Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introducing a Value Improvement Model for Manufacturing (m-VIM)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Understanding the Lean Enterprise

Part of the book series: Measuring Operations Performance ((MEOP))

  • 5422 Accesses

Abstract

This paper introduces a value improvement model (VIM) for repetitive processes applicable to any business where people and/or plant provide a service to support the overall business objective. Arguing competitive advantage can be realised through different amalgams of productive and strategic resources, the VIM introduced focuses on aligning resource bundles and influencing factors creating efficacious, efficient and effective processes by applying Lean thinking and Six Sigma tools and techniques more holistically. The research methodology taken incorporated a case study approach complimented by the action research process of planning, observing and reflecting summarized as an action case study research design. The case study data presented examines the possible improvements to an Extrusion manufacturing process that are achieved through the adoption of the VIM. The m-VIM is introduced as a useful tool for a visual and systematic framework that enables managers to understand, assess and improve repetitive processes within their businesses.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Although Krafcik (1988) first labelled the Toyota Production System as lean, Womack et al. (1990) are widely recognised as producing the seminal work outlining the principles of lean production.

  2. 2.

    Karoshi is a Japanese word used to describe the sudden death or severe stress resulting from being over worked.

  3. 3.

    People, Plant, Product and Process are the 4Ps commonly used in manufacturing as a useful framework for understanding problems. There are many different versions of the 4Ps in the literature, for example Liker (2004) proposes the 4P model is based around: Philosophy, Process, People/Partners and Problem Solving.

  4. 4.

    The process name is a pseudonym.

  5. 5.

    Fire-fighting is a term used in industry to classify a management approach based around short-term thinking often ignoring longer-term consequences of decisions made.

  6. 6.

    The term ‘setter’ refers to a skilled production technician capable of preparing a process for production.

  7. 7.

    At this point the investigation could be broken off into three separate streams to identify the root causes of each of the reasons listed. For brevity, only the first bullet point investigation will be presented. However, the full investigation identified a root cause linking all three of the reasons presented.

  8. 8.

    The maintenance function is usually split into 3 categories: 1st line maintenance covers corrective repairs and minor preventative online; 2nd line maintenance covers planned preventative, on or off line; and 3rd line maintenance covers major modifications offline (Kelly 2001).

  9. 9.

    In an organisation practicing Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) you would expect to see 1st line maintenance activities, and some 2nd line activities, covered by maintainer/operators.

  10. 10.

    The Company had previously operated a four shift system covering manufacturing operations, day and night, 24 h a day, seven days a week. The proposed 5 shift system uses an extra shift incorporating redundancy to utilise flexible working agreements.

  11. 11.

    The lean resource matrix can also be used for succession planning also providing ‘stand-by’ redundancy in resource utilisation in case of an emergency or change to the system. This perhaps helps to overcome one of the criticisms of lean where resources are kept to a minimum leaving the overall system vulnerable. This also helps overcome one of the other criticisms of lean where flexibility is removed through waste elimination and a linear focus on process optimisation.

  12. 12.

    The assumption is made that there is a linear relationship with the OEE improvement % to £, however in reality this is probably not linear but for the sake of quantifying the value impact, the Author argues this approximation is acceptable so long as the Company accountants are happy to approve the financial benefits in OEE % saving (as was the case in this example).

References

  • Abrahamson E (2000) Change without pain. Harvard Bus Rev 78:75–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Abrahamson E (2004) Avoiding repetitive change syndrome. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 45:93–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen-Consulting (1993) The lean enterprise benchmarking project report. Andersen Consulting, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen-Consulting (1994) The second lean enterprise benchmarking report. Andersen Consulting, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney JB (1991) Firm resources and competitive advantage. J Manag 17:99–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Blockley DI (2010) The importance of being process. Civ Eng Environ Syst 27:189–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenstein R (1998) Strike pushes GM to shut down all North American operations. Wall Street J

    Google Scholar 

  • Boston-Consulting-Group (1993) The evolving competitive challenge for the European automotive components industry. Boston Consulting Group, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland PB (1981) Systems thinking, systems practice. Wiley, Chichester, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland PB (1999) Systems thinking, systems practice: includes a 30-year retrospective. Wiley, Chichester, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland PB, Scholes J (1990) Soft systems methodology in action. Wiley, Chichester, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Cusumano MA (1994) The limits of lean. Sloan Manag Rev 35:27–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Deming WE (1986) Out of the crisis. MIT Press, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrahan P, Stewart P (1992) The nissan enigma: flexibility at work in a local economy. Mansell, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons PM (2006) Improving overall equipment efficiency using a lean six-sigma approach. Int J Six Sigma Competitive Advantage 2:207–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons PM (2008) Implementing 5S for lean and six sigma deployment: a holistic approach. In: Antony J (ed) Conference proceedings, third international conference on six sigma. Strathclyde University, Glasgow, 15–16 Dec 2008

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons PM (2009) Introducing a lean recruitment framework for manufacturing (2009) In: Nabhani F (ed) Conference proceedings, 17th international conference on flexible automation and intelligent manufacturing. University of Teeside, 6–8 July 2009

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons PM, Burgess SC (2010) Introducing OEE as a measure of lean six sigma capability. Int J Lean Six Sigma 1:134–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons PM, Burgess SC, Kennedy C, Godfrey P (2012a) The development of a lean resource mapping framework: introducing an 8th waste. Int J Lean Six Sigma 3:4–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons PM, Kennedy C, Burgess SC, Godfrey P (2012b) Developing an asset management value improvement model (a-VIM) approach for an airport operational engineering environment. Int J Qual Reliab Manag 29:819–841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey P (2010) Z7: What is Systems Thinking? UK Chapter, International Council on Systems Engineering

    Google Scholar 

  • Green SD (1999) The missing arguments of lean construction. Constr Manag Eco 17:133–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes RH (1981) Why Japanese factories work. Harvard Bus Rev 59:57–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Hines P, Rich N (1997) The seven value stream mapping tools. Int J Oper Prod Manag 17:46–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hines P, Lamming R, Jones DT, Cousins P, Rich N (2000) Value stream management. Prentice Hall, Harlow

    Google Scholar 

  • Hines P, Holweg M, Rich N (2004) Learning to evolve: a review of contemporary lean thinking. Int J Oper Prod Manag 24:994–1011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holweg M, Pil F (2001) Successful build-to-order strategies start with the customer. Sloan Management Review, Fall, pp 74–83

    Google Scholar 

  • IBM-Consulting-Group (1993) Making it in Britain. IBM Consulting Group, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Imai M (1986) Kaizen, the key to Japan’s competitive success. Mc Graw-Hill Publishing Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Imai M (1997) Gemba Kaizen: a commonsense, low-cost approach to management. Mc Graw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • IMVP (2005) IMVP homepage [online]: http://imvp.mit.edu/index.html. Accessed 5 Mar 2005

  • Jackson MC (2003) Systems thinking: creative holism for managers. Wiley, Chichester, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones DT, Hines P, Rich N (1997) Lean logistics. Int J Phys Distrib Logistics Manag 27:153–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones DT, Womack JP (2003) Seeing the whole: mapping the extended value stream. The Lean Enterprise Institute, Brookline, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Katayama H, Bennett D (1996) Lean production in a changing competitive world: a Japanese perspective. Int J Oper Prod Manag 16:8–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly A (2001) Maintenance organisation and systems. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Krafcik J (1988) The triumph of lean production. Sloan Manag Rev 30:41–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamming R (1993) Beyond partnership: strategies for innovation and lean supply. Prentice Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamming R (1996) Squaring lean supply with supply chain management. Int J Oper Prod Manag 16:183–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson MB (2001) In praise of slack: time is of the essence. Acad Manag Executive 15:125–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis MA (2000) Lean production and sustainable competitive advantage. Int J Oper Prod Manag 20:959–978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liker JK (2004) The Toyota way: 14 management principles from the world’s greatest manufacturer. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Maccoby M (1997) Is there a better way to build a car? Harvard Bus Rev 75:161–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Mather H (1988) Competitive manufacturing. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • McAdam R, Lafferty B (2004) A multilevel case study critique of six sigma: statistical control or strategic change? Int J Oper Prod Manag 24:530–549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monden Y (1983) The Toyota production system. Productivity Press, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Näslund D (2008) Lean, six sigma and lean sigma: fads or real process improvement methods? Bus Process Manag J 14:269–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonthaleerak P, Hendry L (2008) Exploring the six sigma phenomenon using multiple case study evidence. Int J Oper Prod Manag 28:279–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohno T (1988) The Toyota production system: beyond large-scale production. Productivity Press, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Penrose E (1959) The theory of the growth of the firm. Oxford University Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Pilkington A (1998) Manufacturing strategy regained: evidence for the demise of best-practice. Calif Manag Rev 41:31–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pyzdek T (2003) The six sigma handbook. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rinehart J, Huxley C, Robertson D (1997) Just another car factory? Lean production and its discontents. Cornell University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson CJ, Ginder AP (1995) Implementing TPM, the North American experience. Productivity Inc., Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Rother M, Shook J (1998) Learning to see: value-stream mapping to create value and eliminate muda. The Lean Enterprise Institute, Brookline, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Schonberger RJ (1982) Japanese manufacturing techniques. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Schonberger RJ (1986) World class manufacturing—the lessons of simplicity applied. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Shingo S (1981) The Toyota production system. Japan Management Association, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  • Shingo S (1989) A study of the Toyota production system from an industrial engineering viewpoint. Productivity Inc, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart PK, Transfield D, Deasley P, Levene R, Rowe A, Corley J (2003) Integrating lean and high reliability thinking. Proc Inst Mech Eng 217:733–739

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor FW (1911) The principles of scientific management. Harper, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnbell P (1988) The limits to Japanization—just-in-time, labour relations and the UK automotive industry. New Technol Work Employ 3:7–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward (1996) Ward’s manufacturing worldwide. New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt B (1984) A resourced-based view of the firm. Strateg Manag J 5:171–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilk EdO, Fensterseifer JE (2003) Use of resource-based view in industrial cluster strategic analysis. Int J Oper Prod Manag 23:995–1009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams K, Haslam C, Williams J, Adcoft A, Johal S (1992) Against lean production. Eco Soc 21:321–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams K, Haslam C, Williams J, Johal S (1994) Cars: analysis, history, cases, providence. Berghahn Books

    Google Scholar 

  • Womack JP, Jones DT (1994) From lean production to the lean enterprise. Harvard Bus Rev 72:93–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Womack JP, Jones DT (1996a) Beyond Toyota: how to root out waste and pursue perfection. Harvard Bus Rev 74:140–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Womack JP, Jones DT (1996b) Lean thinking: banish waste and create wealth in your corporation. Simon & Schuster, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Womack JP, Jones DT (2005a) Lean consumption. Harvard Bus Rev 83:58–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Womack JP, Jones DT (2005b) Lean solutions: how companies and customers can create value and wealth together. Simon & Schuster UK Ltd, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Womack JP, Jones DT, Roos D (1990) The machine that changed the world: the story of lean production. Harper Perennial, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Engineering and CH2M Asset Management, University of Bristol and CH2M, Bristol, UK

    Paul Martin Gibbons

  2. Asset Management Team CH2M, London, UK

    Paul Martin Gibbons

Authors
  1. Paul Martin Gibbons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Martin Gibbons .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and Management, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy

    Andrea Chiarini

  2. Buckingham Business School, University of Buckingham, Buckingham, United Kingdom

    Pauline Found

  3. School of Management, Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom

    Nicholas Rich

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gibbons, P.M. (2016). Introducing a Value Improvement Model for Manufacturing (m-VIM). In: Chiarini, A., Found, P., Rich, N. (eds) Understanding the Lean Enterprise. Measuring Operations Performance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19995-5_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation