Aims to formalize the benchmarking process by proposing methods and tools for the steps of the process. Focuses on the first two phases of the benchmarking process: measurement and self analysis (phase 1), and determination of subject and partners of a benchmarking study (phase 2). For this purpose, related to the first phase, a method of diagnosis is employed. In the second phase, three different data analysis methods (lexical analysis, principal components analysis and common factor analysis) are utilized. These two phases serve the purpose of an internal benchmarking (comparison between different domains of activities in the enterprise) and of an external benchmarking study (comparison between different enterprises). Three enterprises are selected for the benchmarking application. Related data are collected and analyzed, and results are reported.

A process of benchmarking implies the use of a model of representation and evaluation of the performance allowing a comparison between firms, and from which a simulation of the effects of the potential actions for each one of these companies can then be carried out. The model that we propose provides a vision of the performance of each company on several successive levels of aggregation and associates various possible views with each one of these levels. The tool which we developed makes it possible to simulate the effects of an improvement action on the interdependent views of the representation. The analysis of the results generated by these various scenarios contributes then to the decision concerning the choice of the objectives of improvement and improvement action plans specific to each partner.

No abstract

Abstract. This paper presents and compares different approaches currently used to assess surface anomalies identified on a product. The common point between these methods is that they are based on a document presented in the form of a table, which is to help the inspector to assess the anomaly detected in a repeatable and reproducible way. We will present three types of table: criteria/level table, tree-like presentation table and an indexed table. As each of these tables presents certain limits when applied to the inspection of a product surface, we will describe the table proposed in order to help the inspector determine the intensity to attribute to the identified anomaly.

Purpose -Many companies can today attest to having obtained significant progress in their performance using some improvement processes (six sigma, 5S, business process reengineering, etc.). But they can also attest to experiencing difficulties in sustaining the use of these processes over time. The aim of this paper is to describe all the specific actions which can contribute to the sustaining of these processes. Design/methodology/approach -An empirical research methodology is used by carrying out a survey of 40 Swiss and French manufacturing companies regarding their approach to the sustaining of some of their improvement processes. Findings -A model of sustainability for an improvement process is proposed. This model is founded on three axes: organic state, return on effort and facilitation. To sustain an improvement process over time consists in taking these three axes into account by managing their relative importance in space and over time. The paper details the generic actions associated with each of the three axes. These actions are then illustrated using the context of a sustained statistical process control project. Originality/value -The survey detailed in this paper confirms the difficulty of companies have in sustaining their improvement processes over time, since the average sustainability ratio for all the different processes mentioned rarely exceeds 40 per cent. The paper gives all the specific actions which can contribute to sustain these processes better.