4.4 Article

Measuring the leanness of manufacturing systems-A case study of Ford Motor Company and General Motors

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT
Volume 25, Issue 4, Pages 287-304

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2008.10.003

Keywords

Lean; Leanness; Fuzzy-logic leanness; Systematic measures; Benchmarking

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In spite of the vast research published on lean manufacturing systems in several disciplines in the last decade, the concept remains underdeveloped for two reasons. First, it lacks a generally accepted definition. Different authors define lean in terms of its objectives, which vary, overlap and differ in different firms. Second, no study has developed a systematic and relative measure of lean production systems. With the lack of such a measure, two companies cannot be rated objectively on their progress toward becoming lean. This paper has two goals: first, to define manufacturing leanness as a unifying concept, and, second, to develop a systematic, long-term measure of leanness. Manufacturing leanness is a strategy to incur less input to better achieve the organization's goals through producing better output. The systematic measure of leanness has seven characteristics: relative, dynamic, long-term fuzzy logical, objective, integrative and comprehensive. The leanness measure utilizes the fuzzy-logic methodology since lean is a matter of degree. Applying the measure to compare the production leanness of Ford Motor Company and General Motors, the paper selects Honda Motor Company as the benchmarking firm. Selecting just-in-time (JIT), Kaizen, and quality controls as lean attributes, the paper uses surrogates for these attributes extracted from audited financial statements over the years 2001-2003. The results show that Ford's system is more than 17% leaner than GM's system vis-A-vis the benchmarked company's system. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available