Production Process Moves: Template Use and the Need to Adapt

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to discover the learning mechanisms and temporal dynamics of implementing systems (Six Sigma) as it unfolds over time.Design/methodology/approachThe data come from a European engineering company that was implementing a Six Sigma-based quality management system (QMS) over a seven-year period. The analysis is based on an event-sequence reconstruction of the implementation process as it unfolded over time and discovers four different learning mechanisms that emerged: programmatic, persistent, adaptive and dialectical learning mechanisms. The research follows a process design study, where the authors study how the process unfolds over time.FindingsMuch of the literature on implementing management systems suggests that implementation follows a prescribed sequence of “turn-key” steps. However, the findings show that only 40% of all events were driven by prescribed “turn-key” generic practices, while 56% of events required constructing new practices via adaptive and dialectical learning. Moreover, the implementation process did not proceed in a linear programmatic fashion, but instead followed a punctuated equilibrium pattern, which alternated between periods of incremental change and major organizational change. The study also found that implementation required changing many complementary organizational structures and practices that were interdependent with the management system (i.e. Six Sigma). By understanding the implementation process, managers can better assess the time and effort involved, better adapt the system to their situated context and predict critical junctures where implementation could break down.Originality/valueThis research complements the few studies that have examined the process of implementing management systems. Most studies examine factors or conditions that result in implementation success (the what of implementing systems), but few examine the process of implementation and the learning that takes place during implementation (the how of implementing systems), which is a complex nonlinear process that involves different modes of learning.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the process of management system implementation: a case of Six Sigma

Mast

Lameijer

Linderman

et al. 2021

“…A successful process move requires effectively transferring production knowledge (Kent and Siemsen, 2018). The pace of the ramp-up after a move determines success: how quickly do manufacturing capabilities in a recipient location, such as speed, costs and quality, reach or exceed the prior levels at the source location?…”

Section: Cross-cultural Challenges In Production Knowledge Transfermentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of co-location on production knowledge transfer in collectivist and individualist cultures

Kent

Siemsen

Shao

2023

Self Cite

Purpose This paper enhances our understanding of how national culture impacts manufacturing performance (assembly speed, consistency between teams, etc.) during a production process move. The authors also investigate the efficacy of co-location as a strategy to enhance knowledge transfer from one organization to another.Design/methodology/approach To study the impact of national culture on production process moves, the authors develop and employ a team-based behavioral experiment within and between an individualist society (the United States) and a collectivist one (China). The authors also examine the impact of co-location on knowledge transfer effectiveness within and between these two unique cultures.Findings Interestingly, co-location has little impact on the performance of US recipient teams. Without co-location, Chinese recipient team performance lags significantly behind the US teams. However, firms can overcome these knowledge transfer challenges by co-locating source and recipient team members. These results suggest that firms should assess the national cultural context when considering co-location to manage their production move. There are contexts where co-location may be incredibly useful to facilitate an effective knowledge transfer (e.g. collectivist cultures like China) and contexts where this approach may not be as valuable (e.g. individualistic cultures such as the United States).Originality/valueThis research contributes to the academic literature in several ways. First, while past research demonstrates that national culture can be an essential barrier to information and knowledge sharing, this paper extends these findings showing that co-location may effectively overcome this barrier. After the authors offer and test the merits of co-location, they also establish the boundary conditions of this approach by showing that the effect of co-location on knowledge transfer is contingent on the cultural context. This contribution enhances our understanding of the relationship between national culture and knowledge sharing and has implications for managers developing approaches to transfer knowledge between cultures. Second, the authors develop and execute a novel cross-country experimental design. While cross-country experiments have been done before (e.g. Ozer et al. 2014, Kuwabara et al. 2007, etc.), it is still rare to see such experiments due to them being “technically difficult and costly” (Ozer et al. 2014, p. 2437). This research not only offer insights into how teams of people from individualist and collectivist societies send, receive and comprehend production knowledge. It also documents how these teams convert this knowledge into production results.

“…Nevertheless, to the authors’ knowledge, there have not yet been experimental studies on either the topic of ramp-up management or the topic of spillover learning. Kent and Siemsen (2018) conducted an experiment addressing the use of templates in production moves. However, they focus on geographically moving production and the use of explicit templates rather than the consecutive ramp-up of different products and tacit knowledge transfer.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tacit knowledge transfer and spillover learning in ramp-ups

Letmathe

Rößler

2019

Purpose With shortening product life cycles and an increasing number of product variants, manufacturing firms perform more production ramp-ups. In this context, learning is crucially important to quickly achieve high production process quality and stability. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach Through a laboratory experiment, this study analyzes spillover learning between consecutive ramp-ups and how this phenomenon is influenced by tacit knowledge transfer through observation and imitation. Findings The results prove the existence of spillover learning between consecutive ramp-ups. Moreover, they provide evidence how tacit knowledge transfer through observation and imitation enhances learning of new tasks in consecutive production ramp-ups. Research limitations/implications Future research could focus on the specific psychological processes driving tacit knowledge transfer and spillover learning, a topic which is only touched upon in this paper. Practical implications The findings show that manufacturing firms should not only aim at reaching a steep learning curve during a single production ramp-up, but should also take into account the effects of spillover learning with regard to future production ramp-ups. Furthermore, the paper provides novel insights concerning the allocation of workers to production tasks with regard to previous experience when introducing new personnel and during ramp-up phases. Originality/value Previous evidence on the existence and characteristics of spillover learning in production ramp-up situations is not conclusive. This paper provides new and unambiguous insights by considering different organizational settings.