Production competence and its impact on business performance

Choe, Kwangseek; Booth, David E.; Hu, Michael Y.

doi:10.1016/s0278-6125(97)81699-8

Cited by 39 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A plant manager could therefore develop and use speci®c manufacturing¯exibilities to target selected aspects of manufacturing performance that have strategic relevance to a company's strategic posture in the market. Interestingly, previous research has reported remarkably similar ®ndings (Choe et al 1997, Deane et al 1990). These studies found that successful ®rms align cost leadership strategies with a programme of manufacturing cost reduction, and a di erentiation business strategy with manufacturing quality and customization performance.…”

Section: Firm Performanc E and Manufacturing-busines S Strategic ®Tsupporting

confidence: 59%

“…Advanced manufacturing technology did not relate to any of the three¯exibility dimensions. Flexibility outcomes included signi®cant e ects of mix, modi®cation and new product¯exibilities on multiple aspects Positive**** and business strategy/ Positive***** environment on ®rm performance *Narasimhan and Das (1999b) (nˆ68); ** Upton (1997) (nˆ54; examines process range¯exibility, akin to mix¯exibility); *** Pagell and Krause (1999); **** Deane et al (1990); ***** Choe et al (1997). Table 6.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards theory building in manufacturing flexibility

Das¹

2001

International Journal of Production Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study consolidates and extends previous research to propose a theoretical framework of manufacturing¯exibility. The framework proposes antecedent roles for manufacturing¯exibilities in supporting a range of agility-related manufacturing priorities; suggests how such manufacturing¯exibilities can be developed; and relates the e ects of alignment between¯exibility-facilitated manufacturing outcomes and business strategy on ®rm performance. A questionnaire was administered to 1700 senior level managers in manufacturing ®rms, with 322 valid surveys returned for data analysis. The results support the framework, and suggest that di erent manufacturing priorities can be facilitated through the development of speci®c manufacturing¯exibilities. The results also indicate that these manufacturing¯exibilities can be acquired through the development of purchasing competence in a ®rm. The data provide partial support for a relationship between congruity in manufacturing and business goals, and ®rm performance.

show abstract

Section: Firm Performanc E and Manufacturing-busines S Strategic ®Tsupporting

confidence: 59%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards theory building in manufacturing flexibility

Das¹

2001

International Journal of Production Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Spearman's rho was used to calculate these relationships, rather than Pearson's r, because the fit and performance variables might not be normally distributed and the number of cases was relatively small (Mohrman et al, 2001). This approach is consistent with previous studies investigating the relationship between fit and performance such as Naman and Slevin (1993), Choe et al (1997), Ahmad and Schroeder (2003) and da Silveira (2005).…”

Section: Identifying Internal Fit-performance Relationships Across Alsupporting

confidence: 92%

Service fitness ladders: improving business performance in low cost and differentiated markets

Hill

Cuthbertson

Laker

et al. 2017

IJOPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis paper presents thirteen propositions about how internal strategic fit (often referred to as fit) impacts the business performance of low cost and differentiated services. It then uses these relationships to develop two 'fitness ladder' frameworks to help practitioners understand how to improve fit given their business strategy (low cost or differentiation) and performance objectives (operational, financial or competitiveness). Design/methodology/approachEleven strategic business units were studied that perform differently and provide a range of low cost and differentiated services to understand how changes in internal strategic fit impacted business performance over a seven year period. FindingsOur findings suggest aligning systems with market needs does not improve performance. Instead, firms serving low cost markets should first focus managers' attention on processes and centralise resources around key processes, before reducing process flexibility and automate as many steps as possible to develop a low cost capability that is difficult to imitate. By contrast, firms serving differentiated markets should first focus managers' attention on customers and then locate resources ! 1 near them, before increasing customer contact with their processes and making them more flexible so they can develop customer knowledge, relationships and services that are difficult to imitate. Research limitations/implicationsSome significant factors may not have been considered as the study only looked at the impact of fourteen internal strategic fit variables on seven performance variables. Also, the performance changes may not be a direct result of the strategic fit improvements identified and may not generalise to other service organisations, settings and environments. Practical implicationsThe strategic fit-performance relationships identified and the 'fitness ladder' frameworks developed can be used by organisations to make decisions about how best to improve fit given their different market needs, business strategies and performance objectives. Originality/valueOur findings offer more clarity than previous research about how internal fit impacts business performance for low cost and differentiated services.

show abstract

“…drivers or enablers of capabilities -e.g. Choe et al (1997), Narasimhan and Jayaram (1998), Dangayach and Deshmukh (2004), and Schmenner and Vastag (2006).…”

Section: Literature Review 21 Manufacturing Strategy Operationalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although there are exceptions (e.g. Choe et al, 1997;Narasimhan and Jayaram, 1998;Dangayach and Deshmukh, 2004;Schmenner and Vastag, 2006), production competence is usually operationalized as the fit between the importance of, and actual performance on, manufacturing related competitive priorities.…”

Section: Summary and Critique Of The Production Competence Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Production competence revisited – a critique of the literature and a new measurement approach

Szász

Demeter

Boer

2015

Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2015),"An optimized travelling time estimation mechanism for minimizing handover failures and unnecessary handovers from cellular networks If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to seek remedy to two major flaws of the production competence literature, which concern: the way the production competence construct is operationalized and the way its effects on performance are measured. Design/methodology/approach -The paper proposes to measure production competence as the two-dimensional operational level construct it actually is, and to use Slack's (1994) importanceperformance matrix to study its business level performance effects. The three hypotheses developed are tested using a subsample of the International Manufacturing Strategy Survey database, which includes 465 manufacturing companies from 21 countries. Findings -The study offers additional empirical support for production competence theory. Going beyond supporting existing theory, the results give more detailed insight by indicating that low operational performance on even one important competitive factor leads to lower business performance (order-losing effect); excessive investment in increasing operational performance on any less important competitive factor does not necessarily lead to higher business performance. Practical implications -Using a large empirical dataset, the study shows that the importanceperformance matrix is a useful tool for decision makers to assess and improve their company's manufacturing strategy: it indicates how to prioritize between improvement efforts to positively contribute to business performance. Originality/value -The paper offers a novel approach to operationalize production competence. The importance-performance analysis approach adopted in this study avoids the two major drawbacks of previous production competence studies and offers an appropriate method to assess the impact of production competence on business performance.

show abstract

Production competence and its impact on business performance

Cited by 39 publications

References 12 publications

Towards theory building in manufacturing flexibility

Towards theory building in manufacturing flexibility

Service fitness ladders: improving business performance in low cost and differentiated markets

Production competence revisited – a critique of the literature and a new measurement approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About