Increasing Production Efficiency Through Electronic Batch Record Systems: A Case Study

  • Jacqueline L. MarshEmail author
  • Daniel R. Eyers
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 52)


As manufacturing operations become increasingly sustainable and seek to evolve towards paradigms such as Industry 4.0 and the Smart Factory, the importance of process control becomes paramount. Strictly controlling manufacturing processes improves production efficiency and this can be supported by Electronic Batch Record Systems (EBRS). This study examines this concept in terms of existing literature, and through a case study that explored the implementation of an EBRS at a Life Science manufacturing company, focusing on practical implications of EBRS adoption. The main advantage identified was a 75 % decrease in human errors in batch records, compared to a hardcopy system, thereby yielding improvements in production efficiency. The main disadvantages were cost, implementation resources and the in-built obsolescence of manufacturing software systems. Despite these disadvantages, the company found that implementation of EBRS resulted in a significant increase in production efficiency.


Sustainable Manufacturing Production efficiency Electronic batch record system Manufacturing execution system 



The authors wish to acknowledge the support of Cardiff University during the undertaking of this research and the kind assistance of the interview participants from the Life Science Company in allowing their opinions and experiences to be recorded for the case study.


  1. 1.
    Kletti, J.: New ways for the effective factory. In: Kletti, J. (ed.) Manufacturing Execution Systems-MES, pp. 1–39. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vaczek, D.: Automating with MES. Pharm. Med. Packag. News. 19(8), 38 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    InstantGMP™MD-Electronic Device History Records: (2015). Accessed 4 Dec 2015
  4. 4.
    Streamlining Batch Record Documentation Systems in the Life Science Industry: http://www.mastercontrol/batch_records (2015). Accessed 4 Dec 2015
  5. 5.
    Yin, R.K.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks CA (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Handfield, R.B., Melnyk, S.A.: The scientific theory-building process: a primer using the case of TQM. J. Oper. Manage. 16(4), 321–339 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    May, T.: Social Research, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill Education, UK (2011) Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Saunders, M.N., Saunders, M., Lewis, P., Thornhill, A.: Research Methods for Business Students, 5th edn. Pearson Education Harlow (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    May, T. Social Research: Issues, Methods and Process, 3rd edn. Open University Press Buckingham (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Legard, R., Keegan, J., Ward, K.: In-depth interviews. In: Ritchie, J., Lewis, J. (eds.) Qualitative Research Practice, pp. 138–169. Sage, London (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miles, M.B., Hubermann, A.M.: Qualitative Data Analysis, 2nd edn. Sage, London (1994)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Scott, D.: Comparative advantage through manufacturing execution systems. In: IEEE/SEMI Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference, pp. 179–184 (1996)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaufman, K., Novack, G.D.: Compliance issues in manufacturing of drugs. Ocul. Surf. 1(2), 80–85 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McAllister, P., Jeswiet, J.: Medical device regulation for manufacturers. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. 217(6), 459–467 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Adler, D.J., Herkamp, J., Henricks, D., Moss, R.: Does a manufacturing execution system reduce the cost of production for bulk pharmaceuticals? ISA Trans. 34, 343–347 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schubert, P., Leimstoll, U.: Personalization of e-commerce applications in SMEs: conclusions from an empirical study in Switzerland. J. Electron. Commer. Organ. 2(3), 21–39 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Blumenthal, R.: Manufacturing execution systems to optimize the pharmaceutical supply chain. Pharm. Ind. 66(11a), 1414–1424 (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Subashini, S., Kavitha, V.: A survey on security issues in service delivery models of cloud computing. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 34(1), 1–11 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cheng, F., Chang, C., Wu, S.: Development of holonic manufacturing execution systems. J. Intell. Manuf. 15(2), 253–267 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Saenz de Ugarte, B., Artiba, A., Pellerin, R.: Manufacturing execution system—a literature review. Prod. Plan. Control 20(6), 525–539 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Improving Operations Through Electronic Batch Records: (2008). Admin center accessed 1 Dec 2015
  22. 22.
    Chase, N.: Paperless manufacturing pays off. Quality 37(11), 46–47 (1998)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lee, Z., Lim, G.H., Tan, S.J.: Dealing with resource disadvantage: generic strategies for SMEs. Small Bus. Econ. 12(4), 299–311 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Marsh, J.L., Soroka, A.J., Davies, P., Lynch, J., Eyers, D.: Challenges to sustainable manufacturing resource planning implementation in SMEs: an exploratory study. KES Trans. Sustain. Des. Manuf. 1(1), 291–302 (2014)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Besson, P.: Les ERP a epreuve de l’organisation. Systemes d’Information et Management 4(4), 21–52 (1999)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Armenakis, A.A., Harris, S.G., Mossholder, K.W.: Creating readiness for organisational change. Hum. Relat. 46(6), 681–703 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pan, Y., Tang, Y.: Review of misfit issues between ERP principles and organisations. In: International Conference on Education and Management Technology (ICEMT), pp. 65–69. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cardiff School of EngineeringCardiff UniversityCardiffUK
  2. 2.Cardiff Business SchoolCardiff UniversityCardiffUK

Personalised recommendations