Decision-making towards achieving world-class total productive maintenance

Abstract

Purpose – World-class total productive maintenance (TPM) status depends on critical success factors (CSF) to be properly implemented. The relevant literature has identified several CSF; however, researchers have not investigated the degree of importance of each phase of the process. The purpose of this paper is to prioritize the CSFs that influence TPM implementation during each phase of the process in order to aid decision making in companies. Design/methodology/approach – The main CSF are identified from a literature review. This paper focusses on the judgments of managers who are experts in TPM implementation in companies which have received TPM awards for excellence. The judgments are processed using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method. Three aggregation methods (geometric mean, Copeland and fuzzy) are employed for comparative analysis. Findings – Although the literature highlights some important CSF, the relevance of these factors is not the same in each phase of TPM implementation. Analysis shows that ranking using the Copeland method is most coherent. Research limitations/implications – This research was carried out in some Brazilian companies. Practical implications – If managers are aware of the CSF to be prioritized in each phase, this facilitates decision making, resulting in a more effective implementation of TPM. Social implications – If TPM implementation is effective, this stimulates the personnel involved and avoids the possibility of the program being abandoned. Originality/value – The originality of this paper consists in the proposed model to prioritize CSF during each phase of the implementation of TPM.

Fuzzy Copras Method for Performance Measurement in Total Productive Maintenance: A Comparative Analysis

“…The important thing is to find out key metrics for the assessment of performance indicators of the program. Piehnicki et al (2015) investigate priority of critical success factors for implementing TPM properly.…”

The state-of-the-art integrations and applications of the analytic hierarchy process

“…Copeland (Piechnicki et al, 2015), evidential reasoning theory (ERT) (Yan et al, 2012), genetic algorithm (GA) (Aguilar-Lasserre et al, 2009), geometric mean (Piechnicki et al, 2015), grey relational analysis (GRA) (Samvedi et al, 2012;Pitcchipoo et al, 2013), the Kano model (Ghorbani et al, 2013), life cycle assessment (LCA) (Chan et al, 2013), preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluations (PROMETHEE) (Rao and Patel, 2010;Avikal et al, 2014), scoring methods (Sun et al, 2008), a technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) (Büyüközkan et al, 2008;Ghorbani et al, 2013;Samvedi et al, 2013;Kilic et al, 2014;Yayla, 2015;Dincer et al, 2016), and VIKOR (Ren and Lützen, 2015).…”

The Role of Managerial Commitment and TPM Implementation Strategies in Productivity Benefits

“…In their research, Piechnicki, et al [26] identified a set of critical TPM success factors and grouped them into eight categories: education and training, teamwork, planning and preparation, senior managerial commitment, resistance to change, change of culture, employee involvement, monitoring results, and effective communication; as can be seen, there are a lot of CSF human resources for TPM. However, Hernández Gómez et al [27] classified three categories for CSF: strategic planning, technical aspects, and human resources development.…”

“…TPM implementation [4,26,27] proper education and training of maintenance staff. follow-up and control of the maintenance program.…”

“…managerial commitment [26,27,39] department leaders embrace their TPM responsibilities. top managers lead TPM execution.…”