تولید و استراتژی های مدیریت تامین در کارخانه های تولید کاغذ نوردیک
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|8698||2001||18 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Scandinavian Journal of Management, Volume 17, Issue 3, September 2001, Pages 379–396
The traditional production management strategy in paper manufacturing is based on a volume-intensive approach. This involves the measurement of overall performance or productivity, while aiming at a high level of capacity utilisation and minimum waste levels. This approach has proved successful in mills producing high volumes with a limited and standardised product range. The situation changes radically when paper and board products are being tailored to customer-specified dimensions and quantities. The volume-based approach is no longer appropriate, and production has to be controlled by an approach that considers inventory performance along the full length of the supply chains. This paper presents five empirical examples to illustrate the use of the two strategies. The detailed analyses of production cycles, the logistical solutions applied and the inventory levels at various stages of the supply chain, show that the Nordic paper industry is slow, with average lead times of 79 days to market. When production cycles are reduced and logistical alternatives are fully exploited, it can be seen that 30% of the inventories can be regarded as slack. The summary of the cases shows that speedier operations easily generate direct cost savings amounting to 2–5% of annual turnover. All these results can be achieved without additional investment; all that is required is a change in production planning principles and logistical control procedures. The paper concludes with a challenge to the Nordic paper industry to be the first in its field to achieve the higher level of productivity that faster operations can generate.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
In the Nordic paper industry the prevailing volume-driven production strategy sees productivity as a measure of the output generated, while the aim of the flexible strategy is the achievement of good overall performance, or perhaps we should say effectiveness, in the whole supply chain. Clearly there is a contradiction in concepts here, especially as regards the notion of productivity. When industrial managers are asked to define productivity their answers depend on the type of manufacturing system in question and on the product the managers are actually involved with. Typical measures refer to production in units: litres, kilos or cubic metres per time, energy or raw materials. In the flexible approach productivity is viewed instead as the value added by an individual, an operation or a mill. This value added can also be used to calculate productivity relative to salaries (employment effectiveness) or investments (capital effectiveness). These measures, together with the above-mentioned operational production measures, can then be used to complement the existing volume-based performance measures. This complementary approach, exploiting the benefits of the volume-based and the flexible approaches is suggested as a viable alternative strategy in the empirical cases. The aim of this paper has been to question the four following statements and to report on the findings that emerged. 1. A volume-based approach fits a limited range of products only. The cases strongly indicate that the volume-based approach is far from being the most efficient for products requiring customisation. To a certain extent it can be applied to highly standardised bulk products. All of the mills studied were bearing the burden of volume-driven production management, which resulted in high inventory levels and a relatively poor level of customer service. 2. In a low-demand situation the volume-based approach does not generate the best performance. Flexibility is needed to tackle periods of low demand. All the cases indicate that shorter paper–machine cycle times and smaller lot sizes provide far better results than the volume-based approach, which can be applied in periods of high market demand and in the case of bulk products. 3. No direct capital investments are needed, as the flexible approach changes the operational procedures of the organisation. To achieve flexibility change is required in the way operations are executed: how well the interplay with other partners in the supply chain is orchestrated, and how the marketing and sales personnel are integrated with production operations. These are all requirements involving activities between people, so no direct capital investment in hardware is needed. Education and training accompanied with an appropriate system of control and rewards are the keys to the flexible approach. 4. The cost-savings potential lies between 2 and 5% of annual turnover. The cases indicate that the flexible approach generates direct cost savings as a result of better inventory and capital efficiency. It is estimated that applying the flexible approach to all mills in the Nordic region would generate savings on a scale of 250–600 million USDs. The volume-based and flexible strategies are not mutually exclusive and can even coexist within one and the same company, depending on the market situation and the paper grade and/or type in question. Nonetheless the volume-based approach is still predominant in the paper industry, as can be seen from benchmark studies indicating that the paper industry in general is operationally slow and in-effective. We have also offered a first indication of the positive impact of shorter production cycles that curb the fluctuation in the long and numerous supply chains of the Nordic paper mills. Among Nordic paper manufacturers this should be seen as a great challenge and an opportunity for achieving a steady and lasting competitive advantage over their rivals.