The development of manufacturing strategy in a turbulent environment

Abstract

Introduction The number of "case studies" reported in the manufacturing strategy process literature does not match the increased importance of the theme. Moreover, the authors in the field generally prescribe what to do but do not always delve into details on how to do it. There are, however, some authors whose work can help in the difficult task of developing a manufacturing strategy in real situations. Two examples are the worksheets developed by Platts and Gregory[1], which are interesting tools for helping define the priorities for manufacturing, and the importance-performance matrix proposed by Slack[2], which is both simple to use and effective in giving managers a clear idea of what performance aspect needs urgent action in manufacturing. However, some important aspects of the manufacturing strategy development process still lack proper operationalization methods. The proactivity of the manufacturing function is an example. Proactivity, particularly in turbulent environments, is not something that can simply give companies an edge. It is sometimes the only way to survive. In fact, manufacturing proactivity is prescribed by a number of authors (Hayes and Wheelwright[3] is the most eloquent example) but few of them actually prescribe how the function should be organized and managed to achieve it. Breaking functional barriers is a second example. In turbulent environments, where change is not an exception but the rule, inter-functional communication becomes essential in order to allow for rapid responses to frequent and sudden changes. The authors in the literature generally agree that for an effective manufacturing strategy to be put into practice it is necessary that functional barriers are broken down. Much of the re-engineering discussion gravitates around this aspect. However, few authors in the field of manufacturing strategy deal specifically with methods to operationalize ways to break down or at least reduce the negative effects of the inter-functional barriers. The case and propositions described here aim to contribute to manufacturing strategy process research by reporting one experience of a manufacturing strategy development in a turbulent business environment, specifically addressing aspects such as manufacturing proactivity and inter-functional The authors wish to thank the anonymous referees who reviewed the first versions of this article for their valuable contributions, and Miss Iara Pfeiffer for help with the manuscript.

Market priorities, manufacturing configuration, and business performance: an empirical analysis of the order‐winners framework

“…Several authors, e.g. Fine and Hax (1985), Platts and Gregory (1990), Slack (1994), and Prochno and Corrêa (1995), have proposed theoretical frameworks to link operations management decisions to the corporate strategy. However, a major drawback with these frameworks has been the lack of empirical research to validate their approaches and the proposed relationships between competitive priorities and operations decisions (Swamidass et al, 2001).…”

Production competence revisited – a critique of the literature and a new measurement approach

“…The matrix was previously used in case study based articles (Slack, 1994;Prochno and Correa, 1995). To the best of our knowledge, this paper represents the first application of the matrix using a large data set to investigate the relationship between production competence and business performance.…”

Manufacturing Strategies and Choices in Cultural Contexts

“…Swamidass and Newell (1987) were among the first researchers who focused on connections between environment and manufacturing strategy. Prochno and Correa (1995) connected manufacturing strategy with political and economic situation.…”