Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the role of top management control in stimulating innovation through their effect on the creation of knowledge in new product development (NPD) projects. Top management has a crucial role in stimulating innovation in companies, in particular as top managers affect knowledge creation through their interaction with project teams before and during an NPD project, which can of course affect innovation.Design/methodology/approachThrough comparative case‐based research in two companies in high‐velocity industries, chosen through theoretical sampling, the authors have studied six NPD projects.FindingsThe control top management exercise over an NPD project influences the creation of knowledge in different ways, both hampering and facilitating knowledge creation. In particular, this control focuses on explicit knowledge, and not tacit knowledge, which may reduce the overall capacity for knowledge creation and ultimately innovation.Research limitations/implicationsThe results are considered to be generalizable within high‐velocity industries. In terms of future research the results should be tested in other industries using either case‐based research or by increasing the sample and doing survey‐type research.Practical implicationsThe advice, or perhaps challenge, for managers is to know when to exercise control, when not to and what type of control to exercise. In particular the paper highlights the importance of managers not solely controlling projects by focusing on explicit knowledge in the project, but also by understanding that tacit knowledge is necessary in order to facilitate knowledge creation and innovation.Originality/valueThe paper helps clarify the relationship between top management control and knowledge creation by specially examining how and why top management control hampers or facilitates knowledge creation.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to develop and empirically validate an instrument containing operational measures of lean service. The instrument is intended for use by both researchers and practitioners.Design/methodology/approachThe instrument was developed and validated in an iterative process between theoretical and empirical insights. Drawing on a wide selection of frequently cited papers on lean service, a preliminary list of items was generated. These items were then vetted through four steps in order to achieve high validity. Empirical refinement and validation included workshops and semi‐structured interviews with expert practitioners, as well as testing the instrument's ability to discriminate between high and low adoption of lean and portray changes during lean service adoption.FindingsThe instrument contains 34 items that assess enablers of lean adoption, lean practices, and operational performance. Empirical validation suggested the instrument was able to discriminate between high and low adoption of lean service, as well as portray changes over time during lean adoption.Practical implicationsPracticing managers will be able to use the instrument in order to track progress during lean service adoption, thereby identifying and acting upon deviations from planned progress.Originality/valueThe paper represents the first comprehensive attempt to develop an instrument for assessing lean service adoption. Through this instrument, operational definitions of lean service will allow researchers to measure the level of lean service adoption, and using this information, to develop knowledge of for instance the contingencies to lean service adoption, the problems and pitfalls in lean service adoption and the feasibility of transferring practices to various service settings.

PurposeAgainst the background of the often politicized debate on the advantages and disadvantages of production models based on sociotechnical systems (STS) theory and lean production (LP), this paper develops a notion of a hybrid model consisting of elements of both STS and LP and tests its validity by empirical examination.Design/methodology/approachA representative sample of manufacturing plants in Sweden was surveyed. The questionnaire measured the hybrid model in three specific constructs: STS in terms of an integrated work organizational design featuring multifunctional teams, decentralized responsibilities and integrated functions; LP in terms of adoption of lean practices such as just‐in‐time; and plant performance in terms of productivity, quality, delivery and speed. The obtained data were subjected to multiple regression analysis to test our convergence argument while controlling for plant size, order fulfilment practice and production process type.FindingsA relationship between the elements of STS and LP is found. Implementing elements of both production models together leads to better plant performance than implementing either one in isolation. Furthermore, plants having an integrated work organization are possibly more successful in adopting the principles of LP, which in turn leads to improved plant performance.Originality/valueIn contrast to earlier research, the paper argues based on empirical findings that there is no inherent conflict between STS and LP. Rather, these production models have evolved over time and converged into a hybrid. The strong relationship between work organization design and LP practices suggests a need for a broad and parallel change effort for high performance impact.

This paper reports the results of a survey conducted to explore issues surrounding mass customization and in particular its implications for operations management. The findings cover the market changes driving customization, the methods used to provide customized goods, the positive and negative effects of customization, and the difficulties of implementation. There are shown to be important implications for operations management in a strategy of mass customization, and thus substantial scope for further research by operations management academics.

Addresses the question of whether the lean enterprise concept is applicable to small and medium‐sized firms. The implications of the lean enterprise framework for the smaller firm can be summarized in three basic ideas. First, building a larger and more comprehensive offer through partnerships, which has a potential to offer comparatively significant advantages. Second, building unique competence through collaboration with smaller and focused businesses. Third, avoiding large geographical distances when collaborating in more advanced knowledge areas and paying attention to the amount of corporate management capacity that can be occupied by global networking issues.

Explores the role of the management accounting system in the process of adopting a complex manufacturing strategy, lean production. Finds, in a longitudinal field study, using the clinical methodology, that in order to change the management accounting system to support the adoption of lean production, traditional performance measures have to reach a certain threshold. An important way to create impetus for this change is to raise the level of the unit of analysis in the management accounting system, both horizontally and vertically. Finally, the management accounting system affects the process in three concurrent ways: technically, through its design; formally, through its role in the organization; and cognitively, through the way in which actors think about and use the management accounting system. Proposes that in order for the system to be congruent with lean production principles, all three of these perspectives need to be changed.

Develops a model which operationalizes the different principles in lean production, with a focus on those that concern the work organization in the manufacturing part of a company. The model has been developed using available theory and has also been tried out in a clinical field study. The model has implications both for research and practice. For research, it can be used as a model for operationalizing lean production to be able to study change processes properly. In practice, the model can be used as a tool to assess the development taking place in an effort to become lean. Finally, it can be used as a checklist for what to aim at when trying to implement lean production. Lean should be seen as a direction, rather than as a state to be reached after a certain time and, therefore, the focus lies on the changes in the determinants, not on their actual values.

Explores the role of the remuneration system in the implementation
process when introducing a complex manufacturing strategy, lean
production. Exploratory clinical research in a mechanical manufacturing
company was used and three areas of findings emerged. First, there is a
need for congruence in time between organization and remuneration, since
the remuneration system serves both as an obstructing and a facilitating
force in the process. There is also a need for congruence between the
principles of the organization and remuneration. Converting the complex
goals of the manufacturing strategy into a correspondingly elaborate
remuneration system is essential. Finally, proposes a two‐part
remuneration system for lean manufacturing. The first part of the system
is a response to the founding principles of lean manufacturing: focusing
on the competence of the individual. The second part is formed to
remunerate the outcomes of a lean manufacturing system based on the
performance of the team.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate the nature of functional involvement in the cross‐functional make or buy decision process.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on literature within the areas of cross‐functional make or buy decision processes as well as cross‐functional process research in general. The empirical part of the paper is a longitudinal and in‐depth case study, where the data are collected using interviews, documentation and observations. The data are analyzed using chronological patterns.FindingsFindings indicate a changing pattern between close collaborative integration during decision‐making phases and more interaction‐focused integration during data‐gathering phases. The benefits of this integration pattern mainly lay in the effective use of resources combined with increased decision quality.Research limitations/implicationsThe results are based on a large manufacturing company that produces complex products. It can be suggested that the scene researched by the authors may be common for companies in the same environment. However, it is a limited sample and future research would benefit from investigating different environments to establish whether the results are context‐specific or not.Practical implicationsFive phases are found in the make or buy decision process where resources are used differently. Also, different functions have different roles during these phases in order not to drain resources.Originality/valueThe paper helps clarify how functions integrate and use resources during different phases of the make or buy decision process and the cross‐functional benefits and effects. A conceptual model is developed that explains the effect of functional involvement during different types of integration.

Investigates the link between benchmarking and operational performance using a sample of over 600 European manufacturing sites. Benchmarking is linked to the identification and adoption of improved operational practices, an increased understanding of competitive positioning, and the larger context of the "learning organization". Shows that benchmarking may indeed contribute to improved operational performance, first through improving the firm's understanding of its competitive position and its strengths and weaknesses, and second through providing a systematic process for effecting change. Learning organizations were more likely to benchmark than other firms.

Purpose
Doctoral education (DE) is central to the development and application of operations management (OM) thinking. The European Doctoral Educational Network (EDEN) seminar on research methodology in OM is a structured initiative developed in 1999 by European Operations Management Association (EurOMA) and European Institute for Advanced Studies in Management (EIASM). This intensive five-day seminar has run annually since and, to date, has engaged 486 students. The purpose of this paper is to ask: what role has the OM EDEN seminar played in the formation and academic career development of doctoral researchers, and how has it contributed to the development of EurOMA as a community of practice?


Design/methodology/approach
The authors developed a retrospective case on the design, launch and growth of the OM EDEN seminar employing two data gathering methods (collecting secondary and archival data, and a survey of four selected seminar participants) and a social network analysis.


Findings
The EDEN seminar is an effective educational intervention in developing doctoral researchers and their subsequent academic careers. The seminar has also contributed to EurOMA as a community of practice, bringing faculty together to teach, write and publish leading edge contributions in research methods for OM.


Research limitations/implications
The case is focused on the OM EDEN seminar only, within which the survey is limited to four of the early participants. While another set of participants might respond differently in detail, the authors' expectation is that participant perception of the role of the seminar would not change. The paper provides an exemplar for European academic associations to guide how they might explore the formation and academic career development of doctoral candidates within a community of practice.


Practical implications
The seminar merits the ongoing support of EurOMA and EIASM, not just in educating doctoral students but also in bringing faculty together to publish leading edge contributions to the OM domain.


Social implications
The paper draws on the areas of student formation, academic career development and communities of practice to illustrate the role played by the OM EDEN seminar.


Originality/value
This paper is the first description, analysis and reflection on the role played by the OM EDEN seminar.

PurposeLean remains popular in a wide range of private and public sectors and continues to attract a significant amount of research. However, most of this research is not grounded in theory. This paper presents and discusses different expert viewpoints on the role of theory in lean research and practice and provides guidelines for future research.Design/methodology/approachSeven experienced lean authors independently provide their views to the question "is Lean a theory?" before Rachna Shah summarizes the viewpoints and provides a holistic outlook for lean research.FindingsAuthors agree, disagree and sometimes agree to disagree. However, a close look reveals agreement on several key points. The paper concludes that Lean is not a theory but has plenty of theoretical underpinnings. Many lean-related theories provide promising opportunities for future research.Originality/valueAs researchers, we are asked to justify our research drawing on "theory," but what does that mean for a practice-driven phenomenon such as lean? This paper provides answers and directions for future research.