Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Productivity enhancement: lean manufacturing performance measurement based multiple indicators of decision making

  • Production Management
  • Published:
Production Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Developing an appropriate performance measurement system to foster continuous improvement can be challenge due to the company’s strategy and diversity of characteristics. This paper aims to develop performance measurement systems (PMS) for productivity enhancement of a particularly lean company or organisation. The PMS is based on multiple indicators decision making (MIDM) and uses the fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (FAHP). The hierarchical levels by choosing the perspectives and indicators were employed the fuzzy vagueness and uncertainty in human judgment into crisp scores from pair-wise comparison as decision making. Hierarchical mechanisms and multiple indicator of performance can create a link between tactical operational processes and strategic levels. It may assist a company in terms of measuring progress toward its goals, allowing decisions to be made regarding strategic management and operational activities, which will lead to continuous improvement. The PMS framework accommodates the company’s performances to enhance their productivity. A case study was performed to explore the applicability and potential strength of the lean PMS model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bhamu J, Sangwan KD (2014) Lean manufacturing: literature review and research issues. Int J Oper Prod Manag 34(7):876–940. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-08-2012-0315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Anand G, Kodali R (2008) Performance measurement system for lean manufacturing: a perspective from SMEs. Int J Glob Small Bus 2(4):371–410. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJGSB.2008.018101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bellisario A, Pavlov A (2018) Performance management practices in lean manufacturing organizations: a systematic review of research evidence. Prod Plann Control 29(5):367–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2018.1432909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Anand G, Kodali R (2009) Development of a framework for lean manufacturing systems. Int J Serv Oper Manag 5(5):687–716

    Google Scholar 

  5. Matias JCH, Ocampo JR, Hidalgo A, Vizan A (2019) Lean manufacturing and operational performance: interrelationships between human-related lean practices. J Manuf Technol Manag 31(2):217–235. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-04-2019-0140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Susilawati A, Tan J, Bell D, Sarwar M (2015) Fuzzy logic based method to measure degree of lean activity in manufacturing industry. J Manuf Syst 34:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2014.09.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Müller E, Stock T, Schillig R (2014) A method to generate energy value-streams in production and logistics in respect of time- and energy-consumption. Prod Eng Res Dev 8:243–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11740-013-0516-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pattanaik LN, Baug TK, Koteswarapavan C (2019) A hybrid ELECTRE based prioritization of conjoint tools for lean and sustainable manufacturing. Prod Eng Res Dev 13:665–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11740-019-00920-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Candra NE, Susilawati A, Herisiswanto SW (2017) Implementation of total productive maintenance (TPM) to improve sheeter machine performance. MATEC Web Conf 135:00028. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201713500028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Minh KS, Zailani S, Iranmanesh M, Heidari S (2019) Do lean manufacturing practices have negative impact on job satisfaction? Int J Lean Six Sigma 10(1):257–274. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS-11-2016-0072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Magenheimer K, Reinhart G, Schutte CSL (2014) Lean management in indirect business areas: modeling, analysis, and evaluation of waste. Prod Eng Res Dev 8:143–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11740-013-0497-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Oleghe O, Salonitis K (2016) Variation modeling of lean manufacturing performance using fuzzy logic based quantitative lean index. Proc CIRP 41:608–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.01.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bai C, Satir A, Sarkis J (2019) Investing in lean manufacturing practices: an environmental and operational perspective. Int J Prod Res 57(4):1037–1051. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1498986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Oliveira RI, Sousa SO, Campos FC (2019) Lean manufacturing implementation: bibliometric analysis 2007–2018. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 101:979–988. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-2965-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Buer SV, Strandhagen JO, Chan FTS (2018) The link between Industry 4.0 and lean manufacturing: mapping current research and establishing a research agenda. Int J Prod Res 56:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1442945

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Schreiber M, Schutte CSL, Braunreuther S, Reinhart G (2020) A performance measurement system for integrated production and maintenance planning. Proc CIRP 93:1037–1042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2020.03.041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dyckhoff H, Souren R (2020) Challenges of performance evaluation in practice. In: Performance evaluation. Springer Briefs in Business. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38732-7_4

  18. Goshua YY, Matebu A, Kitaw B (2017) Development of productivity measurement and analysis framework for manufacturing companies. J Optim Ind Eng 10(22):1–13. https://doi.org/10.22094/joie.2017.274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sahni A (2016) Methods of productivity improvement: a literature review. Int J Res Eng Technol 5(10):112–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Öztayşi B, Uçal I (2009) Comparing MADM techniques for use in performance measurement. Proc Int Symp Anal Hierarchy Process 2009:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  21. Isıklar G, Buyukozkan G (2007) Using a multi-criteria decision making approach to evaluate mobile phone alternatives. Comput Stand Interfaces 29(2):265–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2006.05.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ishizaka A, Siraj S (2018) Are multi-criteria decision-making tools useful? An experimental comparative study of three methods. Eur J Oper Res 264(2):462–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.05.041

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Taylor BW (2019) Introduction to management science, 13th edn. Pearson Education Inc, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  24. Chourabi Z, Khedher F, Babay A, Cheikhrouhou M (2019) Multi-criteria decision making in workforce choice using AHP. WSM WPM J Text Inst 110(7):1092–1101. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405000.2018.1541434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Leung LC, Chao D (2000) On consistency and ranking of alternatives in fuzzy AHP. Eur J Oper Res 124:102–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00118-6

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Iftikhar MA, Siddiqui AS (2017) A study on fuzzy AHP method and its applications in a tie-breaking procedure. Glob J Pure Appl Math 13(6):1619–1630

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kubler S, Robert J, Derigent W, Voisin A, Traon YL (2016) A state-of the-art survey & test bed of fuzzy AHP (FAHP) applications. Expert Syst Appl 65:398–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.08.064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mardani A, Jusoh A, Zavadskas EK (2015) Fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making techniques and applications-two decades review from 1994 to 2014. Expert Syst Appl 42(8):4126–4148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.01.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Soriano MH, Forrester PL (2002) A model for evaluating the degree of leanness of manufacturing firms. Integr Manuf Syst 13(2):104–109. https://doi.org/10.1108/09576060210415437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Tapping D, Luyster T, Shuker T (2002) Value stream management. Productivity Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  31. Behrouzi F, Wong KY (2011) Lean performance evaluation of manufacturing systems: a dynamic and innovative approach. Proc Comput Sci 3:388–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2010.12.065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Chiarini A, Vagnoni E (2015) World-class manufacturing by Fiat. Cmparison with Toyota production system from a strategic management, management accounting, operations management and performance measurement dimension. Int J Prod Res 53(2):590–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Shah R, Ward PT (2007) Defining and developing measures of lean production. J Oper Manag 25(4):785–805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Neely A, Adams C, Crowe P (2001) The performance prism in practice. Meas Bus Excell 5(2):6–13. https://doi.org/10.1108/13683040110385142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Maltz A, Shenhar A, Reilly R (2003) Beyod balanced score card: refining the search for organisational success measures. Long Range Plan 36:187–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(02)00165-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Bhasin S (2008) Lean and performance measurement. J Manuf Technol Manag 19(5):670–684. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410380810877311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Eisenhardt KM (2013) Top management teams and the performance of entrepreneurial firms. Small Bus Econ 40:805–816. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9473-036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Zhu KJ, Jing Y, Chang DY (1999) A discussion on extent analysis method and applications of fuzzy. Eur J Oper Res 116:450–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00331-2

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Saaty TL, Vargas LG (2001) Models, methods, concepts and applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1665-1

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Buckley J (1985) Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst 17(3):233–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(85)90090-9

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Maskell BH, Baggaley B (2011) Practical lean accounting: a proven system for measuring and managing the lean enterprise. CRC Press, Taylor and Frances group, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  42. Chenhall RH (2005) Integrative strategic performance measurement systems, strategic alignment of manufacturing, learning and strategic outcomes: an exploratory study. Account Organ Soc 30(5):395–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2004.08.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lee CL, Yang HJ (2011) Organization structure, competition and performance measurement systems and their joint effects on performance. Manag Account Res 22(2):84–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2010.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Sawang S (2011) Key performance indicators for innovation implementation: perception vs. actual usage. Asia Pac Manag Rev 16:23–29

    Google Scholar 

  45. Kang N, Zhao C, Li J, Horst JA (2016) A hierarchical structure of key performance indicators for operation management and continuous improvement in production systems. Int J Prod Res 54(21):6333–6350. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1136082

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the Editor in Chief of Production Engineering—Research and Development and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions, which helped significantly improve the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Universitas Riau, Pekanbaru, 28293, Indonesia

    Anita Susilawati

Authors
  1. Anita Susilawati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anita Susilawati.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Susilawati, A. Productivity enhancement: lean manufacturing performance measurement based multiple indicators of decision making. Prod. Eng. Res. Devel. 15, 343–359 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11740-021-01025-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11740-021-01025-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation