An empirical examination of critical barriers in transitions between technology push and demand pull strategies in manufacturing organizations

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine critical barriers in transitions between technology push (TP) and demand pull (DP) strategies in Indian manufacturing industries for accomplishing sustainable development. Design/methodology/approach The factors that affect the transitions have been extracted and analyzed using factor analysis technique. For the purpose, various critical barriers are grouped together based on their relevance to TP-DP strategies. The responses to critical barriers have been collected from different Indian manufacturing organizations practicing TP-DP strategies, using a well-framed TP-DP questionnaire. Further, the responses are analyzed using factor analysis which improved the data interpretation. Findings Four latent factors were extracted from critical barriers and revealed that the manufacturing organizations face these barriers in transitions between TP-DP strategies. The recognition of the outcomes of critical barriers has been perceived to be substantial in the present context. Originality/value The research concludes that TP-DP strategies in Indian manufacturing industries encounter relevant critical barriers for accomplishing sustainable development. The outcomes of the study will help TP-DP practitioners, HR executives and organizational managers in manufacturing companies to develop clear understanding about the significant TP-DP strategies to be followed comprehensively for realization of sustainable development. The manufacturing organizations will be able to formulate and express their policies and issues in a more pertinent manner. Hence, the knowledge obtained from the empirical examination of critical barriers in transitions between TP and DP strategies will be helpful in improving the overall performance of manufacturing industries involved in the present study.

An empirical investigation and prioritizing critical barriers of green manufacturing implementation practices through VIKOR approach

“…Singla et al (2018) concluded TP-DP strategies in Indian manufacturing industries encountering relevant critical barriers for accomplishing sustainable development. Results held top level and medium level managements responsible for the implementation of TP-DP strategies for sustainable development.…”

“…For extraction of factors, principal component analysis using the varimax rotation method with Kaiser Normalization has been deployed in the study. The six extracted factors are shown in second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh columns of Table IV, whereas the various corresponding items are portrayed in first column where values below 0.4 are dropped out during the selection of factors (Singla et al , 2018).…”

Identification of barriers in the implementation of AMTs in the SMEs of northern India using AHP–TOPSIS approach

“…These can be due to various factors like lack of resources, management, employees, workers, knowledge and methods. The below-mentioned barriers were considered after a rigorous literature review in various contexts: high cost involved (Chan et al , 2015; Singh et al , 2013; Singla et al , 2018); lack of appropriate financial resources (Singh et al , 2013; Singla et al , 2018; Thomas et al , 2008); risk of failure to achieve financial targets (Khaparde, 2012); lack of skilled personnel (Mannan and Khurana, 2012; Singh et al , 2013); lack of information on markets (Mannan and Khurana, 2012; Singh et al , 2013); lack of information on new technologies (Singh and Khamba, 2011; Singh et al , 2013); lack of training facilities (Chung and Swink, 2009; Singh and Khamba, 2011; Singh et al , 2013); technology obsolescence (Singh et al , 2013; Singla et al , 2018); lack of R&D facilities (Singh et al , 2013); poor organizational structure (Singh et al , 2013; Thomas et al , 2008); lack of supplier/vendor competencies (Hottenstein and Dean, 1992; Singh et al , 2013; Sohal, 1997); poor sourcing practices (Singh et al , 2013); resistance to change within the industry (Singh et al , 2013); unsupportive top management (Singh et al , 2013); location of the plant (Singh et al , 2013); long tenure of top management/static governance (Khaparde, 2012); equipment failure or malfunction (Khaparde, 2012); reliability of new technology (Ndubisi, 2012); lack of leadership/support for innovation (Khaparde, 2012); comfort level – effect of disruption (Goulding et al , 2007); time required to make changes and adjust (Mannan and Khurana, 2012); understanding of and ability to implement (Khaparde, 2012); social implications – changes in collaboration communication styles (Khaparde, 2012); current processes or procedures (Atkin et al , 2017); budgetary priorities; difficulty/availability/time for training (Khaparde, 2012); resistance to learning new technology (Singh and Khamba, 2011); work stress/overload; proof of value; use acceptance (Khaparde, 2012); and...…”

“…lack of appropriate financial resources (Singh et al , 2013; Singla et al , 2018; Thomas et al , 2008);…”

“…Another catalyst can be that SMEs are provided with custom-made or modified AMTs as per their needs. The government policies and financial aids play an important role in overcoming financial barriers (Singla et al , 2018). The solutions and action plan to overcome the major influential barriers have been formulated after a lot of literature review and discussions with experts from different fields (manufacturing industry and academia).…”