Suchergebnisse

The article gives a brief overview of key state legal, regulatory and forecast documents related to government regulation of production and the Russian manufacturing market developed and adopted in the second decade of this century. On the example of the implementation of government measures aimed at improving the structure of industrial production and solving the problems of staffing the functioning of manufacturing industries, unresolved problems in these areas of state regulation that persist at the end of the second decade are shown. Examples of foreign experience and some recommendations in the field of state regulation of the country's industrial development are given. It is shown that for radical investment growth, it is necessary to first of all solve structural problems in the economy, implement measures aimed at improving the business climate, developing competition and reducing the share of the public sector and stimulating consumer demand to intensify the investment activities of private business in the field of manufacturing. In order to accurately and reasonably assess the impact of government measures on the development of manufacturing in the country, it is necessary to develop a methodology for assessing the regulatory impact (ODS) in the direction of methods for assessing the impact of government decisions on the activation of innovation and the use of progressive technologies "Industry 4.0."

This paper is aimed at comparing cellular manufacturing with focused cellular manufacturing. We define focused cellular manufacturing as a layout scheme that groups components by end‐items and forms cells of machines to fabricate and assemble end‐items. It is not classified as a cellular manufacturing layout since it does not attempt to take advantage of process similarities. It also is not classified as a flow shop since there are no machines dedicated to individual operations and the machines are not arranged in a series. In addition, this research includes batching and assemble times in its criteria which few researchers in this area have done. The results indicate that the focused cellular manufacturing scheme has a batching advantage. This advantage out‐weighed the set‐up time reduction advantage of the cellular manufacturing scheme for average end‐item completion times and average work‐in‐process inventory levels. The cellular manufacturing scheme overcame the batching advantage only when there were small batch sizes or large set‐up time magnitudes.

If the use of Advanced Manufacturing Technology (AMT) is to be successful it is vital to give proper consideration to implementation. Failure usually results because implementation has not been carried out in relation to strategic objectives. As a consequence technical considerations, e.g. cost reductions, have predominated. Parallels are drawn between the lack of emphasis on implementation in the literature on Materials Requirements Planning (MRP). A strategic input is needed if the full potential of the technology is to be realised. A model for strategic implementation of AMT and its associated procedures is proposed.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine differences in manufacturing managers' perceptions of functional area power in manufacturing organizations to address the perception in the literature that manufacturing has little if any power in the organization.Design/methodology/approachSurvey data gathered from 129 manufacturing executives in the USA are used to examine their perceptions of differences in functional power in manufacturing firms. Relative rankings of functional areas for four types of power – position, expertise, resource, and political – are used to examine perceived differences, and the relationship between power and the role of the manufacturing executive in strategic decision making.FindingsContrary to prior assertions in the manufacturing strategy literature, it was found that the manufacturing and marketing areas are perceived by manufacturing managers to be the most powerful functions, switching in their dominant roles depending upon the type of power. In addition, a relationship exists between position, expertise, and political power and the role of the manufacturing executive.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough, this research includes a second respondent from a sub‐sample of firms, future research should examine not only the manufacturing managers' perceptions of intra‐organizational power, but also should dovetail the paper's findings with perceptions of managers in other functional areas as well.Practical implicationsManufacturing managers can take actions to enhance their role in business‐level strategic decisions and be proactive in increasing the power of their functional area.Originality/valueThis paper addresses intra‐organizational power, which has not been examined in the manufacturing strategy literature from the perspective of the manufacturing manager's perception.

This paper examines three key factors that help to explain the differences between high and low performing plants in process quality. The three factors are: first, the seniority of manufacturing personnel within the plants; second, the involvement of these senior managers in the business, rather than being confined to the role of a production/technology functional specialist; third, the contribution of a manufacturing strategy which includes quality as part of its content and which feeds into, and forms part of, the overall business plan within the plant. The paper argues that these three factors help to maintain the strategic importance of quality and, consequently, help to explain the subsequent quality performance within the manufacturing plant. The conclusions are that two distinct groups emerge ‐ one, Traditional, and the other, Enlightened ‐ which are different in terms of attitudes, commitment to, and capabilities in, quality.