هم ترازی بین تولید و استراتژی های کسب و کار: تأثیر آن بر عملکرد کسب و کار

This paper reports the influence of alignment between manufacturing strategy and business strategy on business performance and the contribution of manufacturing performance to business performance. The research is based on the empirical data from the International Manufacturing Strategy Survey (IMSS) conducted in more than 20 countries. The results include: (1) the alignment of manufacturing strategy and business strategy positively influences the improvement of business performances; (2) the manufacturing–business alignment also positively influences the manufacturing contribution to the improvement of business performance. The conclusion is that only when the manufacturing strategy and business strategy are in alignment, can manufacturing contribute to the improvement of business performance and business objectives can be achieved. The main implication is that the production/manufacturing function should be involved in the strategic decision-making.

Strategy plays the role of a linkage between the external market requirement and internal organizational and technological resources, capability and competitive advantage. Without a proper strategy, the technological and organizational resources and capacities will be unfocused and very often misdirected. For example, many studies (Riis and Sun, 1994 and Sun, 2000) have revealed that advanced manufacturing technologies implemented may not contribute to the improvement of business performance if they are not under the guidance of a strategy. Strategy can be discussed at different levels such as corporate/business strategy and functional strategies. Functional strategies may include manufacturing strategy, market strategy and R&D strategy etc. Manufacturing strategy is a link between business strategy and internal organizational and technological basis. To serve as such a link, manufacturing strategy must be in alignment with business strategy as well as internal organizational and technological capability. Alignment (or internal and external consistency) is regarded as one of the paradigms on manufacturing strategy (Voss, 1995). However, past practice and literature did not pay enough attention to the alignment between business and manufacturing strategies. As Hill (1995, p. 57) pointed out two incorrect assumptions for the ignorance of manufacturing in strategy. They are: (1) manufacturing is able to do everything; and (2) manufacturing's contribution concerns the achievement of efficiency rather than the effective support of market needs. Strategy literature (Mintzberg and Quinn, 1991) rarely touches manufacturing and production. Although recent research realizes the importance of the issue and research testing the relationship between strategy and performance was reported (Williams et al., 1995), it still lacks empirical testing on the influence of the alignment on business performance. In fact, a review of literature on manufacturing strategy (Bozarth and McDermott, 1998) concluded that “what has not been studied in any depth is the consistency aspects of manufacturing strategy”, both internal and external. In this paper, the research on the alignment between business and manufacturing strategies and its influence on performance will be presented. The paper was structured as follows. After the introduction (Section 1), the literature will be reviewed and relevant research questions will be raised in Section 2. In Section 3, the source of empirical data will be introduced. The data analysis and the results will be reported in Section 4. The implications and future research will be discussed in Section 5. The last section will include a brief conclusion.

In conclusion, a strategy (including both manufacturing and business strategy) should address two questions: ‘What business are we in?’ and ‘What is our basis of competitive advantages?’ A good strategy has to answer both questions. If only the first question is answered and the second is not, the answer to the first must be reconsidered. This implies that manufacturing strategy and business strategy must mutually fit each other. Both top–down and bottom–up alignment should be considered. For example, the identified market opportunity has to be redefined until there is a sufficient basis for the competitive advantages. If the basis cannot be found or built, the market opportunity has to be abandoned! If the manufacturing function does not support the business objective, it must be adjusted or even re-engineered. Hottensen and Dean (1992, pp. 115–116) used a Biblical metaphor to illustrate the mutual alignment of external (market) and internal (technology and organization) fit through a strategy. They suggest that only the right business and the right manufacturing advantages fit each other, the company can survive. They called such a fit or alignment the Promised Land. The sample distributions in Table 1 and Table 2 reveal that only 16% of sample companies have a formal process translating corporate goals and strategy into a manufacturing strategy, while in only 13% of sample companies, manufacturing influences the formulation of corporate strategy a lot. Companies that scored 5 in both top–down and bottom–up alignment only occupy 5%. This implies that, by this Biblical metaphor model, only a small percentage of sampled companies are in the Promised Land, i.e. a perfect alignment between manufacturing strategy and business strategy. Future research is needed to look at the approaches for companies to reach the alignment and enter the Promised Land.