JMTM 12 2013 0174

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/291833699
Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management An experimental

investigation of lean management in aviation: Avoiding unforced errors for
better supply chain Article information: F...
Article in Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management · January 2015
CITATIONS READS
22 2,421
10 authors, including:
Ashish Agarwal Sabry Shaaban

Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) La Rochelle Business School
18 PUBLICATIONS 80 CITATIONS 47 PUBLICATIONS 302 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Abdul Salam Darwish Mark Stevenson

University of Bolton Lancaster University
27 PUBLICATIONS 217 CITATIONS 150 PUBLICATIONS 4,788 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Sustainable Buildings View project
Trend in Production View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Ashish Agarwal on 26 January 2016.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management
An experimental investigation of lean management in aviation: Avoiding unforced
errors for better supply chain
Raghu Kumar BR Milind Kumar Sharma Ashish Agarwal
Article information:
To cite this document:
Raghu Kumar BR Milind Kumar Sharma Ashish Agarwal , (2015),"An experimental investigation of
lean management in aviation", Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 26 Iss 2 pp.
231 - 260
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-12-2013-0174
Downloaded by Mr RAGHU KUMAR At 22:47 17 February 2015 (PT)
Downloaded on: 17 February 2015, At: 22:47 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 114 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 85 times since 2015*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Dr Sabry Shaaban, Dr Abdul Salam Darwish, Kalinga Jagoda, Senevi Kiridena, (2015),"Operations
strategy processes and performance: Insights from the contract apparel manufacturing
industry", Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 26 Iss 2 pp. 261-279 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-10-2013-0156
Dr Sabry Shaaban, Dr Abdul Salam Darwish, Cristóvão Silva, Mark Stevenson, Matthias Thurer,
(2015),"A case study of the successful implementation of workload control: A practitioner-led
approach", Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 26 Iss 2 pp. 280-296 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-10-2013-0144
Dr Sabry Shaaban, Dr Abdul Salam Darwish, Alireza Ebrahim Nejad, Onur Kuzgunkaya, (2015),"On
the value of response time characteristics in robust design of supply flow", Journal of Manufacturing
Technology Management, Vol. 26 Iss 2 pp. 213-230 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-12-2013-0178
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by

Token:JournalAuthor:2E546737-8A90-48E2-ADF1-2AE79C1BCEDE:
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of
download.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1741-038X.htm
An experimental investigation of Experimental

investigation
lean management in aviation of lean
management
Avoiding unforced errors for better
supply chain 231
Raghu Kumar B.R. Received 7 December 2013
Indian Armed Forces, Bangalore, India Revised 24 April 2014
20 June 2014
Milind Kumar Sharma Accepted 4 July 2014
Department of Production and Industrial Engineering, J.N.V. University,
Jodhpur, India, and
Ashish Agarwal
Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), New Delhi, India
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify important factors those which constrain
implementation and sustenance of lean strategies in aviation sector and ways to avoid slow attrition
within annals of lean.
Design/methodology/approach – This research is exploratory in nature and survey methodology
is used for assessing the post lean management implementation environment. The focus of study is
cross-sectional, within aircraft industry based on the information collected through survey and a
case study.
Findings – The reasons for the weak sustenance of lean initiative have been identified. The measures
as undertaken in the case study implied a successful turnaround of specific department. Comparison
with automobile industry indicates suggestions and pitfalls to be avoided with suitable illustration.
Research limitations/implications – The target of the study is the aircraft manufacturer and
hence it has the limitation in terms of the scope. However, overall results are encouraging with the
survey generating expected inputs and underline the need for similar research in the aerospace sector.
The study has implications for managers in all types of industrial environment, especially in aviation,
in the era of globalized lean supply chain establishment.
Practical implications – Inputs obtained are from both industrial research in a live environment and
a case study which impacts lean management in industries.
Originality/value – This paper presents novel inputs regarding post lean implementation scenario in
aviation sector, which has complicated internal processes. It also tries to establish factors relevant for
any organization in assessing lean initiatives.
Keywords Leanness, Lean management, Materials requirement planning (MRP), Throughput
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Each year, 24/7 Wall St. identifies ten important brands sold in America that Yahoo
predicts will disappear before start of next year (Yahoo/finance/news, W-1). There has been
a prediction for the year ending 2014 and this year’s list reflects the brutally competitive
The authors would like to thank the anonymous referees for their valuable comments without which Journal of Manufacturing
the paper would not have taken the present shape. The authors would also like to thank the precious Technology Management
Vol. 26 No. 2, 2015
contribution of the people in the industry where the study was carried out, who remain unnamed pp. 231-260
due to obvious reasons. However their contribution has been instrumental in generating inputs and © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1741-038X
the case study which may prove to be highly beneficial to the organizations. DOI 10.1108/JMTM-12-2013-0174
JMTM nature of certain industries and the importance of not falling behind in efficiency,
26,2 innovation, or financing. The efficiency in other words, can be construed as to be able to
enhance product line up (as gathered from the line up of companies being wiped out) and
effectiveness as to be able to produce the same output from lesser and lesser inputs
progressively. If we look at the companies it definitely does not augur well for their future.
The competitiveness of an industry while reflected by the profits it is making and
232 stocks to large extent may not be the only indicator toward the health of that industry and
its projectable future. Increased earnings are good, but an increase does not mean that
the profit margin of a company is improving. For instance, if a company has costs
that have increased at a greater rate than sales, it leads to a lower profit margin (W-3). The
innovativeness of an industry still dictates to a large extent the ability of that industry to
stay afloat and excel in troubled times, as demonstrated by the mobile companies in recent
past, especially Apple and Samsung in years 2011-2013 by a stable stock performance.
Apple makes more profit on o one-fourth of the sales of Toyota. Doesn’t that make Apple
about four times more efficient in value creation? Unfortunately no. If costs rise and prices
do not rise to keep up, then the profit margin will fall. In times of business cycle upturns,
prices tend to rise; in business cycle downturns, prices tend to fall. Of course, many
factors, and not only costs, will affect the profit margin – namely, industry-specific factors
that relate to investment requirements, pricing, type of market, and conditions of
production (including production turnover time) (W-3). Jet engines for commercial aircraft
are priced the same way, with engines being sold relatively inexpensively but parts (and
service) involving considerable markups and represent an income stream that may
continue for decades (David, 2010) therefore generating income from a single capital
investment. However it is also true that the designing costs of these aero engines are
prohibitive and unless efforts are made to reduce the input costs the maintenance of these
engines become exorbitant. Therefore effective implementation of strategy is a key driver
of financial performance and organizations those fail to fully engage their workforce in the
business strategy will fail to produce reliable, sustainable business results (W-4). This is
reflected in the revolutionary statement “[…] a corporation’s ultimate success or health
can and should be measured not just by the traditional financial bottom line, but also by
its social/ethical and environmental performance” (Wayne and MacDonald, 2004). The
recent lockout of the Toyota Bengaluru plant (TOI, Mar 19, 2014), which is reopened after
state government’s intervention, is another case in point, highlighting finer aspects of the
amalgamation of lean initiatives and supply chain management (SCM).
1.1 Origins of mass production and the birth of lean

Driven by the ideas developed by the Fred Winslow Taylor, a foundry manager from
Philadelphia, who laid the foundation for mass production (Dennis, 2002), and introduced
to the world the concepts such as standardized work, reduced cycle time, time and motion
study, measurement and analysis to continually improve the process, etc., the world
slowly started taking notice of the new generation concepts. However, the erstwhile Ford
plant was the industry which adopted the idea of the mass production with élan and
perfected the concept of a moving conveyer and the stationary worker, along with
thorough interchangeability of parts and ease of assembly. This led the Ford to a market
leadership position in the passenger car segment as they faced literally no competition.
1.2 What is lean manufacturing?

In the spring of 1950, a young Japanese engineer named Eiji Toyoda visited Ford’s vast
Rogue Plant in Detroit (Rodney, 2010; Dennis, 2002). He studied every corner of the
Rogue plant and took back the understanding that the mass production would not Experimental
work in Japan. Upon his return to Japan, Eiji and Taiichi Ohno, over the next 30 years, investigation
solved the problems one by one and pushed his system through Toyota using the
system what the world knows today as the Toyota Production System (TPS), or lean
of lean
production, which was the solution to Toyota’s problems (Dennis, 2002). Nothing in the management
world of manufacturing put across in as simple a manner the fundamentals of
the production systems and a value driven functioning which focusses on the values 233
delivered to the customer rather than the efficiency alone of the plant producing the
product, through the TPS and the TPS House which is famous for these principles
(Figure 1). In 1990, the “Problems of Production” were in fact had become foremost
issue in any industry. The culmination was perhaps the publication of a book in 1990
The Machine That Changed the World, preaching the gospel of lean production
and offering the promise of two-for-one improvement for all who followed these
Japanese-initiated doctrines (Haslam et al., 1996). This book gave an articulate and data
reinforced description of the Toyota inspired lean production system and that
predicted widespread adoption of this superior approach to integrated manufacturing
and business management. In a very short time the term “lean production” had entered
the mainstream business lexicons and is indisputably important in the plans of a large
fraction of the world’s manufacturing base – automotive and otherwise (International
motor vehicle program (IMVP)).
According to Womak and Jones (1996) (Emiliani, 1998; Spear, 2004; Murman et al.,
2002a; Hopp and Spearman, 2004) lean thinking can be summarized in five principles:
precisely specify value by specific product, identify the value stream for each product,
make value flow without interruptions, let the customer pull value from the producer,
and pursue perfection. These principles have been put into practice in most types of
industries and being applied with great success. The lean transition is, at its core, an
organizational culture transition and it follows that managing lean, particularly during
the initial phases, is actually more about managing the change process than managing
lean tools and techniques (Csokasy and Parent, 2007). “The idea of lean thinking
comprises complex cocktail of ideas including continuous improvements, flattened
organization structures, team work, elimination of waste, efficient use of resources and
cooperative supply chain management” (Green, 2000, p. 524).
1.3 IMVP
IMVP is an abbreviation of the International Motor Vehicle Program established at
Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1985. During the following five years, the
IMVP staff carried out the world’s most comprehensive benchmarking study ever seen.
The study collected data from automobile assembly plans all over the world in order to
understand the differences in quality and productivity. The results of this benchmarking
study were published in the well-known book The Machine that Changed the World
(Womak et al., 1990), in which there is an exciting historical analysis of the machine called
“the automobile” (Dahlgaard and Dahlgaard-Park, 2006). As a result of the IMVP
benchmarking study, and the work of Womak et al. (1990), US and European
companies began adapting the TPS under the title of just-in-time ( JIT) to remain
competitive with Japanese industry (Pepper and Spedding, 2010). Another key driver of
change in the automotive industry riding on the wave of lean can be summed up by the
word “globalization” (IMVP). Because globalization connects activities occurring in an
extremely diverse set of locations, it is an inherently complex process, one that cannot
call for a static set of strategic responses or result in a single societal or competitive
26,2
234
JMTM
Figure 1.
the LAI research

Selected examples of
40
Proposed UCAV Project
35
30
25
20
15
10
Rel Probability
Changes (%)
5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Estimated Unplanned Req

Schedule
Program Leadership Continuity (%) Cost
Case studies show impact of DSM simulations show impact of

program leadership continuity on sequencing design tasks on project
s/w requirements rework (lppolito) cost and schedule (Browning)
18.0 35% 36%

Part Count
16.0
29%
14.0
12.0 Average Build Time
Shortest Build Time
10.0
Longest Build Time
8.0 Spacecraft
6.0 Normalized by
4.0 % of Discrepancies,
Normalized Build Time

2.0
(actual/planned build time)

0.0
B1 B2 A1 A1’ A2 C2 C1 System Subsystem Test
(n = 10) (n = 10) (n = 31) (n = 5) (n = 55) (n = 59) (n = 77) Equipment
Site Engine Lines
Analysis of final integration and
Benchmarking jet engine final test of 224 spacecraft reveal
assembly reveal effect of supply sources of discrepancies (Weigel).
chain mgm’t on schedule (Shields) Academic Perspectives on Engineering Systems - Murman - 7
Source: Rebentisch et al. (2004)

outcome. Accordingly, IMVP’s Globalization Research Program (GRP) is relying on a Experimental
series on inter-linked research projects that seek to understand the process of investigation
globalization in terms of corporate strategy, industry organization, and social impacts
for both “home” and “host” countries. The direct application of this knowledge can be
of lean
extended to the aerospace sector, which particularly thrives on globalized supply for management
most of its aeronautical components, which have prohibitive developmental cost and is
more prudent to be outsourced. 235
As seen in the foregoing discussion, in 1990 MIT book on the automobile industry
introduced Lean Production as a new industrial paradigm. As a fall out to this finding, in
1992 US Air Force asked whether the concepts, principles, and practices of the TPS be
applied to the military aircraft industry. As an answer to this the Lean Aerospace
Initiative (LAI) was formed in 1993 which was basically a national consortium of
Industry, Government, Labor and Academia to look into work principles on which the
Japanese domination and monopoly on the auto sector were based and further extended
them to the western industry. The industry involved basically Airframe, Engine,
Avionics, Missile and Space companies, which had been burgeoned by the cost effective
measures and were being forced to work under reduced budgets. The scope of LAI was
very vast but clearly brought out in three major categories – Life Cycle Processes (LCP),
Enabling Infrastructure Processes (EIP) and Enterprise Leadership Processes (ELP). The
LCP consisted of business acquisition and program management, requirements
definition, develop product and process, SCM, produce product, distribute and service
product. The EIP consisted of finance, information technology, human resources, quality
assurance, facilities and services, environment and health and safety. The ELP consisted
of strategic planning, business models, managing business growth, strategic partnering,
organizational structure and integration and transformation management.
1.4 LAI
The LAI (later to become the Lean Advancement Initiative) was a consortium of industry,
government, and labor union members funding MIT to help research and enable
implementation of lean thinking in the aerospace sector (Murman et al., 2002a). In August
2002, Mrs Darleen Druyun, the Principal Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Air
Force for Acquisition and government co-chairperson of the LAI, decided it was time for
Air Force acquisitions to embrace the concepts of lean. At her request, the LAI Executive
Board developed a concept and methodology to employ lean into the Air Force’s
acquisition culture and processes. As organizations grow and become more successful,
they begin to lose insight into the basic truths of what made them successful; organizations
have to deal with more and more issues that may not have anything to do with directly
providing products or services to their customers (Ronald, 2003). Not enough follow-up
after lean events, nor requests for further input was in fact one of the feedback by the
C-5 mechanics (Lydia Fraile Labor Aerospace Research Agenda (LARA) MIT). These get
substantiated in this research and provide a concrete foundation for the industrialists to
give a fillip to future direction of the organization which has lost out after several years
into implementation of lean management.
The LAI Lean Academy effort started soon after publication of Lean Enterprise
Value (Murman et al., 2002a) by the LAI team. It arises from the work of the LAI at MIT
and provides a new light. It also redefines and develops the concept of Lean as a
framework for enterprise transformation with insights from MIT’s LAI. The book
introduces the concepts of value stream, total quality control and other lean principles
that enable the company to focus on value delivery to all stakeholders and quickly
JMTM adapt the production processes to current market trends. There are a number of
26,2 inspirational examples from aerospace industry that enabled companies to eliminate
waste and increase product value by implementing lean concepts (Figure 1) which can be
applied in other complex environments as well. It gives an introduction to lean philosophy
for all those interested particularly in company strategy and process management.
Visualization of a supply chain. The term “Supply Chain Management” (SCM) was first
236 introduced by consultants in the early 1980s (Oliver and Webber, 1982). The concept was
mainly used to discuss the benefits of integrating a firm’s internal business functions;
such as purchasing, manufacturing, sales, and distribution (Harland, 1996). This view of
the supply chain is closely related to what Porter (1985) labels the firm’s value chain
(Harland, 1996; Anna et al., 1998). According to Spekman et al. (1998) the traditional view
of SCM has been to organize the supply chain to achieve the lowest initial purchase prices
while assuring supply. Supply chain today has been recognized as one of the most critical
domains which warrant utmost attention of the management bigwigs in any industry if
they have to sustain themselves in an ever increasingly competitive global scenario of
suppliers and consumers. Organizations in both the public and private sectors are
increasingly aware of the pivotal role that SCM can play in their businesses (Cousins et al.,
2006). Though it is well known that this field is well managed by the industry leaders like
the Toyota, Maruti, Honda, Walmart, McDonald’s, etc. in automotive and retail sectors, the
other players on different product platforms have yet to fully comprehend the nuances of
the SCM and its benefits when managed well. This statement will bring to fore examples
such as the aviation industry where cost effectiveness cannot be easily achieved and
technological challenges difficult to surmount if not assisted by a well-managed supply
chain, owing to a very restricted supplier base and an uncertain clientele.
Syverson (2004a) found that plants at the 90th percentile of the industry’s
productivity distribution produced four times as much as the plant in the tenth
percentile on a per-employee basis (These figures use total factor productivity
measures. They reflect the amount of output that a producer obtains from a given
combination of labor, capital, and intermediate inputs). At the country level, Hall and
Jones (1999) and Jones and Romer (2009) show how the stark differences in productivity
across countries account for a substantial fraction of the differences in average per
capita income. Thompson (1967) states that most models of complex organizations
“assume interdependence of organizational parts.” What is essential in the SCM is to
establish operationally feasible link(s) between various key components for achieving
overall efficiency and cost trade-off using natural downsizing and reengineering
models. All in all, interdependence has only been dealt within SCM to a very limited
degree and in most cases in an intra-organizational setting, discussing how functions
within a firm depend on one another. One explicit notion of this kind of interdependence
is made in Lambert et al. (1998) followed by Lambert and Cooper (2000) suggesting that
“non-member” links can be of importance to consider, which form the building blocks
of the lean thinking. Therefore the lean thinking along with lean philosophies and
related concepts, tools, techniques, and practices are rapidly expanding into the
different parts of a supply chain because of their great achievements such as lower cost,
superior quality, high flexibility, and JIT delivery (Behrouzi and Wong, 2011a, b). The
term “lean manufacturing” is used here as shorthand for a broad set of changes
embodied in efforts to promote “high performance,” “continuous improvement,” “JIT”
and ultimately much more efficient and profitable production (Panizzolo et al., 2012).
Though the lean management has been professed by the Japanese practitioners, the
roots really lie in the west, in the very boughs of the mass production. This paper thus Experimental
is an attempt to record the post lean implementation (LI) scenario of a supply chain, investigation
stretching many years beyond the lean management implementation, to record the
changes that have taken place from the very beginning of lean initialization.
of lean
management
2. Literature survey
In several studies, quality, cost, flexibility, delivery, and reliability have been considered 237
as the most important parts of the value in a supply chain ( Johansson et al., 1993; Naylor
et al., 1999; Manrodt et al., 2005). By focussing on waste elimination, value creation and
flexibility enhancement across the supply chain, lean philosophies can be applied to all
the supply chain members (Behrouzi and Wong, 2011a, b). The term “lean production”
first appeared in The Machine That Changed The World (Womak et al., 1990), in which
the authors coined the term to describe the strategic business system and operational
differences between Japanese auto producers and North American auto producers of
the 1980s. Essentially, they changed the emphasis from machine and workstation
optimization to product flow through the total process, implementing some ideas like
dimensioning the manufacturing resources according to actual demand (rightsizing),
improving the self-monitoring capabilities of equipment to ensure quality, designing the
process layout to facilitate the sequence of the operations, studying and improving quick
setups to enable rapid changeovers and the use of kanbans to coordinate the production
pull from and link one workstation to its predecessors and successors, and also to link
the company with its suppliers and enable JIT supply (Womack, 2002).
Lean manufacturing is a corporate activity of continuous improvement and requires
effective strategies to successfully implement (Charles et al., 2005/2006). A good strategy
needs to be defined and redefined dynamically according to the current circumstances of
manufacturing during LI (Kesser, 1999; Nightingale and Mize, 2002; Charles et al.,
2005/2006; Wilson and Pearson, 1995). Lean techniques aim to identify and eliminate the
root causes of waste; but implementing these techniques in China and India presents
challenges that can jeopardize the efforts of any company, even those which are
well-versed in the discipline (Panizzolo et al., 2012). Although lean production was
originally designed for the auto industry, it has been applied widely to other industrial
areas such as aerospace (Murman et al., 2002a), construction (Garnett et al., 1998; Freire
and Alarcón, 2002; Mohamed Marzouk et al., 2011), wood products (Shingo Prize News,
2003), and many others. The details of the diffusion of the lean techniques in Indian
industry is as shown in the Table I (Panizzolo et al., 2012), which is very low for aerospace.
This low diffusion standard in the industry has affected the general perception of
the people in the industry about the lean thinking. The large organisations in India
have greater awareness of lean manufacturing while the small- and medium-size
enterprises (SMEs) lag behind (Panizzolo et al., 2012). According to Mishra (2008), it is
essential to systematically demonstrate how lean manufacturing tools can help to
eliminate waste, achieve better product quality and inventory control. As per the
feedback from lean trainers within the industry the ability of the clientele to get to
know the lean environment’s requirement is crucial in establishing the lean
environment per se. The new environment requires everything to change – the style
of management, organizational structure, performance measurement, thinking, and
even the style of leadership. This would be a tall order considering tough aviation
industry standards and environment, where all ideas revolve around “flight safety”
which would be the first and foremost thought in taking decisions related to changes in
work environment.
JMTM Industry sector Journal research studies on lean Level of
26,2 in India manufacturing in India Authors/companies diffusion
Automotive International Journal of Production Dangayach and Deshmukh (2001), Very high
Research, Interfaces, Vilakshan – Balakrishnan et al. (2007), Mohanty
XIMB Journal of Management IIM et al. (2006), Saranga et al. (2009)
238 Bangalore Working Paper No. 286 Ashok Leyland. Bajaj Aulo, Tata
Motors, Ford India. Maruti Suzuki
India, TVS-Wabco India,
Machine tool International Journal of Advanced Eswaramoorthi et al. (2010) Medium
Manufacturing Technology to low
Electronics IT Benchmarking: An International Gurumurthy and Kodali (2009). High
engineering Journal Wipro, Samsung India. Flextronics,
LG Electronics, Lapp India,
FMCG International Journal of Advanced Upadhye et al. (2010), Singh et al. Medium
Operations Management, (2010) HUL, Britannia Industries, to low
International, Journal of Rapid Godrej
Manufacturing
Table I. Process Curie, Journal of Scientific and Mishra (2008), Mahapatra and Medium
Evidence to industries Industrial Research Mohanty (2007). Grasim Industries, to low
comprehend level of Jindal Steel, Kansai Nerolac
diffusion of lean Aerospace SMEworld Janakiram (2008), Hindustan Medium
manufacturing in Aeronautics Ltd to low
India Source: Panizzolo et al. (2012)
2.1 Transition from supply chain to lean supply chain

The supply chain model, which came first, focusses on activities that get raw materials
and sub-assemblies into a manufacturing operation and finally deliver products to the end
user smoothly and economically, but the lean supply chain model focusses on values
and wastes which may happen all over the supply chain (Behrouzi and Wong, 2011a, b).
To implement lean engineering, a three-part approach is needed: creating the right
products, with effective lifecycle and enterprise integration, using efficient engineering
processes. Organizations within a lean supply chain are able to leverage their own lean
journey more easily, delivering better customer value by responding more efficiently,
quickly, and predictably to customer needs (Srinivasan, 2004; Behrouzi and Wong,
2011a, b). Though increasing the value is by means of elimination of waste in supply chain
parlance, a “good” supply chain is difficult to assess, as it puts the onus of assessment on
performance measurement metric. Therefore most of the companies have realized that in
order to evolve an efficient and effective supply chain, its performance needs to be
assessed (Gunasekaran et al., 2001). In this regard, identifying and using the right metrics
and measures to efficiently and effectively measure supply chain performance is a
challenge for many practitioners, managers, and researchers (Gunasekaran et al., 2001;
Lambert and Pohlen, 2001; Chan and Qi, 2003; Phelps et al., 2003; Neely, 2005). As the topic
of performance measurement is not in the purview of this paper, it is concluded with a
statement that the performance measurement becomes an important activity in transition
from a primordial supply chain to lean supply chain and scores high in value addition.
3. Gaps in literature review

As can be seen in Table I the aerospace industry has a very low diffusion compared to
automobile industry, which led to this study so that problems characteristic of aviation
can be documented. Many companies embarking on Lean efforts find that their Experimental
organization is too rigid and top-down to support the management principles of Lean investigation
and Six Sigma; therefore they start by redefining the role of middle managers,
transforming them from enforcers to enablers and mentors of front-line workers
of lean
(Wyman and Carpenter, 2007). Similarly, Business process management (BPM) management
technologies and service-oriented architectures (SOAs) combine with Lean Six Sigma
to accelerate improvements and results (Hans Skalle and Bill Hahn). But these efforts 239
do everything required to make the organization lean and in the process adopt many
tools of lean but at the same time fail to address the issue of generating continuity
in the process which has been established with lot of difficulty and dedication.
The methods of the TPS, where workers, processes, and technology are equally
considered, have been at the forefront of this development ( James and Jeffrey, 2006).
Now, the focus of analysis has shifted to the administrative units of an organization
that are related to production (Wittenstein/Wesoly, 2006). In spite of such a
declaration in as early as 2006, the literature by Subramanyam and Adwait (2012),

Charles et al. (2005/2006), Pattison (2010) and many other papers do talk in length
about the improvement by the LI.
While these literatures generally discuss the formalities of LI and benefits derived,
they do not document/predict the company’s performance few years into the future
after implementation. Though the literature is ripe with the implementation examples
of the Lean principles there are fewer examples which have recorded the scenario deep
into the future, i.e., post LI. This gives a hazy picture as something is not very clear
a very long time after implementation.
3.1 Motivation to write this paper

We shall reproduce the relevant paragraph of the leanpost below, as seen on a web
site which complements the interest in scrutinizing various aspects of post LI
efficacy. Due to inherent problem of any organization’s reluctance in divulging
sensitive information which puts them in bad light it took some effort in identifying
and eking out the required data. Let us examine the lean customer’s remarks
reproduced as under:
“So in an attempt to face this universe’s cold, cruel reality, here are a few of the gaps
that I’ve been enlightened about by some of Lean’s customers:
• If I ask 5 “experts” what Lean is, why do I get 10 answers? Why is there so much
variation? Why are there so many books explaining Toyota or even Lean in general?
• If Lean is so good, why is it so hard to implement? Why is the failure rate so high?
• Did Toyota look thin because they stood next to fat competitors in the auto
industry?
• Jet fighters are inherently unstable and that allows them to be more agile. If we
standardize too much or only incrementally improve, won’t that make us less
agile to rapidly changing markets?
• Those Lean people are getting awfully snobby. Aren’t they supposed to be
humble? And why is everyone speaking Japanese? How is that helping us learn
faster and get more people on board?
• Why don’t you “Show me the money!”? What good is Lean if the improvements
don’t readily fall to the bottom line?” (W5).
JMTM With the above background we can safely assume that there seems to be issues which
26,2 are actually hidden face of the lean management initiatives of the organizations.
Lean management is “uncomfortable” because managers must swap a direct action
(manager tells employee what to do) with an indirect one (manager coaches employee,
encouraging their self-development and listening to their suggestions) (W6).
Evidence suggests that the diffusion of lean manufacturing in India has been
240 substantial in the automotive and electronic sectors that were exposed to global
competition faster (Mohanty et al., 2006; Dangayach and Deshmukh, 2008). According
to Womack (2008), companies in India have to move from mass production model to
lean production since lean uses less of everything – human effort, investment in tools,
engineering time and inventory – compared with mass production.
Considering the available literature, the present work is the first attempt that apart
from exploring the benefits of lean tools in various organizations spanning innumerable
fields as diverse as aviation and wood, attempts to document proceedings in an aircraft
manufacturing company While trying to provide inputs to the present companies related
to pitfalls beyond immediate future this also provides direction for future continuous
improvement based on the inputs analyzed over a long period of implementation of
Lean Management principles, This paper thus is an attempt to record the happenings in a
scenario stretching many years beyond the lean management implementation.
4. Research methodology
4.1 Motivation and research objective
The lean management is being used by many aeronautical/aerospace companies for a
very long time and the perception (reflected in para 3) is of reduced benefits as time
passes and scope for lesser improvement over what has been achieved so far in a high
cost and low range/depth component profile. This research also means to explore,
understand, identify, and thus contribute to the efforts of Lean initiative across
industries and help implementation by identifying pitfalls.
4.2 Statement of the problem

Identifying important factors that constrain implementing lean strategies in aviation
production sector and suggest ways to avoid errors in implementing and sustaining them.
The central thesis driving this paper is that the social and technical aspects of LI
are interdependent. Taken together, there is the potential for the sort of systemic
transformation originally intended; advanced separately, there is the risk of unstable
or incomplete outcomes ( Joel, 2003). The main criticism against lean is the lack of
flexibility the concept offers, (Dove, 1999), and that the concept actually can lead to
delays for the customers (Cusumano, 1994). There is also a discussion going on whether
lean, which was developed for manufacturing and distribution situations, is applicable
in all industries (Mast, 2004; Andersson et al., 2006; Ahmed, 2013).
There are two points which were considered as crucial in lean management which
are highly critical in maintaining lean environment. These issues as given below were
considered to be addressed in this study with the aviation backdrop. First, the lean
organization may become very susceptible to the impact of changes. The leanness in
itself leads to reduced flexibility and less ability to react to new conditions and
circumstances (Dove, 1999).
Second, JIT deliveries cause congestion in the supply chain leading to delays,
pollution, shortage of workers, etc. (Cusumano, 1994; Andersson et al., 2006).
4.3 Purpose of research Experimental
The purpose of the research can be classified as exploratory owing to the nature of the investigation
work involved. This research tries to gain new insights within the phenomenon of lean
management and its implementation.
of lean
The process of research can be characterized as qualitative as it is subjective management
assessment of attitudes, opinion and behavior. For eliciting information in relation to
the research questions which are basically intangibles, the qualitative information is 241
collected and interpreted rather than any numerical methods. Use of multiple
informants and archival data helped authors crosscheck pertinent information and
verify the reliability of data obtained. To demonstrate internal validity (Yin, 1994;
Shadish et al., 2001), the authors recorded evidence of other factors that could be
alternative explanations for the observed patterns.
A leading aircraft manufacturer who had already implemented the Lean management
strategy and had a long history and record of application of such tools was selected for
research purpose. The brief of the industry is as given in the Table II. The company
known hereafter as M/S XYZ was experiencing severe pressures internally to improve its
order position. The order position was going from bad to worse in terms of the order
received, as the company was neither involved with systematic production nor had any
knowledge of the scientific tools available for new production strategies. Therefore the
orders had dwindled and the customers were looking overseas for supplies.
The manpower though looks large, includes all types of skilled and non-skilled
personnel, contract workers and other miscellaneous categories who are not directly
affecting the production/manufacturing. The production is non-automated and is based
on the complexity of the component being processed. All stations may not be utilized at
a time and most of the components may require only processing on some of the
stations. However, to increase utilization of the stations, all are generally running all the
time, where each station is working to different schedule and offers a different value
stream map, thus adding to the complexity of the system.
The stations considered are limited to 50 as the assumptions related to the station is
that there may be at least one component processed at that station daily. Stations
Sl.
no Description Data Remarks
1 Type of commodity Aviation components

2 Type of industry Aviation/aerospace supplier
(medium scale)
3 Type of production system Non-automated, manual
4 Nature of production system (push/pull) Pull
5 Total man power (approximate as also 2,500 Includes
includes contract workers) overseas workers
6 Type of manpower Technical/Administrative
7 No. of shifts 2
8 No. of stations involved 50
9 Space occupied 1.5 Sq. Km
10 Transfer of material Semi-automatic/through Table II.
Cranes/trolley Description of the
11 Material travel distance 55-890 mt industry
JMTM related to special drilling, milling, surface finish (work beyond normally acceptable
26,2 limits), etc., are some of the stations which are not routinely involved in production.
5. Analysis of the LI process and unforced errors

The lean system of production is both a thought process and philosophy. The lean
production system as given out by the TPS was the beginning of the Lean system
242 adoption and tip of the iceberg. The entire implementation was the responsibility given to
an external trainer. There are several questions which are raised as an afterthought, post
LI, to decide the course of implementation. One can argue that there is a set methodology
of implementing the Lean production system. However, if the sequencing is wrong then
the derived value of the Lean efforts would not reap rich dividends. Therefore the TPS
House is taken for reference as starting point of the entire exercise (Figure 2).
The establishing of the TPS house completely took many years of systematic and
scientific implementation. The stability was established from a set of highly accurate
principles and precise feedback from the workforce based on scope sheets. A scope
sheet sample used in the Kaizen event for this purpose is given in Table I. Each event
was segregated and responsibility assigned after suitable deliberation (Figure 3).
5.1 Lean system implementation overview

Once the training of the people started it was very essential to understand whether all
personnel were responding to the training in intended manner. The assessment was
made by asking simple questions to them, such as:
(1) Are problems coming to them or they are visiting problems.
(2) Are they meeting with everyone and explaining the initiative (to their peers
and subordinates).
(3) Are they discovering problem areas or inventing problem areas.
Highest Quality, Lowest Cost, Shortest Lead Time
Just in Time Jidoka
Continuous Stop and

Flow Notify of
abnormalities
Takt Time Separate Man
and Machine
Pull system work
Just in Time Just in Time
Heijunka Standardized work Kaizen

Figure 2.
Toyota production
system (TPS) house Stability
Step 7: What’s Experimental
Step 1: Make out a clear Scope Sheet
the event timing investigation
Event Description : Step 5: What will and duration?
event be named?
Event Dates : of lean
Preliminary Objectives : Step 8: management
Team Meeting A When/where will
the team meet?
Step 5: What should
be different when Team Leader : Step 2: Who will
243
the event is done? Co Leader : lead the team?
Step 4: What is Team Members : Step 6: Who will

Production Requirements ( TAKT TIME ) :
the customer be on the team?
demand? Facilitators :
Process Information : Step 8: Facilitator
Consultant :
and Consultant?
Current situation and Problems

Step 3: How does the process
happen now? what is
included in event scope? Step 1: What’s
wrong now? Figure 3.
Sample scope sheet
Based on the above assessment, the personnel were called for separate sessions in the
conference hall and explained the motive behind each session before embarking on
training with respect to intended/expected behavior.
5.2 Implementing 5S
This action is critical for any lean initiative. Various teams were formed and 5S
auditors were identified. All items which can be “Red-Tagged” were identified and
listed to form the check points. This action preceded the step “ORGANIZE.” Then
these items were systematically arranged, i.e. the storage was standardized. The
three basic keys of storage – WHERE, WHAT AND HOW MANY – were addressed
to give a fillip to the 5S start. This was followed by fixed position labeling with
suitable color codes to identify areas of storage. This was followed by cleaning of
the entire area. Restoring, improving, and checking were the prominent action steps
in this process.
5.3 Training of all employees

After the Kaizen event as the start point, various definitions of major action points
were laid down and made known clearly to everyone. Beginning of training of
all employees started with establishing leader and co-leader responsibilities
and attributes. The resource teams were established with suitable facilitators
who would act as links between various echelons of manufacturing, engineering
and support groups. Engineers/support groups for floor events were decided
and subject matter experts along with informal leaders for these events
were decided.
5.4 Total productive maintenance (TPM)

TPM was developed in the 1970s as a method of involving machine operators in the
preventive maintenance of their machines. This was adopted for the lean initiative as
JMTM per trainer’s choice. The foremost objective of the TPM being elimination of losses, the
26,2 goal would be to drive all wastes to zero: zero accidents, zero defects, zero breakdowns.
In fact the Poka-Yoke was used in most of the sections. This is the most famous
technique for minimizing wastes to zero through a set of methods that help the operator
avoid mistakes in their work caused by choosing the wrong part, missing a part,
installing a part incorrectly, etc. There are a variety of energy sensing devices as given
244 in Table III which were adopted for this purpose.
The next important step in the entire process which was implemented simultaneously
with para 5.4 above was identifying the different types of wastes. This was done using
eight waste identification techniques, with the help of value stream mapping.
5.5 Manufacturing Kanban

When lot sizes differ between process steps, processes are unbalanced or when distance
introduces time lag or variability. These systems slightly de-couple the processes. Where
the process allows, physical link is the system of choice. Kanban, materials requirements
planning (MRP) and re-order point (ROP) follow in desirability. A system designer would
examine each process and each product group in turn. He/she attempts to apply physical
linkage. If the necessary conditions do not exist and process change is impractical,
physical linkage is rejected and broadcast is considered. This also enhanced the Pull
system strategy for production. In-process Kanban (IPK) determines the amount of work
in process (WIP) that can be kept between any two operations in a process.
5.6 Miscellaneous other lean initiatives

The other systems of streamlining production which were religiously followed are
as given:
(1) cellular system of manufacturing;
(2) process mapping;
(3) takt time; and
(4) SMED/SDMED (Slight modification over SMED called “Single-digit-minute”
was used.
There are many other numerous techniques which were used to erect the TPS House.
The Heijunka and Jidoka are the two other techniques which were well established for
the lean initiative, which formed the pillars of the TPS House.
Sensors Use
Fiber sensors Detects motor revolutions, color code markings

Area sensors Detects random breaks in a fixed area, such as hands into hazard
Position sensors Control cylinder stroke or determines screw heights
Dimension sensors Ensures that the products dimensions are correct
Vibration sensors Detects products ejection, seam distortion, or start of processing
Displacement sensors Detect and measures warpage, thickness and fluid levels
Tap sensors Detects incomplete tap screw machining
Metal passage sensors Detects metal in motion
Table III. Color mark sensors Detects color marks of variation in color
Energy sensing Double feed sensors Detects two products fed at the same time
devices Weld position sensors Detects joints such as weld lines, seams in pipes or cans
6. Data and lean process analysis Experimental
The data which were made available have been converted to graphs and the same have investigation
been reflected below. Even the Lean information is discussed alongside (Figures 4-9).
The following points become amply clear once we go through the Figures 2-7 and
of lean
look at the various graphs: management
• The profit which has been increasing from year 5 onwards takes a giant leap
from eighth year owing to the Lean initiative which was implemented in between 245
year 5 to year 10 in increments of two years. But the heartening factor is that the
profit keeps rising beyond year 12 and year 13 owing to the earlier efforts
partially and also due to the fact that the alternative manufacturer is unavailable.
• The dip in the net operating cost in the year 11 is basically due to the Lean
initiative in the preceding years.
PROFIT
3,000
2,000
1,000 Figure 4.
The profit
distribution
0 over 15 years
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
R&D EXPDR
1,500
1,000
500 Figure 5.
The R&D
expenditure
0 for 15 years
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
NET OPERATING COST

3,000
2,000
1,000
Figure 6.
The net op cost
0 (15 years)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
•
JMTM The cost of manpower is reduced due to correct utilization of the workforce and
26,2 hiring stabilizes in this period. However, due to a sluggish Lean initiative
subsequently the cost of manpower shoots up.
• The sales have always been increasing. However the net operating cost which
was always tailing the sales DOES NOT increase in the same rate as sales
beyond year 9.
246 • Due to the reducing waste the material cost has come down drastically by year 10
but increases again due to lack of initiative.
The retrospective survey which was carried out among the volunteer respondents
reflected a trend which showed the following spread of their emotions about the LI.
This also recorded their response to the change curve. The sentiments of the workforce
COST OF MANPOWER
3,000
2,000
Figure 7. 1,000
The cost of
manpower
for 15 years 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
COST OF MATLS
15,000
10,000
5,000
Figure 8.
The cost of materials
(15 years) 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
SALES and NET OP COST

COMPARISON
15,000
10,000 SALES
Figure 9. 5,000
NET OP
Sales and net op COST
cost (15 years) 0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
have been amply captured in the survey carried out to collect the information regarding Experimental
various aspects of the change curve called Kubler-Ross curve. A representation of the investigation
curve is given in the Figure 8 (Figure 10).
These sentiments are exactly reflected by the personnel who answered a simple
of lean
survey about the emotions they had (against/for) for the Lean management initiative, management
both when it was introduced initially and when it was re-visited few years later (almost
five to seven years) to assess where were the problem areas as growth was dwindling 247
Table IV (Figures 11 and 12).
Shock – They
Integration –
are’nt really
Actually this new
going to go
methodology is
through this
better than earlier
Denial – I will let this and we are really
happen on my dead Acceptance – doing well
body YES! This
seems to be
working after
PERFORMANCE
all!!
Anger – What
a waste of Bargaining – If
time and they really force me
money; we do this I am going to
could have quit OR if they want
better spent me to do this then i
Depression –
the same
This is what I had will not be able to
money do my duties
told would
happen and now
nothing can stop
this menace
Figure 10.
Kubler-Ross curve
TIME
Low Low (1-3) Average Average High High Remarks 2,500

Category (1-3) (old) (new) (4-7) (old) (4-7) (new) (8-10) (old) (8-10) (new) workers total
Shock 1,118 1,556 155 899 1,227 45

Denial 264 1,156 105 921 2,131 423
Anger 163 1,896 295 265 2,042 339
Depression 52 1,963 263 325 2,185 212
Bargaining 106 75 418 215 1,976 2,210 Table IV.
Acceptance 269 29 269 341 1,962 2,130 Response of the
Integration 231 155 126 43 2,143 2,302 employees
100%
JMTM OLD
26,2 80%
60%
40% High
20% Medium
248
0% Low
Figure 11.
on
ce
n
ia
ge
oc
in
io
en
an
si
in
at
An
Response of the Sh
s
D
pt
gr
re
rg
ce
te
ep
employees (Old)
Ba
In
Ac
D
100% NEW
80%
60%
40% High
20% Medium
0% Low
l
Figure 12.
k
ng
ce
n
ia
ge
oc
io
io
en
an
ni
ss
at
An
Sh
Response of the
ai
D
gr
pt
re
rg
ce
te
ep
employees (New)
Ba
In
Ac
D
The data were converted to a graphical form to aid the understanding and it clearly
shows that the denial and anger exhibited by the workforce first time (Figure 9) are
no longer there in the second essay of the Lean initiative implementation exercise
(Figure 10). This is because they are already aware of what is going to happen.
However this same understanding is going to come in the way of their accepting easily
the re-installation of the processes. This time around they are going to bargain hard
and believe that the change what they are aware of is much more sacrosanct than
actually is theoretically.
7. Effect of the above drawbacks

The above observation of the workforce and the subsequent effect on the change curve
is suspected as the personnel are expected to behave in a manner befitting their human
instincts. The complacency on part of the workforce as the first peak is achieved is all
there to be seen. Disillusionment is another reason the fall has happened. So the figures
depicting the financial gains and losses are actually reflecting the mood swings of the
workforce in a way, in the face of a constant order position from the customer.
Therefore in a situation when the company has secured the orders from the customer
and looking at a smooth transition to a growth at an expected rate, the fall may very
well be there, though not in the immediate future as generally expected, but definitely
in a span of about few years (Figure 13).
Experimental
Shock – They
Integration – investigation
are’nt really
going to go
Actually this new of lean
methodology is management
through this
better than earlier
Denial – I will let this and we are really
happen on my dead Acceptance –
doing well 249
body YES! This
seems to be
working after
PERFORMANCE
all!!
Anger –
What a Disillusionment
Bargaining – If
waste of time The fall is
they really force
and money; imminent beyond

me do this I am
we could the integration
going to quit OR if
have better point
Depression – they want me to do
spent the
This is what I this then i will not
same money
had told would be able to do my
happen and now duties
nothing can stop
this menace
Figure 13.
Kubler-Ross curve
modified (Expected)
TIME
8. Case study
This case study summary tries to analyze several aspects of the post LI scenario of
research and design (R&D) department and suggest inputs toward the future direction
of the lean management initiatives for the organization. This pertains to a major
component/assembly (with 16 sub-assemblies).
8.1 The inputs from the design engineering department

The design process is a complicated process with many interdependent complex
processes (Mohamed Marzouk et al., 2011) within. The design phase is generally identified
as the phase where the customer’s ideas and speculations are conceptualized into a
physical model by defining his needs and requirements into procedures, drawings, and
technical specifications (Freire and Alarcón, 2002).
8.2 Problem statement

The design department is flooded with requirements from all groups and is required to
cater for a variety of diversified design issues at short notice. The dividing line between
the fresh design and revision of an old design being thin, the department always used
to face resource crunch in terms of manpower and processing machines, bogged down
with delays and chaos, in spite of implementation of lean initiatives. There were
reasons for this which is given in succeeding paras.
JMTM 8.3 Analysis of the crunch issues
26,2 Though Lean management has been implemented it failed to establish itself as
expected due to the high “knowledge level” of the user. The design people understood
the requirement of lean and over a period of time rejected the new methodology as it
had perceived “disadvantages” over the established way of work methodology. There
was inherent resistance to change and adopt innovations which led to stagnation and in
250 the face of stiff competition created a situation of no-go.
8.4 Lean re-validation and assessment

There was an intervention from the top management who addressed the problem using
brain storming sessions and created an environment conducive for recovery and
growth. This intervention was part of the lean initiative discussions held between the
authors and the top management. According to Rawabdeh (2005) and Carter (2011)
there are at least seven areas that can be looked at for ways to reduce waste or excess of
a product – motion excess, over production, over-processing, waiting time, defects,
inventory excess and transportation. This is more or less in line with the department’s
8 waste identification exercise done earlier (Para 5.4). The information related to the
department was collated for the last three years. This was the period which had a drop
in the throughput of all the sections connected directly or indirectly to the design
engineering department. We already know that the lean thinking can be summarized in
five principles – precisely specify value by specific product, identify the value stream
for each product, make value flow without interruptions, let the customer pull value
from the producer, and pursue perfection. With these principles as the trail blazer the
entire design engineering department was revamped with revised processes. Some of
the major changes were incorporation of a Rapid Prototyping (RPT) machine,
segregation of design tasks to respective project groups; rather than keeping system
heads, there were now project heads to increase accountability for a given project.
8.5 Description of analytical methods

Factor analysis, as Johnson (1998) stated, is used to derive or develop a smaller set of
uncorrelated variables (known as the underlying factors or characteristics), with the
hope that these latent variables will give a better understanding of the data being
analyzed (Table IV). The design department conducted introspection and came up with
seven factors as given in Table IV deemed critical for analysis. The information
collected was brought together using the categorical aggregation and interpretation
technique, which brings instances together until something can be said about them
as a group (Buckley et al., 1976; Stake, 1995; Panizzolo et al., 2012). According to Stake
(1995), there are four forms: categorical aggregation, direct interpretation, establishing
patterns, and developing naturalistic generalizations. Categorical aggregation draws
meaning across multiple instances of data (Creswell, 2007) where as direct
interpretation draws meaning across parts of a single instance of data. Therefore
seven categories of data were studied and generalized to one theme – that is effects of
lean management (Table V).
The details of the case study are summarized in the Table IV. The product sheet
gives a pseudo part no. and the seven characteristics extracted from the interaction
with the workforce. The comparison between the initial and final design was done over
a period of three years data and the present flow of drawings between departments.
The material saving was stupendous considering that there was a saving of 4.9 Kgs,
Product sheet (Part No. xxx-yyy-zzz-000)
Experimental
Factors considered Initial design Final design Remarks investigation
of lean
Mfg cost saving (Rs) Very high Reduced by 41.5% 185,000 management
Defect rates High Very low (1 %)
Customer complaints Nil Nil
Product development cycle time Long (12 D) Short (8 D) No machining 251
Warranty cost High Low
Response to urgent demands Slow Fast
Manufacturing lead time High Low 8 days Table V.
No of operations 16 9 – Product details
Material saved 22.3 kg 17.4 kg 4.9 before and after
Time saved 12 days 8 days 4 days saved li review
which is astounding in aircraft design parlance. The machining tasks were cut down
from four to one thus helping decrease lead time. The entire component was being
forged now. This achievement was in no less assisted by actions like incorporation of
multi functional teams to cater for better utilization of the manpower and avoid
bottlenecks on priority. The identification of internal customers followed by mushroom
concept of production cycle aided in enhancing coordination. The brain storming also
generated inputs in the form of ranking from all participants on a scale of 1 to 10. A
total of 3,440 volunteers were administered the interview. Rank-wise benefits observed
by restructuring lean practices are:
(1) identification of internal customers and their prioritization (9.3);

(2) multifunctional design teams (8.6);
(3) mushroom concept (8.4);
(4) parts standardization (8.2);
(5) product modularisation (7.3);
(6) design for manufacturability (6.9); and
(7) phase overlapping (6.7).
9. Discussions and implications for future research

The entire process of implementation of the Lean initiative in a real world scenario was
analyzed and the drawbacks were noticed and recorded. These were later evaluated with
the backdrop of a survey of the personnel and their emotions reflecting the change curve
and the changes in the financial implications for the company. Further to the discussions
earlier, it is seen that though the LI was carried out as per the laid down policy in the Lean
document and as per the training given by the trainer who was hired for the purpose.
Like most management systems, lean manufacturing does not come without its
own set of disadvantages, including possible customer dissatisfaction problems,
productivity costs, supply problems, high cost of implementation and lack of
acceptance by employees (Čiarnienė and Vienažindienė, 2012; Sim and Rogers, 2009;
Kropf, 2008; Wood, 2012; Holweg, 2007; Kelly, 2012). All these were experienced in the
industry under study and the outcome is the gradual attrition of the system. This
leads to a disbelief and an expanding spiral effect where aforementioned failures
JMTM contribute to a continued attrition, which in turn lead to a step up of disbelief – “see,
26,2 I told you this would’nt work” – syndrome.
In line with these findings is the understanding that there “[…] is no best way to
manage supply chains.” This is due to the fact that the physical structures of supply
chains are very different. Each case demonstrates relatively more or less degrees of
complexity, with a variety of stages and with a wide diversity of participants at each
252 supply chain stage. “There are also varying degrees of contestation over the resources
that must be provided at each stage of the physical supply chain, and significant
differences in the ability of companies to appropriate value from their position within the
chain (Cox, 1999).” The study also supports the statement by Orr (2005) that the term
“Lean” manufacturing seems to have forgotten the debate on human motivation, and has
focussed on techniques, where the emphasis has been on deploying new methods, rather
than understanding how work is organized and lead. The toughest-to-digest lesson learnt
is that zero advancement can be made without the true support of the shop floor
operator’s involvement. In some cases it was found to be very tough to convince the shop
floor operator about the batch size. As the old habits die hard, it was quite difficult to
change over to small batch sizes as earlier they had all got used to mass production,
irrespective of floor requirement and contrary to “pull” system of functioning.
9.1 Aviation and automobile industry – a comparison

One of the issues was Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) which was debated and
analyzed in depth. This is characteristic of aviation industry and requires careful
consideration as this seems to be always in confrontation within the basic tenets of
lean management. The quantity required to be ordered as per lean initiative may be
very less but in some cases it may so happen that the component or product may not be
feasible for procurement owing to supplier constraint:
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
TC min ¼ 2hDK þ cD:
Here in this relation the ordering cost has been assumed constant for all practical
purposes, but it varies in aviation.
C is the purchase price, unit production cost; Q the order quantity; Q* the optimal
order quantity; D the annual demand quantity; K the fixed cost per order, setup cost
(not per unit, typically cost of ordering and shipping and handling. This is not the cost
of goods); and h the annual holding cost per unit, also known as carrying cost or
storage cost:
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
n 2DK
Q ¼
h
where Q* is the function of only K, D and h and is independent of c. If this relation is
used in aviation, may lead to problem as there is no mention of certification cost
(basically included in K ).
These constraints are in the nature of certification of critical components which are
characteristic of the aviation industry. These constraints are never part of automobile
industry and hence require a different strategy when accosted in aviation field, as the
EOQ relationship does not contain certification costs. In order to affect a procurement
one may have to order a higher quantity to assure the supplier a loss free transaction,
as higher the order quantity the better is the spread of high cost of certification, which Experimental
sometimes may be as much as the cost of the product. Therefore this may very well investigation
defeat the basic aim of cost cutting as the component may become extremely expensive.
The aviation and automobile though share several commonalities they are also in
of lean
contradiction in some critical aspects. This was highlighted to demonstrate the management
contradictions. Several other characteristics of aviation are given below:
• restrictions on supplier base; 253
• high cost of design;
• high cost of transfer of technology (TOT);
• non-availability of skilled workforce;
• low number of engine manufacturers (in single digit); and
• avionics and instrumentation extremely expensive (off the shelf item).

It should be understood that one airline accident/incident is inacceptable and is sufficient
to highlight everyone from the manufacturer to the user, whereas the automobile
accidents/snags do not get highlighted and offer scope for improvement in design.
10. Important findings and implications for the industry

(1) The importance of the Kubler-Ross curve (Figures 10 and 13) was established
by the survey (Figures 11 and 12) which confirmed that organizations have to
deal with more and more issues that may not have anything to do with directly
providing products or services to their customers (Ronald, 2003), than the
socio-economic aspects of the workers are concerned.
(2) However, it can be taken care of by suitably redesigning the process or
manufacturing activity as established in the case study, which implied constant
restructuring/review of the lean system.
(3) Basic change capabilities being utilized to implement change: the susceptibility
to changes thus gets answered in this section. The basic change in the strategic
direction finally has to come from the top management. This change
management means to help users through the road blocks and enable them to
experience a positive journey through the manufacturing maze. The change
management is a structured process designed to deal directly and intentionally
with the human factors involved in not just planning and implementing but
through behavior change achieving the anticipated benefits. This also has
bearing on the corporate intent on cost savings.
(4) Current enterprise orientation and strategy toward lean transformation: the
most important lesson from this research is “don’t send a changed person back
to an unchanged environment” for whatever reason. This not only puts the
individuals into a confused state, but also creates a doubt in other’s mind to
what depth he should get involved in the lean transformation process, as his
future may also be uncertain like others who got shifted.
(5) How are the Lean initiatives of enterprise being pursued and how are they
aligned: the JIT causing delays is also another wrong perception of the
workforce. The enterprise organizational structure and command linkage
JMTM either enable or slow progress if not properly aligned. The case in point is the
26,2 case study in which the results took almost three years to manifest. This type
of transformation makes it difficult for the policy makers to get an alignment
for the organization, in absence of delayed results. Therefore it is necessary for
the policy makers to anticipate the expected direction a particular department
may be taken using the historic data.
254 (6) Learning processes and programs that are employed: the point of getting users to
actively support the deployment of lean management is more about a systematic
education rather than a thrust – upon activity. This requires an active and
personally involved participation of the individuals rather than dissemination of
just information about how a certain activity may be done. This will gradually
wear out and result in recurring expenditure in terms of training of the same
individuals for the same techniques. Care has to be taken to ensure that this
education allows personal growth and development of the individuals.

(7) Another important feedback from the post LI study is the loss of interest by top
management midway. This has a very big demoralizing effect on the workforce
have to undergo the change and may again get snubbed at an issue as important
as the lean management, just because lean may not be suitable at certain context
Of all the issues it can be thus seen that the people and cultural change remains
the most important issue to be addressed in any LI corrective measure.
(8) After critical analysis it was found that the most important step of standardization
(during 5S implementation) had lost importance. This was never implemented in
totality as the records show. The routine/repetitive work and aspects like material
and tools used, quality parameters, workstation layout, sequence of work, and
methods of measurement were never standardized for the next stage to take over.
This led to the entire process to go futile when it was practiced for years. Other
factors are as under:
• Unused capacity of the manufacturing facility (in spite of cellular
manufacturing) pointing to process constraints and Lean initiatives.
• Untapped creativity of all personnel of all ranks.
• Lack of continuity among the workforce due to unforeseen problems
(transfers/upgradation/shifting to high skill area, etc.) apart from resignations.
• The head of the institution was changed and the relevant dip/rise is
observed subsequently in the profit/cost graphs. Loss of continuity during
change of head of institution (similar to the statement by Orr (2005),
regarding LI and related considerations), expects a high attention and
careful planning for such activities in future.
• At times it is also noticed that the top management is lacking initiative to
continue with the efforts of Lean in a sustained and consistent manner
owing probably to all pressures (meeting deadlines, etc.). Long term vision
required at top management level to ensure unhindered success.
• The relationship between cost and efficiency and quality and effectiveness.
It is thus concluded that there is a strong correlation between the lean implemention for
the subsequent times and chances of the change curve, Kubler-Ross curve (Figure 13),
taking a second dip pointing to a downfall in the fortunes of the company, owing Experimental
to a very gradual attrition within the pillars of lean. The inputs obtained are from investigation
the live environment of an industry and is expected to aid organizations which
are in the process of finalizing or planning a long term strategy for the lean
of lean
management initiative. management
References
255
Ahmed, M. (2013), “Lean, six sigma and lean six sigma overview”, International Journal of
Scientific & Engineering Research, Vol. 4 No. 5, pp. 1137-1153.
Andersson, R., Eriksson, H. and Torstensson, H. (2006), “Similarities and differences between
TQM, six sigma and lean”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 282-296.
Anna, D., Hulthén, K. and Pedersen, A.-C. (1998), Interdependence Within and Among Supply
Chains, Department of Industrial Marketing, Chalmers University of Technology SE-412

96, Gothenburg.
Balakrishnan, K. et al. (2007), “Indian auto-component supply chain at the cross roads”, Interfaces,
Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 310-323.
Behrouzi, F. and Wong, K.Y. (2011a), “Lean performance evaluation of manufacturing systems:
a dynamic and innovative approach”, Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 3, pp. 388-395, available at:
http://ac.els-cdn.com/S1877050910004400/1-s2.0-S1877050910004400-main.pdf?_tid=5089b7ee-
8be5-11e4-8e8a-00000aab0f01&acdnat=1419477954_2e5d991b312568d426be761025f4d7f3
Behrouzi, F. and Wong, K.Y. (2011b), “An investigation and identification of lean supply chain
performance measures in the automotive SMEs”, Scientific Research and Essays, Vol. 6
No. 24, pp. 5239-5252.
Buckley, J.W., Buckley, M.H. and Chiang, H.F. (Eds) (1976), Research Methodology and Business
Decision, National Association of Accountants and the Society of Industrial Account of
Canada, New York, NY.
Carter, P. (2011), “7 wastes”, available at: http://cisystem-ltd.blogspot.com/2011/03/7-wastes-
transportation.html (accessed March 2, 2012).
Chan, F. and Qi, H.J. (2003), “An innovative performance measurement method for supply chain
management”, Supply Chain Manage: Int. J., Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 209-223.
Charles, D.R., Xiaoqiu, Z., Michael, J.H. and Wiedenbeck, J.K. (2005/2006), “The lean index:
operational ‘lean’ metrics for the wood products industry”, Wood and Fiber Science, Vol. 38
No. 2, pp. 238-255.
Čiarnienė, R. and Vienažindienė, M. (2012), Economics and Management, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 726-732.
Cousins, P.D., Lawson, B. and Squire, B. (2006), “Supply chain management: theory and
practice – the emergence of an academic discipline”, Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manage., Vol. 26
No. 7, pp. 697-702.
Cox, A. (1999), “A research agenda for supply chain and business management thinking”, Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 209-211.
Creswell, J.W. (2007), Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches,
Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Csokasy, D.L. and Parent, P.D. (2007), Managing Lean Manufacturing, Society of Manufacturing
Engineers, Dearborn, MI.
Cusumano, M.A. (1994), “The limits of lean”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 27-32.
Dahlgaard, J.J. and Dahlgaard-Park, S.M. (2006), “Lean production, six sigma quality, TQM and
company culture”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 263-281.
JMTM Dangayach, G.S. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2001), “Practice of manufacturing strategy: evidence from
select Indian automobile companies”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 39
26,2 No. 11, pp. 2353-2393.
Dangayach, G.S. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2008), “Implementation of manufacturing strategy:
a multisector study of the Indian manufacturing industry”, International Journal of Services
and Operations Management, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 1-33.
256 David, J.T. (2010), “Business models, business strategy and innovation”, Long Range Planning,
Vol. 43, pp. 172-194, available at: www.elsevier.com/locate/lrp
Dennis, P. (2002), Lean Production Simplified: A Plain Language Guide to the World’s Most
Powerful Production System, Productivity Press, New York, NY.
Dove, R. (1999), “Knowledge management, response ability and the agile enterprise”, Journal of
Knowledge Management, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 18-35.
Emiliani, M.L. (1998), “Lean behaviors”, Management Decision, Vol. 36 No. 9, pp. 615-631.
Eswaramoorthi, M. et al. (2010), “A survey on lean practices in Indian machine tool industries”, The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 52 Nos 9-12, pp. 1091-1101.
Freire, J. and Alarcón, L. (2002), “Achieving a lean design process”, Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management ASCE, Vol. 128 No. 3, pp. 248-256.
Garnett, N., Jones, D.T. and Murray, S. (1998), “Strategic application of lean thinking”,
Proceedings IGLC-6, International Group for Lean Construction, Guaruja, August 13-15.
Green, S.D. (2000), “The future of lean construction: a brave new world”, Proceedings of the 8th
Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, Brighton, July 17-19,
pp. 1-11.
Gurumurthy, A. and Kodali, R. (2009), “Application of benchmarking for assessing the lean
manufacturing implementation”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 2,
pp. 274-308.
Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C. and Tirtirogulu, E. (2001), “Performance measures and metrics in
supply chain environment”, Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manage., Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 71-87.
Hall, R. and Jones, C. (1999), “Why do some countries produce so much more output per worker
than others?”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 114 No. 1, pp. 83-116.
Harland, C. (1996), “Supply chain management: relationships, chains and networks”, British
Journal of Management, Vol. 7 No. S1, pp. S63-S80.
Haslam, C., Williams, K., Johal, S. and Williams, J. (1996), “A fallen idol? Japanese management in
the 1990s”, Asia Pacific Management Review, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 21-43.
Holweg, M. (2007), “The genealogy of lean production”, Journal of Operation and Management,
Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 420-437.
Hopp, W.J. and Spearman, M.L. (2004), “To pull or not to pull: what is the question?”,
Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 133-148.
James, M.M. and Jeffrey, K.L. (2006), The Toyota Product Development System: Integrating People,
Process, and Technology, Productivity Press, New York, NY.
Janakiram, J. (2008), “Key to growth – lean manufacturing”, Special Reports, SMEworld, October.
Joel, C.-G. (2003), Center for Technology, Policy and Industrial Development, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Johansson, H.J., McHugh, P., Pendlebury, A.J. and Wheeler, W.A. (1993), Business Process
Reengineering: Breakpoint Strategies for Market Dominance, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
Johnson, D.E. (1998), Applied Multivariate Methods for Data Analysis, Brooks/Cole Publishing,
Pacific Grove, CA.
Jones, C.I. and Romer, P.M. (2009), “The new kaldor facts: ideas, institutions, population, and Experimental
human capital”, Working Paper No. 15094, available at: www.nber.org/papers/w15094
investigation
Kelly, M. (2012), “Advantages & disadvantages of lean production”, available at: www.ehow.com/ of lean
about_5418429_advantages-disadvantages-lean-production.html (accessed March 5, 2012).
Kesser, W.C. (1999), “Implementing lean thinking”, Journal of Information Knowledge System
management
Management, Vol. 1, pp. 99-103.
Kropf, P. (2008), “What is lean manufacturing”, available at: http://pkropf.wrytestuff.com/ 257
swa290247.htm (accessed March 1, 2012).
Lambert, D.M. and Cooper, M.C. (2000), “Issues in supply chain management”, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 29, pp. 65-83.
Lambert, D.M. and Pohlen, T.L. (2001), “Supply chain metrics,” International Journal of Logistics
Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 1-19.
Lambert, D.M., Cooper, M.C. and Pagh, J.D. (1998), “Supply chain management implementation
issues and research opportunities”, The International Journal of Logistics Management,

Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Mahapatra, S.S. and Mohanty, S.R. (2007), “Lean manufacturing in continuous process industry:
an empirical study”, Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 19-27.
Manrodt, K.B., Abott, J. and Visatek, K.(2005), “Understanding the lean supply chain: beginning
the journey 2005 report on lean practices in the supply chain”, APICS, Oracle and Supply
Chain Visions, Georgia Southern University.
Marzouk, M., Bakry, I. and El-Said, M. (2011), “Application of lean principles to design processes
in construction consultancy firms”, International Journal of Construction Supply Chain
Management, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 43-55.
Mast, J. (2004), “A methodological comparison of three strategies for quality improvement”,
International Journal of Quality & Reliabil-ity Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 198-213.
Mishra, P. (2008), “Lean manufacturing tools and techniques in the process industry”, Curie,
Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 84-94.
Mohanty, R.P., Yadav, O.P. and Jain, R. (2006), “Implementation of lean manufacturing principles
in auto industry”, Vilakshan – XIMB Journal of Management, Vol. 1, pp. 1-32.
Murman, E., Allen, T., Bozdogan, K., Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., McManus, H., Nightingale, D.,
Rebentisch, E., Shields, T., Stahl, F., Walton, M., Warmkessel, J., Weiss, S. and Widnall, S.
(2002), Lean Enterprise Value, Palgrave, London.
Naylor, J.B., Naim, M.M. and Berry, D. (1999), “Leagility: integrating the lean and agile
manufacturing paradigms in the total supply chain”, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 62, pp. 107-118.
Neely, A. (2005), “The evaluation of performance measurement research: development in the last
decade and a research agenda for the next”, International Journals of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 12, pp. 1264-1277.
Nightingale, D.J. and Mize, J.H. (2002), “Development of a lean enterprise transformation maturity
model”, Information, Knowledge, System Management, Vol. 3, pp. 15-30.
Oliver, R. and Webber, M. (1982), “Supply-chain management: logistics catches up with strategy”,
in Christopher, M. (Ed.), Logistics: The Strategic Issues, Outlook, Booz, Allen and Hamilton
Inc., Chapman Hall, London, pp. 63-75.
Orr, C. (2005), “Lean leadership in construction. management of people and team”, Proceedings
IGLC-13, Sydney, July, pp. 345-351.
Panizzolo, R., Patrizia, , G., Sharma, M.K. and Gore, A. (2012), “Lean manufacturing in developing
countries: evidence from Indian SMEs”, Production Planning & Control: The Management
of Operations, Vol. 23 Nos 10-11, pp. 769-788.
JMTM Pattison, T. (2010), “Production streamlining through design, implementation, and analysis of
lean manufacturing methods”, Honors Scholar Theses, Paper 116, available at: http://
26,2 digitalcommons.uconn.edu/srhonors_theses/116
Pepper, M.P.J. and Spedding, T.A. (2010), “The evolution of lean six sigma”, International Journal
of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 138-155.
Phelps, T., Hoenes, T. and Smith, M. (2003), Developing Lean Supply Chains: A Guidebook,
258 Altarum Institute, Michigan, The Boeing Company, St.Louis, MO; Messier-Dowty Inc.,
Ontario, available at: www.spans.org/publications/LSCGBook.pdf
Porter, M. (1985), Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance,
Free Press, New York, NY.
Rawabdeh, I.A. (2005), “A model for the assessment of waste in job shop environments”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 800-822.
Rebentisch, E., Rhodes, D.H. and Murman, E. (2004) “Lean systems engineering: research
initiatives in support of a new paradigm”, Paper No. 122, Publication/Presentation at the

Conference on Systems Engineering Research, April 15-16.
Rodney, S.R. (2010), Implementing Lean Manufacturing Principles in a Manufacturing Environment,
The Graduate School University of Wisconsin-Stout, December, available at: www.bpaiqi.com/
reading/implementing-lean-manufacturing-by-rodney-s-rogstad-a-Aeac.html#read-frame
Ronald, S.J. (2003), “Applying the lessons of ‘lean now’, to transform the US aerospace
enterprise, (2003-08-22)”, A study guide for government lean transformation (supported by
Dr Rebentisch, E.E.), Cambridge, MA, available at: http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/
1721.1/7524/Applying+the+Lessons+of+?sequence=1
Saranga, H., Mukherji, A. and Shah, J. (2009), “Determinants of inventory trends in the Indian
automotive industry: an empirical study”, Working Paper No. 286, Indian Institute of
Management, Bangalore.
Shadish, W.R., Cook, T.D. and Campbell, D.T. (2001), Experimental and Quasi-Experimental
Design for Generalized Causal Inference, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.
Shingo Prize (2003), available at: www.shingoprize.org/BusPrize/recipients/current/Merillat %20
Atkins%20Profile.doc
Sim, K.L. and Rogers, J.W. (2009), “Implementing lean production systems barriers to change”,
Management Research News, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 37-49.
Singh, B., Garg, S.K. and Sharma, S. (2010), “Scope for lean implementation: a survey of 127
Indian industries”, International Journal of Rapid Manufacturing, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 323-333.
Spear, S.J. (2004), “Learning to lead at Toyota”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 82 No. 5, pp. 78-86.
Spekman, R., Kamauff, J. and Myhr, N. (1998), “An empirical investigation into supply chain
management: a perspective on partnerships”, Supply Chain Management: An International
Journal, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 53-67.
Srinivasan, M.M. (2004), Streamlined: 14 Principles for Building and Managing the Lean Supply
Chain, Thompson, Madison, OH.
Stake, R.E. (1995), The Art of Case Study Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Subramanyam, C. and Adwait, K. (2012), Lean Six Sigma to Improve Supply Chain Management
at Iron Systems, The Faculty of Department of General Engineering, San Jose State
University.
Syverson, C. (2004a), “Product substitutability and productivity dispersion”, Review of Economics
and Statistics, Vol. 86 No. 2, pp. 534-550.
Thompson, J.D. (1967), Organizations in Action, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Upadhye, N., Deshmukh, S.G. and Garg, S. (2010), “Lean manufacturing in biscuit manufacturing Experimental
plant: a case”, International Journal of Advanced Operations Management, Vol. 2 Nos 1-2,
pp. 108-139.
investigation
Wayne, N. and MacDonald, C. (2004), “Getting to the bottom of ‘Triple Bottom Line,’ ” Business
of lean
Ethics Quarterly, April, pp. 1-19, available at: http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb. management
topic549945.files/Canadian%20Paper.pdf
Wilson, P. and Pearson, R.D. (1995), Performance-Based Assessments, ASQC Quality Press, 259
Milwaukee, WI.
Wittenstein/Wesoly (Hrsg.) (2006), Lean Office , Fraunhofer IRB Ver-lag, Stuttgart.
Womack, J. (2002), “Lean thinking: where have we been and where are we going?” Forming &
Fabricating Lean Manufacturing Special Insert, p. L2.
Womack, J.P. (2008), “From lean manufacturing to lean thinking to lean solutions”, Lean
management summit, Lean Management Institute of India, Mumbai, August.
Womak, J.P. and Jones, D.T. (1996), Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your
Corporation, Simon and Schuster, New York, NY.
Womak, J.P., Jones, D.T. and Roos, D. (1990), The Machine that Changed the World, Simon
Schuster Ltd.
Wood, J.L. (2012), “Disadvantages of lean manufacturing”, available at: www.ehow.com/
list_6025715 disadvantages-lean-manufacturing. html#ixzz1nf9nyHmv (accessed
March 8, 2012).
Wyman, O. and Carpenter, , G. (2007), Keystone of Lean Six Sigma: Strong Middle Management,
Marsh Mercer Kroll, New York, NY, available at: www.oliverwyman.com/content/dam/
oliver-wyman/global/en/files/archive/2007/AAD-MiddleManagement.pdf
Yin, R.K. (1994), Case Study Research, Design and Methods, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Further reading
Agarwal, A., Shankar, R. and Tiwari, M.K. (2006), “Modeling the metrics of lean, agile and leagile
supply chain: an ANP-based approach”, European Journal of Operational Research,
(Elsevier Press), Vol. 173, pp. 211-225.
Agarwal, A., Shankar, R. and Tiwari, M.K. (2007), “Modeling agility of supply chain”, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 443-457.
Charles, F. (1997), “Power Diffusion in Automotive Supply Chains, FY-97”, IMVP working papers,
Sloan School of Management, MIT, MA, available at: http://web.mit.edu/ctpid/www/
people/Fine.html
Collis, J. and Hussey, R. (2009), Business Research – A Practical Guide For Undergraduate and
Postgraduate Students, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Cooper, M., Lambert, D. and Pagh, J. (1997), “Supply chain management: more than a new name
for logistics”, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 8, p. 1.
Emiliani, M.L. and Stec, D.J. (2004), “Leaders lost in transformation”, Leadership and Organization
Development Journal, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 370-387.
Hans, S. and Hahn, B. (2013), Applying Lean, Six Sigma, BPM, and SOA to Drive Business Results,
Redguides for Business Leaders, IBM Corporation, Armonk, New York, NY.
Hung-da W. (2006), “Measuring leanness of manufacturing systems and identifying leanness
target by considering agility”, Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Industrial and Systems Engineering, Blacksburg, VA.
JMTM Jean, T. (2009), “Lean manufacturing and ERP: how to leverage ERP to get lean”, available at:
www.iqms.com/products/brochures/eBook_LeverageToLean.pdf
26,2
Karlsson, C. and Ahlstrom, P. (1996), “Assessing changes towards lean production”, International
Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 24-41.
Kothari, C.R. (2009), Research Methodology Methods and Techniques, New Age International Pvt
Ltd Publishers, 2nd ed., ISBN-10: 8122415229; ISBN (13): 978-81-224-2488-1.
260 Lydia, F. (2004), C-5 Journey Into Lean Workforce Aspects, Labor Aerospace Research Agenda
(LARA) Center for Technology, Policy and Industrial Development, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Murman, E, McManus, H. and Weigel, A.L. (2013), “The LAI lean academy experience:
introductory lean six sigma curriculum”, Journal of Enterprise Transformation, Vol. 4,
No. 3, pp. 205-225, (also Proceedings of the 2013 Industrial and Systems Engineering
Research Conference, in Krishnamurthy, A. and Chan, W.K.V. (Eds), 2014) Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, available at: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/
aeronautics-and-astronautics/16-660j-introduction-to-lean-six-sigma-methods-january-iap-
2012/Syllabus/MIT16_660JIAP12_ISERC2013.pdf
Murman, E., Allen, T., Bozdogan, K., Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., McManus, H., Nightingale, D.,
Rebentisch, E., Shields, T., Stahl, F., Walton, M., Warmkessel, J., Weiss, S. and Widnall, S.
(2002b), Lean Enterprise Value: Insights from MIT’s Lean Aerospace Initiative, Palgrave,
Hampshire, New York, NY.
Rajenthirakumar, D. and Shankar, R.G. (2011), Analyzing the Benefits of Lean Tools: A Consumer
Durables Manufacturing Company, Department Of Mechanical Engineering, PSG College
Of Technology, Peelamedu, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu.
Schloske, A. and Thieme, P., “Lean process analysis in administration and production”, 43rd
CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems, Fraunhofer Institute Manufacturing
Engineering and Automation, Nobel-strasse 12; 70597 Stuttgart, May 26-28, available
at: www.ipa.fraunhofer.de/fileadmin/www.ipa.fhg.de/Fabrikplanung/pe2/publikationen/
lean_process_analysis.pdf
Times of India (2014), Times of India, Bengaluru ed., March 19g.
Womak, J.P. and Jones, D.T. (2007), Lean Solutions – How Companies and Customers Can Create
Value and Wealth together, Simon and Schuster UK Ltd, ISBN-10:0-7432-7603-5; ISBN-
13:978-0-7432-7603-0.
Web references
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ten-brands-that-will-disappear-in-2014-181419498.html?page ¼ all
www.answers.com/topic/profit-margin#ixzz2lpvXg0Tg
www.right.com/thought-leadership/research/organizational-effectiveness-discovering-how-to-
make-it-happen.pdf
www.lean.org/common/display/?o ¼ 223
“Taiichi Ohno Was a Hairdresser” a post By Brent Wahba, at: www.lean.org/LeanPost/Posting.
cfm?LeanPostId ¼ 169#.UzG5OPmSzLI
www.lean.org/leanpost/Posting.cfm?LeanPostId ¼ 156#.UzG84_mSzLJ
Corresponding author
Raghu Kumar B.R. can be contacted at: rkbrmysore@gmail.com
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
View publication stats

JMTM 12 2013 0174

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

JMTM 12 2013 0174

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management An experimental

Article in Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management · January 2015

Ashish Agarwal Sabry Shaaban

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Abdul Salam Darwish Mark Stevenson

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Sustainable Buildings View project

Trend in Production View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Downloaded on: 17 February 2015, At: 22:47 (PT)

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by

An experimental investigation of Experimental

1.1 Origins of mass production and the birth of lean

1.2 What is lean manufacturing?

the LAI research

Estimated Unplanned Req

Case studies show impact of DSM simulations show impact of

18.0 35% 36%

Normalized Build Time

(actual/planned build time)

Source: Rebentisch et al. (2004)

2.1 Transition from supply chain to lean supply chain

3. Gaps in literature review

declaration in as early as 2006, the literature by Subramanyam and Adwait (2012),

3.1 Motivation to write this paper

4.2 Statement of the problem

1 Type of commodity Aviation components

5. Analysis of the LI process and unforced errors

5.1 Lean system implementation overview

Highest Quality, Lowest Cost, Shortest Lead Time

Just in Time Jidoka

Continuous Stop and

Just in Time Just in Time

Heijunka Standardized work Kaizen

Step 4: What is Team Members : Step 6: Who will

Current situation and Problems

5.3 Training of all employees

5.4 Total productive maintenance (TPM)

5.5 Manufacturing Kanban

5.6 Miscellaneous other lean initiatives

Fiber sensors Detects motor revolutions, color code markings

NET OPERATING COST

SALES and NET OP COST

Low Low (1-3) Average Average High High Remarks 2,500

Shock 1,118 1,556 155 899 1,227 45

7. Effect of the above drawbacks

and money; imminent beyond

8.1 The inputs from the design engineering department

8.2 Problem statement

8.4 Lean re-validation and assessment

8.5 Description of analytical methods

(1) identification of internal customers and their prioritization (9.3);

9. Discussions and implications for future research

9.1 Aviation and automobile industry – a comparison

• avionics and instrumentation extremely expensive (off the shelf item).

10. Important findings and implications for the industry

education allows personal growth and development of the individuals.

Chains, Department of Industrial Marketing, Chalmers University of Technology SE-412

issues and research opportunities”, The International Journal of Logistics Management,

initiatives in support of a new paradigm”, Paper No. 122, Publication/Presentation at the

View publication stats

You might also like