Search results

PurposeSeeks to provide observations on a paper published in 1995.Design/methodology/approachThe approach is a review and observations about the 1987 work.FindingsIn the 1995 paper, "Alternative paradigms for manufacturing strategy", the history of the development of manufacturing strategy was reviewed and it was concluded that three paradigms had emerged: competing through manufacturing; strategic choices in manufacturing, and best practice. Looking back on this work these three paradigms are remarkably robust. However, there has been considerable development in the intervening years both intellectually and in practice that needs to be considered when reviewing this paper.Originality/valueShows that the three paradigms have remained robust, but there has been considerable development in practice and theory that both broadens the content and informs the nature of each paradigm.

Over the past 20 years, the field of manufacturing strategy has
developed many different approaches. Argues that there are three
distinct paradigms in manufacturing strategy: competing through
manufacturing; strategic choices in manufacturing; and best practice.
Each is reviewed and its strengths and weaknesses discussed. Finally,
the relationship between them is discussed and a cycle of manufacturing
strategy is proposed.

In the integrated manufacturing enterprise there is a logical
sequence – strategy must lead, flow leads technology, information
standards start early but information and technology integration develop
alongside one another and organisation integration responds to these
two. It will be necessary for the manufacturing manager of the future to
have a vision of the manufacturing system to which he or she is moving.

The Managing Advanced Manufacturing Technology (AMT) Conference was held at the University of Warwick in January 1986. The conference theme covered those elements which are part of the total process of management of AMT: manufacturing strategy, technical planning, relations with equipment suppliers, implementation and performance and evaluation. These elements are reviewed here in the context of the background to the conference.

Japan is perceived in most advanced countries as the world leader in the introduction and exploitation of new management practices, particularly in the area of manufacturing. In an attempt to match Japan's economic progress other countries are seeking to introduce many of the systems which are believed to be the basis of Japanese success. In this article, certain aspects of a UK manufacturing company, which had adopted a number of practices following studies undertaken in Japan, is compared with a Japanese owned company located in the UK.

The person responding to customer requests often diagnoses problems, despatches and schedules service resources. This article reports some exploratory research into the nature of this role.

There is widespread interest and discussion of Just‐in‐Time (JIT) manufacturing but little is known about the actual uptake and pattern of use of JIT and its constituent techniques. This article reports the results of a survey of UK manufacturing companies. The survey examined the level of consideration of JIT in the UK, the nature of the JIT effort, the JIT techniques used and not used, the effectiveness of the various techniques and the benefits reported from JIT. The data are reviewed by industry, sector, size and parent company and conclusions are developed concerning the nature of the application of JIT in the UK. The data indicate that though the overall level of interest in JIT is high, there are a number of causes for concern in the way in which it is being implemented.

Most Western countries are demonstrating a trend in the public and private sector away from traditional manufacturing operations. This has resulted in customer‐led pressure for Production/Operations Management teachers to give service operations equal time with manufacturing. Service industries have the same operating issues as manufacturing but for effective teaching two aspects must be considered. The first is the context of service operations and the second is those differences that do exist between manufacturing and services. A teaching strategy is proposed. This emphasises the use of service cases and examples to illustrate the application of operations management approaches; an understanding of the key contextual differences in the service environment; and the development of electives focusing on specific service features in operations management. Examples from undergraduate and postgraduate teaching are given.