gap'.
