Integrating Six Sigma Culture and TPM Framework to Improve Manufacturing Performance in SMEs

Abstract

Worldwide, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) have been accepted as the engine of economic growth, especially in the emerging economies, and for promoting equitable development their contribution as a component to nation's infrastructure is relatively high. Global competition forces SMEs to improve their competitiveness by enhancing their manufacturing performance. Hence, they have to pay attention to the reliability of their production processes as well as their commitment to quality management practices. In present times, because of automation and large-scale mechanization, higher plant availability, better product quality and longer equipment life had assumed considerable significance among the SMEs.In order to meet the above challenges, adoption and practice of proactive maintenance strategies along with execution of best management practices, i.e. lean Six Sigma (LSS), has become essential for organizations to bring down maintenance and production costs. As evident from literature, both total productive maintenance (TPM) and Six Sigma are key business process strategies employed by SMEs to enhance their manufacturing performance. However, whilst there is significant research information available on implementing these systems in an independent manner, there is little information available relating to the integration of these approaches to provide a unified and highly effective implementation framework. The purpose of this paper is thus to develop an integrated model based on Six Sigma and TPM framework focusing on adding performance indicators. The goals of the study were achieved by utilizing various tools such as 'brainstorming sessions, pareto analysis fish-bone diagrams, histograms, FMEA, box plots, control charts and process capability plots for analysis'. While implementation of such twin framework requires greater management commitment in terms of training, resources and integration, they are also expected to provide higher levels of equipment and plant performance as evident from the results. The results show significant improvement in OEE level (Before 50, 54 and after 76, 83 for M/C -I and M/c-II), reduction in rework (from 22% to 10%), reduction in maintenance versus operation cost (from 30% to 10%) and reduction in defect rate (from 24.82% to 5%) and average outgoing quality level (from 30% to 5%). The substantial improvement in sigma level from 2.16 and 2.64 to 4.01 and 4.12 for M/C -I and M/C-II resulted in financial savings of approximately $2 m per annum.

Investigating the readiness of people in manufacturing SMEs to embark on Lean Six Sigma projects

“…To date LSS research in SMEs has mainly focused on the mechanistic aspects of the approach such as the application of the DMAIC methodology within the manufacturing sector, rather than the more strategic perspectives and softer elements and these need to be addressed. (Prashar, 2014;Atmaca and Girenes, 2013;Sharma and Sharma, 2013;Kaushik et al, 2012;Antony et al, 2005Wang and Chen, 2012;Thomas et al, 2009;McAdam and Lafferty, 2004).…”

Lean Maturity Assessment in ETO Scenario

“…The many well-known features of lean production include: bottleneck analysis [6], the Kanban system (the just-in-time (JIT) process) [7,8], kaizen (continuous improvement) [9,10], value stream mapping (VSM) [11], lean six sigma [12][13][14], single minute exchange of die (SMED) [15], 5S [16], zero inventory [17], work standardization [18], and lean product development (LPD) [19]. The main goal behind this-and all related tools and techniques-concerns the improvement of the effectiveness and efficiency of the production process through deletion of waste (or muda) [20].…”

Difficulties observed when implementing Total Productive Maintenance (TPM): empirical evidences from the manufacturing sector

“…Labib (1999) sets TPM's primary goal as the ability to enable a critical maintenance and an approximation between polyvalent operators and production employees in joint works. TPM is also characterized by promoting and exercising synergy among all organizational functions, emphasizing production and maintenance to ensure continuous improvements of product quality, operational efficiency, capacity warranty and security (Aspinwall & Elgharib, 2013;Jain et al, 2014;Kumar Sharma & Gopal Sharma, 2014;Park & Han, 2001). Pascal et al (2019) and Ahuja & Khamba (2008a) affirm that TPM is a continuous improvement methodology that enhances confidence in equipment and in management efficiency by improving motivation and satisfaction of the people involved at all working levels, integrating production, maintenance and engineering activities.…”

“…Due to TPM's complexity, many organizations around the world face difficulties in successfully implementing it (Kumar Sharma & Gopal Sharma, 2014;McKone et al, 2001;Wickramasinghe & Perera, 2016). The scientific literature concerning difficulties and barriers in implementing a TPM program is limited and only a few studies allow broader conclusions, even though they mostly of qualitative nature restricted to a region or country.…”