The management accounting and operations management literatures argue that the adoption of advanced manufacturing practices, such as just‐in‐time (JIT), necessitates complementary changes in a firm's management accounting and control systems. This study uses a sample of JIT and non‐JIT plants operating in the Canadian automotive parts manufacturing industry to study the interaction among performance outcomes, intensity of JIT practices, and productivity measurement. This study provides evidence that productivity measurement mediates the relationship between performance outcomes and intensity of JIT practices. Specifically, both JIT and non‐JIT plants that use a broader range of productivity measures are more efficient and profitable than other plants. Also, plants that employ industry‐driven productivity measures are more profitable and efficient than plants that employ idiosyncratic productivity measures, especially if the former are more JIT‐intensive than the latter. Furthermore, plants that employ quality productivity measures are less efficient and less profitable than those that do not, especially if they use more intensive JIT practices. The latter result is consistent with JIT‐intensive plants overinvesting in quality. This study also finds that plants that invest more in buffer stock are less efficient and less profitable, especially if they use more intensive JIT practices. Despite the fact that plant profitability and efficiency are highly correlated, JIT‐intensive plants are more profitable but less efficient than plants that are not JIT‐intensive, after controlling for productivity measures, plant size, and buffer stock. This result suggests that despite wasting resources, JIT‐intensive plants are still able to generate relatively higher profits than plants that are not JIT‐intensive.

No abstract

This paper examines the relationship between Canadian public infrastructure and private output using a Constant Elasticity and Substitution-Translog (CES-TL) cost model to describe the interaction of the public and private sectors. We find public capital a substitute for private capital within the Canadian manufacturing sector. Additionally, the services of public capital enhance the productivity of private capital. Canadian manufacturing costs are characterized by economies of scale, indicating that less than optimal plant sizes dominated Canadian manufacturing sector during the study period. Advances in disembodied technical progress are also indicated.

This paper combines ideas that are well founded in the production and inventory management literature, with analytical approaches that have been long established in the economic theory literature, to reveal and explore production‐function characteristic differences between JIT producers and non‐JIT producers among electronic firms in Ontario, Canada. The methodology employed is the estimation of the CES‐TL total cost system. Our primary conclusion is that JIT firms are more cost‐efficient and appear to be distinct from the non‐JIT group. This conclusion is supported by: (1) the fact that, in most cases, the elasticities calculated from the two groups of firms are significantly different; (2) the fact that the cost elasticity with respect to output is lower for the JIT firms than for the non‐JIT firms, indicating that the former are better able to capture economies of scale and density; (3) the difference between the elasticities of factor productivity, with respect to output changes, shows the JIT firms as being more labor‐ and materials‐saving than the non‐JIT firms.

No abstract