221Selepers
D
* C
Ab
ThiExcproenaorgheaTo appelem © 2SelSys
Key
1. I
forpreby
“exEFcerspewitbuzExconcon
2-8271 © 2014 Tection and peer-reson of the Confer
Variety M
Developmbas
orresponding aut
stract
is paper presentcellence (OE)
oduction procesablers as a cenganization (e.g.alth foreseeablesupport a meth
plied research pment of the pre
2014 The Autholection and peerstems” in the pe
ywords: Operation
Introduction
Today’s comrce organizatioevailing challeachieving excThe origin of
xcellence” is QM (Europea
rtain management too much th real subszzwords “Opcellence” (Onsulting fieldnsidered syno
The Authors. Pubeview under resprence Chair Profe
Management
ment of ased on th
thor. Tel.: +43-67
ts the researchepredominantly
sses. In comparntral role for op, high perform
e and to identifyhodical integratproject “IMFT”esent paper.
ors. Published br-review under erson of the Con
ns Excellence, Op
mpetitive andons not only enges, but alscellence in thef this drive to
unclear, butan Foundationment consultatime on jarg
stance” [2]. erational ExcsE) are amo
d of productionymously. T
Availabl
P
blished by Elsevieponsibility of the Iessor Hoda ElMar
t in Manufa
an assesshe parad
A.aFraunhofer A
bVienna Univ
76-88861625; E-m
ed changeover fy deals with thrison, Operatioperational long
mance culture, my its capability ttion of Operatio. The model de
by Elsevier B.Vresponsibility onference Chair
perational Excell
d globalized to respond re
so to seek loneir business. change from qt is assumed n for Qualityancies. “Acad
gon building rIn terms o
cellence” (OEong the mostion optimizatThis misbelie
e online at ww
Procedia CIRP 00
er B.V. International Scieraghy.
acturing. Pro
sment frdigm cha
.Jaegera,b*,
ustria Research Gversity of Techno
mail address: and
from Operationhe efficiency (pns Excellence
g-term success.methods and into achieve sustaons Excellencesign containing
V. of the InternatioProfessor Hoda
lence, EFQM, Per
market condeactively to sung-term succe
quality and TQto originate
y Managemendemics and erather than dof operationsE) and “Opert over-used ition and are ef underscore
ww.sciencedir
0 (2014) 000–000
entific Committee
oceedings oSystems
rameworange in O
, K.Matyas
GmbH, Theresianology, Theresianu
dreas.jaeger@frau
nal Excellence (productivity), e(OsE) enlarges. The assessmenstruments, emainability and exe in organizationg the identificat
onal Scientific Ca ElMaraghy.
rformance Measu
ditions urvive ess [1]
QM to e from nt) and experts dealing s, the rations in the
often es the
neeresspe
origexcres
2. C
arethecanbuswe
rect.com
0
e of “The 47th CI
of the 47th C
rk for OpOperatio
sb,W.Sihn (
numgasse 27, 104umgasse 27, 1040
unhofer.at
(OE) to the neweffectiveness (cs that perspectient of required
mployee empowxcellence in terns, an OsE asstion of relevant
Committee of “
urement, Assessm
ed for a distinult-driven pro
ecific enablersTherefore, thgin and devecellence in oponsible crite
Challenge an
As part of the correspondine right track ton be assessed siness excellell-founded ba
IRP Conference o
CIRP Confe
perationsonal Exce
(2)a,b
40 Vienna, Austri Vienna, Austria
w path of Operacustomer/markeve to see opera
d against existinwerment, etc.) srms of operationessment framewcriteria and the
The 47th CIRP
ment, Enablers
nction betweenocesses, and Os and principlehis paper elabelopment of
operations, attria and indica
nd objectives
eir desire to sngly concerneowards excell[3]. To assist nce, the EFQMasis for self-a
www.elsevier
on Manufacturing
erence on M
s Excellellence (
ia
ations Excellencet orientation)
rations as settinng setting of e
supports to becns. work has been eir cause-effect
P Conference on
n OE, i.e., theOsE, the promes.
aborates on thdifferent poitended by th
ators and their
succeed and ged regarding wlence and howorganizations
QM scoring syassessment. T
r.com/locate/proc
g Systems” in the
Manufacturin
ence (Os(OE)
ce (OsE). Operaand optimizat
ng lever by proenabler criteriacome a plant’s
developed withrelationships is
n Manufacturin
e exclusive focotion of opera
he research oint of viewshe identificatir assessment.
grow, organiswhether they w their performs in striving toystem [4] provThe EFQM m
edia
e
ng
sE),
ational tion of oviding a in an
future
hin the s a key
g
cus on ations-
of the about
ion of
sations are on mance
owards vides a model,
2
Europand tacadeespecsubst(SME
(1revieto theinduscriterorganand aorganand mto Opnecessuppoglobainterd
(2organenterresousmallthe Eand u
As
Austrinstitthe ManaEngin“Inno(IMFleast used a culSMEproceto enattracpresc
Stsualtraofasasto
StDecothsein
pe’s answer the Japanese emics and indcially in termtantial challenEs): ) The EFQMw organisatioe need to be astrial sectors [ria resp. indinisation’s speadopt any indunisations, themeasurement operations Excssary to adaptorts transpareal organisationdependencies 2) Most assnisations and rprises [10]. urces e.g., hiler organisatio
EFQM model. user-optimised
s a result of trian Machinetution of the
Vienna Unagement Scieneering (IMWovative MetaFT). FMMI fu
three years toto accelerate
lture of excellE’s ranging fresses to stakehnhance enterpctiveness as cribes a two-st
tep 1: Defineufficiently genso flexible enaits. The modf prerequisitess criteria agaissessed compa target these ktep 2 (outlookesign a system
ontinuous selree-stage eva
elf-assessmenttegration of O
to the AmeriDeming Pric
dustry. But appms of Operatinges for small
M statements ons’ excellencapplicable to [5,6]. As a coicators need ecific requiremustry-specific
e interpretatioof business excellence is toot the concept oency of the nal indicatorsto adjacent fisessment toobarely considDue to re
igh efforts foons especiallyAs a consequ
d version of as
these potentiaery & MetalAustrian Fed
niversity of ence, DivisionW) establishedal – Researcunds these acto provide a mimprovementlence that sup
from individuholder’s mind
prises’ compean industria
tage approach
e an OsE asneric to suit alnough to incoel’s design is
s for excellent inst which allany could be jkey issues. k, follow-up rematic assessmf-assessment aluation by et”), as part o
OsE in FMMI’
Andreas J
ican Malcom e, is widely plication of thions Excellenl and medium
and scoring e are defined a very wide rnsequence, thto be adjus
ments of the language [8]
on, definitionxcellence as wo abstract [9]of assessmentcause-effect
s to operationelds. ols are desider the needs estricted timeor preparationy encounter puence, the neessessment is c
al gaps, the Alware Industrderal Econom
Technologyn for Industrd the appliedch & Techntivities over a
methodology ant across the sepports rethinkual culture, mds. The resultietitiveness andal location. h:
ssessment fral companies worporate varyintended to idoperations th
l decisions anjudged. This p
esearch based ent, set up a sby the orga
external expeof supporting’s SMEs.
Jaeger/ Procedia
Baldrige Awaccepted by bhe EFQM ratince, presents
m-sized enterpr
criteria usedtoo generally range of diffe
he self-assessmted to fit toorganisation
. But for man, implementa
well as the tran]. Therefore,t in a manner
relationshipss as well as t
igned for laof medium s
e and monen and executroblems apply
ed for a simpliclear [11].
Association ofries (FMMI),
mic Chamber, y, Institute rial and Syst
d research pronology Transa period lastinnd language toector and to crking of aspectmanagement, ng overall god boost AustrTherefore, IM
amework, thawithin FMMI,ying firm-specdentify a clearhat would thennd actions of paper is inten
on step 1): ystem combinanization withrts (“supervis
g the method
a CIRP 00 (2014)
ward both ings, two
rises
d to y due erent ment o an n [7] ny of ation nsfer it is that
s of their
arge sized etary tion, ying ified
f the , an and
of tems oject sfer” ng at o be reate ts of and
oal is ria’s MW
at is but cific r set n act f the nded
ning th a sed-
dical
3. EvOper
Mscienthan Exceterm measdescronly Thoswith
Ththe lidelinOE excelcanoperathe psourc
3.1. O
Into prproceprocewhilemovemana
3.2. O
FiOperEffeccontimarkdiscipCusto(best
OEin co
000–000
volution of Oprations Excel
Many differenntific discours
30 definitillence as rev
OE/OsE pesureable, predeription and opa handful of e few descripseveral practihe growing aiterature can beated by the a1.0 and 2.0 llence”) whilsexcellence b
ations. OE 4.0aradigm chan
ce of OE (“Wh
Fig. 1
OE 1.0: Origi
n the late 18th
ropose measuesses [12]. Iness developede Frederick Taement, introdagement [13].
OE 2.0: Value
rst research rational Ectiveness”) wnued by Trea
ket leader shplines and shomer Intimacproduct) or O
E’s price-orieontemporary
perational Exlence (OsE)
nt approachese. A review oons and inealed in Sect
er se is neitefined indicaterationalizatioapproaches c
tions, howevecal examples.
attention paid be categorizedauthors with “concentrate
st OE 3.0 excbe achieved?”0’s approach inge to OsE 1.0hat is needed t
1. Evolution and t
n and first step
century, Adamures to maximn the early 20d by Henry Foaylor, an intelduced the f
e discipline of
activities Excellence were carried oacy and Wierould concenthould compety (best total
Operational Exnted perspectiliterature, e.g
xcellence (OE
s towards Oof key literat
nterpretations tions 3.1, 3.2ther meaningtors and criteron. As far as Ocan be found er, are illustra.
to Operationd into three int“OE ×.0” as fomainly on rclusively stre”) to encomis substantiall0 that identifieto manage exc
trend of OE and O
eps
m Smith was mise the outp0th century, thord revolutionllectual leaderfirst principle
f cost minimiza
conducted i(originally
out by Portersema [16]. Ttrate on onete in each osolution), Pro
xcellence (besive continues g., Ferrell an
E) towards
OE exist in ture offered m
of Operatio and 3.3. As
gful nor direria are used foOsE is concern
in the literatated and valid
nal Excellencterrelated streollows (Figureesults (“Whasses tools (“H
mpass world-cly responsiblees enablers ascellence?”).
OsE
amongst the fut of producthe assembly nised productr of the efficiees of scient
ation
n the area “Operatio
er [14, 15], lThey stated the of three vf the other toduct Leader
st total cost). to be republis
nd Hartline w
the more onal the
ectly or its ned, ture.
dated
e in eams e 1). at is How class e for s the
first tion line
tion, ency tific
of onal later
hat a alue two: rship
shed who
decopedelandpro[18ideserand
3.3
puractMa(TQProLeame(JITdeb
comcusimpandmaactperchaopeinto
3.4Excset
carena
of env(adtheoptdynproculbas
as groess
clared that coerate at lower liver goods and better valuopositions that8], four addentified for acrvices, customd manageable
3. OE 3.0: Qua
Most OE 3.0rsuit of activitivities to aanagement phQM) and Leanocess Reenginan-Six-Sigma
ethods such T), flow and pbate concerninThis approachmbined withstomer orienprovement (Cd the eliminaain goals of Otivities to acrsonalities arange is onlerational exceo culture [22]
4. OE 4.0 & cellence to Optting levers
More recent rried out by abler oriented According toenablers to
vironment badaptability). Te basis for timization of namic capabocesses in theltural and orgsed on the resp Based on sevon discussio
oup, Gleich ansential for long
ompanies whocosts than the
nd services toue [17]. Aft quote or inte
ditional relevchieving OE 2mer convenien
bargains.
ality and Lean
0 literature, eities to strip aattain efficienhilosophies sun Managemenneering (BPR)a and Fit-Sias valuestreapull, SMED, ng the best of h is equivalen
h consensus ntation and CI). Although tation of wasteOperational Exchieve it. “Pre insufficiently possible ellence are un.”
OsE 1.0: TheOperations Exc
research actGleich & Sframework.
o their interprgenerate com
ased on the The compositicontinuous i
f business prility to reali
e value creatiganizational faspective strateg
veral analyses ons within a nd Sautter preg-term operati
Andre
o pursue Opeeir competitoro their customfter filtering erpret Treacy vant constitu2.0: fast and tnce, reliable p
n Managemen
e.g., [19, 20]away waste ant and frict
uch as total qnt, tools like S) and various igma [21], am-based thiOEE, etc. arethe best in ter
nt to a classicregarding tthe necessi
the utilizatione are often coxcellence, theyPrograms, tot to create la
when timelnderstood an
e changeovercellence: enab
tivities with fSautter [23],
etation, “OE mpetitive ben
resources ofion and expanimprovement, rocesses. Theize effective ion chain utilifactors in an iegy.”
of existing Odedicated in
esent six fieldional success
eas Jäger/ Proced
erational Excers, allowing th
mers at lower for eight f
and Wiersemative criteria imely operatiproducts or se
nt as key eleme
], is dominatand nonvalue-tionless proc
quality managSix Sigma, Bu
combinationsor principles
inking, just-ine focus of extrms of operatic production she importanity of contin of Kaizen (Ponsidered to by are only tooools, projectsasting changeless principld deeply emb
r from Operablers in the r
focus on OEwho describ
is the developefits in a dy
of an organinsion of enab
change, anerefore, OE and efficientizing technolointegrative wa
OE-concepts andustry-wide ds they identif(Figure 2).
dia CIRP 00 (201
ellence hem to prices
further a, e.g.,
were ions or ervice,
ents
ted by -added cesses. gement usiness s, e.g., s and n-time tensive ions. system
nce of inuous
PDCA) be the
ols and s and
e. Real les of bedded
ational role of
E were bed an
opment ynamic ization
blers is nd the is the t core ogical, ay and
as well study
fied as
Bo“Oof propatimpandprosupsucval
pursupval
decmeopetheappenaservalstraeffeand
andundcenareexcenaachdes
4) 000–000
Fig. 2. Si
Schwientek ath are amonperations Excexcellence in
ovides companth towards beprovement, cd competitiveoductivity. Thpport, measurch as organizalues for compaStarting fromrchasing andpply chain malue chain.
Fig. 3. Three le
A more rigclaration [25]eans focusing erations delive power of peoplication of vaables sustainrvices and caplue. Companiategic comp
fectiveness of td sustaining cSuch a statemd organizatioderscores thentral to operate substantiallyclusively resuabler’s perspehieve Operatiosire to follow
x fields for long-
nd Schmidt pg the few au
cellence” by doperations (Fnies with infoest practice. overs the rete levers suchhe third levere, and controation, processanies.
m research andmanufacturin
anagement, th
vels & four fieldsOperations E
orous definit. He argumenstrategically
ver to customople, the use oalue-add tech
ned delivery apabilities thaes that leverapetitive advtheir operationustomer satisf
ment, especialonal, as wee need to prional success.
y responsible fult-driven viective on the oonal Excellencthe path to Op
-term operational
presented a simuthors elabor
describing threFigure 3). The formation on
The second thinking of ph as cost stel concerns ol all operatioses, IT, and K
nd developmenng and eventuhese three lev
s of activities forExcellence [24]
tion can be nts that “Ope
y on maximizmers, through
of industry behnologies. Op
of high-quaat provide exage Operatiovantage recn plays a centfaction and lolly the accentell as technromote opera. The three exfor the paradiew on the poperations levece is being grperations Exce
success [23]
milar approachrating on theee levels at thfirst level, strtraveling theilevel, perform
performance dtructures and enablers thatonal enabler KPIs, with ta
nt, continuingually encompels cover the
r implementation
seen in Suerations Excezing the valu
strong leadeest practice anerations Exceality, cost-effxceptional cusns Excellence
cognize thattral role in cr
oyalty.” tuation of stranological, asational enablexplained approgm change frrocess level el. The aspiratradually replacellence.
3
h [24]. e term he core rategy, ir own mance drivers
asset t help issues
angible
g with assing entire
of
utton’s ellence e that ership, nd the
ellence ffective stomer e as a t the reating
ategic, spects, ers as oaches rom an
to an tion to ced by
4
4. De
NuconstExceSecti
new as a Oper
Duasseschallrelatimeas
4.1. I
ToExcechainOpercrucibusinthem
“Hprincstratethe o
“Vconseattituproceprovientrerespe
efinition of an
umerous overtitutive framellence approaon 3. Because
agglomeratedmore substan
rations Excelleue to synergyssment desigenge of identionships of suring and eva
Identification
o identify the llence in indu
n is used as rations Excelleial vertical ness-areas. Th
m on different lHorizontal fitciples, conceptegic, tactical, perations man
Vertical fit” sensus between
ude in its roless level. Thiding an operpreneurial ac
ectively, mana
n OsE 1.0 fra
rviews of exeworks and a aches can be fe every interpr
d overview wantive basis forence as requiry effects (ho
gn of Operatifying and renabler and
aluating them
of OsE interr
role, positionustrial compan
reference. Hence represenand horizon
he alignment olevels is hereint” describes ts, systems, anand operationnagement and stands for ton behavior onle as setting
herefore, OsE rating system
ctivities with agement with
Andreas J
Fig.
amework
xisting Operatlimited numb
found in literaretation has a
as devised (Figr developing red in Section ow things woations Excellreviewing the
results critin isolation.
elationships
n and interactinies, Porter’s [
Hence, it can nts a key functntal correlatiof results withnafter referredthe sideway
nd tools withinal level, respe
the shopfloorop-to-bottom n the business
lever, and it fulfills the
m that links athe producti
execution.
Jaeger/ Procedia
4. OsE 1.0 frame
tional Excelleber of Operatature, as show
different focu
gure 4) to be uan assessmen2.
ork together), ence meetscause-and-ef
eria rather t
ion of Operat[14] generic vbe deduced
tional aspect wions with oenablers crea
d to as “fit.” ys consensus n operations oectively, betwr. (and vice velevel, operatiots impact on essential taskand synchronion process,
a CIRP 00 (2014)
ework from system
ence tions
wn in us, a
used nt of
the the
ffect than
tions value
that with
other ating
s of on a
ween
ersa) ons’
the k of nizes
and
4.2. A
Thassesassesevalu
ho ho
(A(A
hotec
Thcompinterdlevel
AD 1
ThratheOperendin“visio
Thtechndesigand minvolTheysystecorpoits reachiemana
000–000
ms perspective
Assessment dim
he issue of verssment dimenssment and uations. The fu
ow operations ow operationsAD2a) on thAD2b) top-dowow operations chnology and
he supervisepany’s degreedependencies s and their ali
1: Horizontal
he first step tor than intuiti
rations Excelleng developmeon to be worldhe difference nology, but mgn, align, and methods to halving enablersy must shift frmatically. Onoration’s undeeadiness to coeved exclusivagement to sh
mensions of O
rtical and horisions (AD) torated throug
undamental qu
enablers corrs characteristihe macro levwn on the micand operationinnovation cr
ed-self-assessmes of awarene
between enagnment to cre
fit—Aligning
owards excellive improvemence is not a ent [20] as pd-class” and c
between medmanagement an
execute systeave the greates that drive idrom thinking pnly then it berstanding of dope with chanvely throughhopfloor. Exc
OsE 1.0
izontal fit is ao be checked
gh external uestions are
relate among eics have a bvel of entrecro level of prnal processes riteria (AD3).
ment must ess and consiablers and reseate excellence
g enablers wi
lence is condments. The im
project, but tpart of corpocontinuous seldiocre and w
and people [2ems with apprest impact on deal, principlepurely analyt
becomes possdeeply-embed
ange [29]. Buh top-down cellence in op
a key aspect ofd during the sexperts’ sco
each other (ADottom-up imppreneurship ocesses are supported
determine ideration towsults on diffee.
ithin operatio
ucting systemmplementationhe start of ne
orate culture f-improvemen
world class is 6]. Leaders m
ropriate princitheir results,
e-based behavtically to thinksible to assesdded enablers ut OsE canno
directives fperations inclu
f the self-
oring
D1) pact and
d by
the wards erent
ons
matic n of ever-e.g., nt.
not must iples and
vior. king ss a and t be
from udes
Andreas Jäger/ Procedia CIRP 00 (2014) 000–000 5
superior people-related performance [27]. People are OsE’s ultimate architects, so cultivation of a deep culture where everybody is able to innovate will drive future improvement.
The alignment of managerial decisions, culture establishment, operations resources, competences and capabilities is linked through operations strategy, which forms a central element of the operations enablers.
AD 2a: Vertical fit—Aligning operations enablers with business enablers and results
Vertical fit rests on the premise that coherence between operational performance and overall business strategy takes higher priority than operational performance on its own. Neither excellent operations nor excellent performance can exist unless they fit to the business’s top-level strategies [28]. The business strategy’s plausibility and transparency make or break the success of its deployment top down to the operations and operative process levels. Operations strategy will always be derived from business strategy. In return, operations strategy and activities must have confirmed their bottom-up contribution to and consistency with the business strategy and their linkage to the plant’s overall goals. “Excellence in operations is about how the operations side of the business supports business growth as a strategic part of business.” [30]
The companies’ path towards business growth requires excellence in all activities. According to Dalluege, an organisation’s only route towards excellence is to use stakeholder needs as input for the development and assessment of a strategy and its respective guidelines. Furthermore, organisations should strive to continuously fulfil stakeholder expectations [8]. Consequently, OsE has the ultimate objective of satisfied customers [27]. Every choice made in an organization requires a central focus on the customer; this also applies to operations activities up through operational sub-processes.
This assessment dimension has to judge if “policies, people, products and processes are brought into alignment so that operational expenses go down, profits go up, and companies blossom and prosper” [31]. Balancing the dilemma of gaining best short-term operating results with meeting long-term business objectives, as desired by different stakeholders, should be a particular subject of review.
AD 2b: Vertical fit—Aligning operations enablers with operational processes and results
Based on AD 1 and AD 2a, Operations meets the challenge to configure operational processes across the entire value chain including interactions with clients, suppliers, and further stakeholders by providing an adequate set of enablers. Operations is responsible for stabilization, standardization, and value stream-based optimization of the transformation process from input to output. Therefore, “the limited principle ‘engineering creates, manufacturing makes, and marketing sells’ is obsolete” [26]. The OsE 1.0 framework assists companies to advance beyond the present state of sporadic attention to operations support layers (e.g., maintenance, quality management, administration). The process of new product development gets particular increased significance in
assessing excellence in operations [32]. Westkämper, Alting, Arndt highlight that in the future, not only the manufacturing process and resources themselves, but the whole product life cycle, including life cycle management and assessment, have to be taken as an integral part of engineering [34].
AD 3: Support fit—Aligning technology and innovation with business, operations and process objectives
A key issue in the discussion concerning OsE is the operations’ strong dependence on upstream supporting activity, technology, and innovation management (TIM), that extends beyond the classical product development and production process given in AD 2b. TIM focuses on scouting, forecasting, and strategic development of next-generation technologies and innovations by considering and evaluating different future market and factory scenarios. Currently, cyber-physical-systems, smart factories, real-time data process diagnosis, and condition techniques represent examples that will become increasingly relevant for companies in coming years. TIM’s influence on operations and the reverse are critical factor to achieving OsE. In addition to the demand that technology supports the production process’ efficiency and effectiveness, assessment must identify if TIM, business, and operations enablers work in tandem without conflicts.
5. Case Study and Validation of the Model
In 2013, the OsE 1.0 model’s approach was presented to and analyzed by 15 leading-edge SMEs (7 equipment manufacturers, 8 batch manufacturers) from the machinery and metalware industries. Model validation involved a three-day workshop with the management board, department heads of manufacturing, logistics and R&D as well as shopfloor workers. As first step, a standardized, open-ended interview captured the individual SME`s practical understanding and experience about Operations Excellence in comparison to Operational Excellence. Two conditions, the SME’s desirable ideal position in contrast to the current situation, were respected. Second, IMW introduced the OsE 1.0 framework. The participants discussed systematically the links of the four OsE 1.0 perspectives and classified the importance of result and enabler criteria according to a numerical priority scale. This analysis was critical for the integration or exclusion of criteria to establish the comprehensive but compact framework. Third, the industrial applicability of OsE 1.0 was evaluated by a survey with KPIs, a methodical questionnaire including a best practice benchmark. It was checked if certain enabler criteria, such as procedures or methods, are available and how they correlate with result indicators at SMEs. The empirical research pointed out that SMEs with approx. 100 employees indeed cover several aspects of OsE 1.0, but not completely consistent so far. Smaller SMEs (< 50 employees) only have sporadic implemented examples of Operations Excellence. All participants share the common opinion that the OsE 1.0 framework delivers an adequate basis to devise a detailed assessment for excellence in operations.
One central point of the debates concerned the integration of “technology and innovation management” into OsE. During the discussion, some surprising points and aspects were
6 Andreas Jaeger/ Procedia CIRP 00 (2014) 000–000
brought to the companies’ attention, of which they have previously been unaware, such as the relevance of strategic, systematic, and methodical management of future technology, compared with the operational improvement offered by the present approach of in-house manufacturing technologies themselves.
6. Conclusion
The topic of excellence in operations has increasingly gained researchers’ attention, especially in applied sciences, over recent decades. However, past research activities have relatively over-emphasized the unilateral “result-driven” perspective of OE with limited corresponding concern for enablers, which forms OsE’s focus - a shortcoming this paper attempts to address.
With the design of the OsE 1.0 assessment framework (Figure 4) and the identification of critical root-cause relationships, the first step of Duggan’s demand that excellence in operations should be visually measurable [30] was achieved. Further steps must focus on the detailed composition of the assessment itself. Currently, IMW develops a strictly diagnostic, improvement-oriented evaluation approach. For data collection, two methodologies are focused. A standardized questionnaire serves to determine quantitative facts and an interview is used as qualitative analysis to scrutinize SME’s enablers, results and their cause-and-effect relationships according to Section 4. Therefore, an evaluation scheme with maturity levels will be developed. The SME’s self-reflection and the neutral assessment by IMW will allow to identify company’s weaknesses and to derive prioritized recommendations for SME’s future action.
Finally, it is argued that a general definition cannot be promulgated for the ideal state of excellence in operations. An individual assessment of every single plant is necessary [33]. Thus, the organization must accommodate changes of framework criteria and their interaction in future and recognize that the ability to adapt over time is a key criterion of excellence [28].
References
[1] Jovane F, Yoshikawa H, Alting L, Boër CR, Westkamper E, Williams D, Tseng M, Seliger G, Paci AM. The incoming global technological and industrial revolution towards competitive sustainable manufacturing. In: CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology. 2008. p. 641–659.
[2] Dale B, Zairi M. Quality is dead in Europe - long life excellence- true or false? In: Measuring Business Excellence. 2000. p. 4–10.
[3] Oakland JS. Total organizational excellence: Achieving world-class performance. Oxford, Woburn, Mass: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2001.
[4] EFQM. EFQM Excellence Model. Brussels; 2012. [5] Li M, Yang J. A decision model for self-assessment of business process
based on the EFQM excellence model. In: International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. 2003. p. 164–188.
[6] Sandt J. Performance measurement. In: Controlling und Management. 2005. p. 429–447.
[7] Medhurst D, Richards D. How Many Reasons for not using the EFQM Excellence Model are just excuses?: D&D Excellence Limited; 2010.
[8] Dalluege C. Exzellenz durch nachhaltige Unternehmensstrategien - EFQM im Mittelstand (Excellence through sustainable strategies - EFQM for medium- sized businesses). Heidelberg: Haefner; 2012.
[9] Hohmann K. Unternehmens Excellence Modelle - das EFQM-Modell (Corporation Excellence Models - the EFQM-Model). Hamburg: Diplomica Verlag; 2009.
[10] Ahsen A. Bewertung von Innovationen im Mittelstand (Evaluation of Innovation for medium- sized businesses). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg; 2010.
[11] Rusjan B. Usefulness of the EFQM excellence model: Theoretical explanation of some conceptual and methodological issues. In: Total Quality Management & Business Excellence. 2005. p. 363–380.
[12] Grubbström RW. Modelling production opportunities — a historical overview. In: International Journal of Production Economics. 1995. p. 1-14.
[13] Westkämper E. Einführung in die Organisation der Produktion (Introduction into Organisation of Production). Berlin, Heidelberg, NEw York: Springer-Verlag;2006.
[14] Porter ME. Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York NY: Free Press; 1985.
[15] Porter ME. What is strategy? In: Harvard Business Review. 1996. p. 62-76.
[16] Treacy M, Wiersema F. Customer Intimacy and other Value Disciplines. In: Harvard Business Review. 1993. p. 84–93.
[17] Ferrell OC, Hartline MD. Marketing strategy. 5. ed. Mason: Cengage Learning; 2011.
[18] Cheverton P. Key Marketing Skills 2: Strategies, Tools and Techniques for Marketing Success. London: Kogan Page; 2004.
[19] Töpfer A. Six Sigma: Konzeption und Erfolgsbeispiele für praktizierte Null-Fehler-Qualität (Conception and successful examples for applied zero-error quality). Berlin, New York: Springer; 2007.
[20] May C. Operational Excellence: Mit Total Productive Management zu Weltklasseformat (World-class-format through Total Productive Management). In: Industrielle Informations-Technik. 2007. p. 479–483.
[21] Basu R. Implementing quality: A practical guide to tools and techniques: enabling the power of operational excellence. 1st ed. London: Thomson Learning; 2004.
[22] Miller RD, Raymer J, Cook R, Barker S. The Shingo Model for Operational Excellence. Logan, Utah
[23] Gleich R, Sauter R. Operational Excellence: Innovative Ansätze und Best Practices in der produzierenden Industrie (Innovative approaches and Best Practices in the production industry). München: Rudolf Haufe Verlag GmbH & Co. KG; 2008.
[24] Schwientek R, Schmidt A. Operations excellence: Smart solutions for business success. Basingstoke, New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008.
[25] Sutton D. Back to basics: A practitioner's guide to operations excellence. Cincinnati, Ohio: Operations Excellence Services; 2012.
[26] Chick, E., Huchzemeier, A., Loch, C. Management quality and operational excellence. In: Managing Money, Measurement and Marketing in the Allied Health Professions. 2010.
[27] Wiendahl H, ElMaraghy HA, Nyhuis P, Zäh MF, Wiendahl H, Duffie N, Brieke M. Changeable Manufacturing - Classification, Design and Operation. In: CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology. 2007. p. 783–809.
[28] Collier DA, Evans JR. Operations Management: A student-tested, faculty-approved approach to teaching and learning operations management. 3. ed., student ed. Mason, Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning; 2011.
[29] Lu D, Betts A, Croom S. Re-investigating business excellence: Values, measures and a framework. In: Total quality management & business excellence: an official journal of the European Society for Organisational Excellence. 2011. p. 1263–1276.
[30] Duggan KJ. Design for operational excellence: A breakthrough strategy for business growth. Columbus: McGraw-Hill Professional; 2011.
[31] Schneider M. Operational Excellence. Canada: Delmar Thomson Learning; 2001.
[32] Bilalis N, Alvizos E, Tsironis L, van Wassenhove L. Benchmarking the competitiveness of industrial sectors: Application in textiles. In: International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. 2007. p. 603–622.
[33] Westkämper E, Alting L, Arndt G. Life Cycle Management and Assessment: Approaches and Visions Towards Sustainable Manufacturing (keynote paper). In: CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology. 2000. p. 501–526.
[34] Glazer H. High performance operations: Leverage compliance to lower costs, increase profits, and gain competitive advantage. Upper Saddle River, N.J: FT Press; 2012.