Technology, lean, quality and human resource practices in manufacturing: how does size as a contingency factor matter?

Abstract

PurposeTaking its outset in operations management (OM) contingency research, this paper aims to investigate how firm size, as one of the most powerful explanatory factors, influences the implementation and performance impact of four key manufacturing practices.Design/methodology/approachThree large-scale surveys from three different points in time, with a total of 1880 observations from varied geographical regions, are used to offer generalizable evidence on how firm size influences the implementation and performance outcome of technology, lean, quality and human resource practices.FindingsThe four manufacturing practices positively enhance performance: quality and lean practices produce the most consistent effects, while technology and human resource practices turn more beneficial in the latest sample. Furthermore, the authors offer robust support for the selection and mediation models (larger firms generally invest more in the four practices and, through that, achieve higher performance), while finding no evidence for the moderation model (smaller firms can equally benefit if they possess the resources to invest in these practices).Originality/valueAs manufacturing practices are continuously evolving, their performance impact cannot be guaranteed in any context. Size is a frequently used contingency variable in OM studies, but results are contradictory in terms of its impact on the implementation and performance outcomes of manufacturing practices. This study manages to ease these contradictions.

The mechanism of knowledge management process toward minimizing technical risks under green implementation network: a direct and configurational approach

“…Hence, numerous examples of green planning networks signify physical, physiological and psychological significance. In this scenario, the study's findings align with prior literature (Bai and Satir, 2020), which suggest that green planning networks can improve the economic, technological and human resource more beneficial in manufacturing (Szász et al ., 2023).…”

Fourth industrial (r)evolution? Investigating the use of technology bundles and performance implications

“…Since technologies serving automatic material handling and robotic technology are usually developed for mass production purposes, having positive effect on costs while no differentiation effect makes sense. Thus, it is not surprising either that additional subgroup analysis indicated that larger companies could benefit significantly more than smaller ones, in line with previous findings (Szász et al ., 2023). Given that these technologies can partially or fully replace humans (Acemoglu, 2017), their economic return is direct and therefore easily measured and realized.…”

“…To be able to perform further subgroup analyses, a binary variable is created to differentiate between large manufacturing units and SMEs, the cutoff value being at 250 employees. Size has been generally used as a contingency variable in technology-related studies and can have a significant influence on technology investments and performance (Szász et al ., 2023). The second control variable is related to the economic development of the country the respondent unit is located in.…”

Developing capabilities underlying to Industry 4.0 design principles within the manufacturing context

“…Nonetheless, the descript findings revealed that most participating manufacturers in the present study could be categorized as Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs). The literature widely affirms that SMEs are significantly limited in accessing and mobilizing necessary resources for Industry 4.0 transformation (Masood and Sonntag, 2020;Moeuf et al, 2018;Sz asz et al, 2023). Our results align with this perspective showing that the availability of Industry 4.0-specific digitalization resources is the crucial enabler of the hallmark design principles of Industry 4.0.…”

“…The literature widely affirms that SMEs are significantly limited in accessing and mobilizing necessary resources for Industry 4.0 transformation (Masood and Sonntag, 2020; Moeuf et al. , 2018; Szász et al. , 2023).…”