تنظیم استراتژی تولید برای یک "کارخانه در یک کارخانه"

Manufacturing strategy is a plan for moving a company from where it is to where it wants to be. Determining the best manufacturing strategy is not easy because of the wide range of choices and constraints a company faces. Manufacturing strategy frameworks or models are helpful because they identify the objects that comprise manufacturing strategy and organize these objects into a structure that enables a company to understand and use the objects to develop strategy. Many frameworks are possible and there is no single framework that is best for all companies. In this paper, we are interested in the levels of cost, quality, delivery, and flexibility that manufacturing provides for each product family it produces. This is determined primarily by a company's factories-within-a-factory (FWFs) and so the level of analysis in this paper is the FWF. We identify and examine five manufacturing strategy objects (production systems, manufacturing outputs, manufacturing levers, manufacturing capability, competitive analysis), linkages between these objects, and the manufacturing strategy framework for an FWF that follows from these objects and linkages. We apply the framework to the FWFs of two multi-national companies. This paper is descriptive and exploratory. Strategy objects, linkages, and framework are presented and their use is illustrated. The work of rigorous empirical analysis is left for future research.

Marketing professionals talk about four types of value: form, time, place, and possession. Manufacturing is primarily responsible for the form and time value-types with some participation from marketing and accounting. Manufacturing forms products by completing design and production activities in a timely manner. Manufacturing and marketing generate the place value-type through their distribution activities. Marketing and accounting are responsible for the possession value-type through activities such as pricing, credit, advertising, and customer service. Manufacturing creates value in its network of factories, distribution centers, offices, research laboratories, and so on. Factories can be large or small, and can consist of one or more factories-within-a-factory, FWFs (also called plants-within-a-plant, PWPs). See Hill (2007). Manufacturing strategy can be analyzed at the level of industry, company, strategic business unit, network, factory, FWF, or product (Swink and Hegarty, 1998). In this paper, the level of analysis is the FWF. FWFs are important parts of a factory and a manufacturing network. Miltenburg (2005) examines the constraints a manufacturing network imposes on the factories and FWFs that comprise it. In an FWF the form and time value-types are operationalized as levels of cost, quality, delivery, and flexibility that the FWF provides for the products it produces. The goal of manufacturing strategy for an FWF is to determine the levels of cost, quality, delivery, and flexibility that are required, and the actions that are needed to achieve these levels. Minor et al. (1994) and Dangayach and Deshmukh (2001) give good reviews of manufacturing strategy. At a macro level manufacturing strategy can be studied as one of several functional strategies in a hierarchy of industrial, corporate, business, and functional strategies (Gupta and Lonial, 1998), or as the way a company uses its assets and prioritizes its activities to achieve business goals and generate competitive advantage (Kotha and Orne, 1989; Miller and Roth, 1994). A distinction can be made between the content of manufacturing strategy and the process of formulating manufacturing strategy (Barnes, 2002; Papke-Shields et al., 2002; Platts et al., 1998). Pun (2004) gives an excellent review and synthesis of different processes for formulating manufacturing strategy. Ahmed and Montagno (1996), Devaraj et al. (2004), and others verify empirically a positive correlation between strategy formulation and company performance. Demeter (2003), for example, reviewed the literature from 1983 to 1999, completed an empirical analysis of the IMSS-II data (International Manufacturing Strategy Survey in 1996–1997), and found that “(T)he most important result … is that ROS (return on sales, which is the ratio of profit before tax to sales) is significantly higher in companies with existing MS (manufacturing strategy)” (pp. 210–211). Setting manufacturing strategy for an FWF is the subject of this paper. The next section describes the objects, linkages, and framework that comprise manufacturing strategy for an FWF. Section 3 illustrates the use of these objects, linkages, and framework by studying the manufacturing strategies of two multi-national companies. The paper finishes with a summary in Section 4.

The manufacturing strategy framework for an FWF consists of five objects: production systems, manufacturing outputs, manufacturing levers, manufacturing capability, and competitive analysis, and the linkages between these objects. An FWF uses one production system to produce most or all products in a product family and provide six manufacturing outputs: cost, quality, delivery, performance, flexibility, and innovativeness. No FWF is able to provide all outputs at the best possible levels. So it is important to determine which outputs are most important to customers. These are the market–qualifying and order–winning outputs. There are seven production systems: job shop, batch flow, operator-paced line flow, equipment-paced line flow, continuous flow, just-in-time, and flexible manufacturing systems. Each produces a unique mix of products and volumes, and provides a unique combination of manufacturing outputs. A production system consists of six subsystems called manufacturing levers. They are human resources, organization structure and controls, production planning and control, sourcing, process technology, and facilities. Adjustments to manufacturing levers must consider the linkages between manufacturing levers and the linkages between strategy objects. For example, each adjustment must be appropriate for the production system in use and must help the production system provide the manufacturing outputs at required levels. The levels at which the manufacturing outputs are provided depend on the production system in use and its level of manufacturing capability. A production system's level of capability is the sum of the levels of capability of each subsystem or lever. Manufacturing capability is measured on a continuous scale from 1.0 to 4.0: 1.0 is an infant level of capability; 2.0 is an industry average level; 3.0 is an adult level; and 4.0 is a world-class level. Competitive analysis identifies the manufacturing outputs that customers desire. It requires information on the FWF's products, competitors’ products, customer requirements, and the current production system. Outcomes from the competitive analysis are the market qualifying and order winning manufacturing outputs for the product family, and the production system that can provide these outputs and can be put into practice by the FWF. Fig. 1 arranges the five manufacturing strategy objects for an FWF into a manufacturing strategy framework. We illustrate the use of these objects and framework by studying the strategic activities of Groupe Dutailier Inc. and Rheem Manufacturing Company. We can also use the five objects and manufacturing strategy framework to formulate a manufacturing strategy for an FWF. First we determine the FWF's current manufacturing state by examining its production system, its manufacturing capability, and its manufacturing outputs. Second we determine the FWF's desired future manufacturing state by using the competitive analysis object. Finally we use the manufacturing levers object to determine the changes that are required to move the FWF from its current manufacturing state to its desired future manufacturing state. Safsten and Winroth (2002) studied this process at some small- and medium-size manufacturing companies. This paper is descriptive and exploratory. A manufacturing strategy framework for an FWF is presented and its use is illustrated. The strategy objects and the framework they comprise are not analyzed empirically. This work is left for future research. There are other areas where more research can be done. More detailed descriptions can be developed for each manufacturing strategy object. New objects can be developed. Other frameworks can be developed, and relationships between different frameworks can be studied.