Proposal for Vocational Courses / Certifications

Chapter 8

Agile Manufacturing Enterprise Design

- Dr. Dayakar G. Devaru

Professor

IP Dept.

Agile Manufacturing Enterprise Design The Iacocca Institute’s Agile Manufacturing Infrastructure


System concepts as the basis of manufacturing theory

If we examine the literature on systems concepts we

will find two rather distinct interpretations.

The first approach is what we might call true systems

thinking, and the second we can describe as systems

engineering.

Although we might be tempted to see the two as

synonymous concepts, but they are based upon

entirely different perspectives and have some

common features.

The authors believe that the systems engineering

approach is not appropriate to agile manufacturing

enterprise design and systems thinking is more

appropriate.

Agile Manufacturing Enterprise Design System concepts as the basis of manufacturing theory

Systems engineering is an interdisciplinary field of engineering and engineering management that focuses on how to design, integrate, and manage complex systems over their life cycles.

At its core, systems engineering utilizes systems thinking principles to organize its body of knowledge.

Systems engineering techniques are used in complex projects: spacecraft design, computer chip design, robotics, software integration, and bridge building.

Systems engineering uses a host of tools that include modeling and simulation, requirements analysis and scheduling to manage complexity.

Agile Manufacturing Enterprise Design The origin of systems thinking

Systems thinking has its roots in the belief, expressed by some biologists in the 1920s and 1930s that the reductionism of natural science was probably not the best approach to the understanding of specifically biological phenomena.

What was therefore proposed was a systems approach that was systematic, that is, concerned with understanding the whole (Checkland, 1981, 1983).

The systems approach, as we practice it in engineering, often does not reflect this view and thus we have something which we call systems engineering, which is based on reductionism rather than systemic thinking.

Checkland (1981) introduces the terms hard systems and soft systems.

Agile Manufacturing Enterprise Design Hard Systems

Systems engineering is a hard systems method and it can be used to tackle problems in which objectives or goals can be taken as given and a system designed to achieve the given objectives.

Soft systems methods, on the other hand, are applied to situations where desirable ends cannot be taken as given.

According to King (1988), in hard systems thinking, the philosophy that informs the methodology is that:

1. Needs can be clearly defined

2. Objectives can be set which are established by neutral scientific criteria

3. The engineering challenge is to design and select the best among possible alternative systems to achieve the scientific objectives.


Hard Systems

Checkland has stated that the essence of hard

systems thinking is the pursuit of the best solution;

the belief in, and the search for, the optimum.

Furthermore, Checkland has also argued that hard

systems thinking is only applicable to systems which

are characterized by interconnections which are part

of the regularities of the universe.

It is assumed that the essence of the hard system

approach consists of a number of subsystems and

that the components of those subsystems can be

identified and quantified to provide an

explanation of the workings of those subsystems.

For Example: Electronic Circuits


Soft Systems

“Soft systems methodology (SSM) was developed by

Peter Checkland (1981) as a strategy for analyzing

complex problem situations and identifying

acceptable improvements that could be made to

those situations.”

The aim of the SSM is to achieve improvement to the

system; this is attained through a multistage process

of information gathering, description, analysis and

debate.

The first stage in an SSM consisting of the careful

observation of the problem situation with all its

intricate details, and the recording of all that is

perceived.


Soft Systems

This involves collecting qualitative data such as attitudes

and opinions concerning the problem situation,

including reactions to interference in matters as well as

quantitative data, and recording this in the form of a

‘picture’ which is known as rich picture.

Then, models of these systems that are consistent with

different viewpoints expressed within the descriptions

are drawn.

Finally, several comparisons are made of the models

with the observations of the real world situation, which

are used in a discussion with the problem owners to

suggest systemically desirable and culturally feasible

changes that are hoped will lead to improvements in

the problem situation.


Comparison of Hard and Soft Systems

It is necessary to know why Checkland developed

two different systems.

According to Checkland (1996, p. 190), “The main

difference between ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ approaches is

that where the former can start by asking ‘What

system has to be engineered to solve this

problem?’ or ‘What system will meet this need?’

and can take the problem or the need as given.”

In case of Soft System methodology, there is a

comparison stage, which has no equivalent in the

Hard System methodology.

Agile Manufacturing Enterprise Design Comparison of Hard and Soft Systems

In comparison stage, soft system thinking

provides a structure for a debate about change

which hopefully ensures superior quality as a

result of the insight captured in the root

definitions.

On the other hand, hard system thinking is always

busy preparing to implement the designed system.

Moreover, Soft system thinking is considered for

the general case and hard system thinking is

considered for special cases.

Soft system thinking improves the conceptual

model using the formal system model and other

systems thinking.

Agile Manufacturing Enterprise Design Comparison of Hard and Soft Systems

On the other hand, hard system optimizes the

design, using the defined performance criterion

and select the alternative which best meets the

need and is feasible.

Soft system implements the agreed system and

hard system implement the designed system.

Hard systems thinking consider the system as an

objective part of the world and Soft Systems

Thinking considers system as epistemological

concept, which is subjectively constructed by

people rather the objective entities in the world.

After comparing the hard and soft system, “it is

clear that SST achieves a paradigm shift”.

Agile Manufacturing Enterprise Design Joint Technical and Organizational Design

Cherns formulated nine principles of joint technical

and organizational design to deal with design of agile

manufacturing enterprises as listed below.

1. Compatibility

2. Minimum Critical Specification

3. Variance Control

4. Boundary Location

5. Information Flow

6. Support Congruence

7. Design and Human Values

8. Power and Authority

9. Transitional Organization


1. Compatibility

The design process by which we design agile

manufacturing enterprises need to be compatible

with the objectives we are pursuing.

We cannot for example, bring about employee

participation and empowerment by decree.

Our objective is to design agile manufacturing

enterprises leading to systems which are capable of

self-modification and adaptation and where we derive

competitive advantage from the people’s inherent

abilities.

This requires that we develop some form of

participatory organizational structure, but such a

system must be designed by involving the people.


2. Minimum Critical Specification

This principle states that we should specify no more

than is absolutely necessary and this applies to all

aspects of the system: tasks, jobs, roles and so on.

We can be specific about what has to be done, but

we should not over determine how things should be

done.

This implies a degree of flexibility and openness in

job descriptions, group structures and technologies.

This is exactly what is needed to achieve agility, i.e.,

Micro-management should be avoided.


3. Variance Control

Variances which cannot be eliminated should be

controlled as near to the point of origin of the

variance as possible.

Variances are those events that are unexpected or

unprogrammed.

Some of these variances may be critical, in that they

have an important effect on results.

It is important that we should control variances at

source because, not to do so, often introduces time

delays which tend to lengthen throughput times and

so on.

In agile manufacturing, response time is a critical

variable, which must be kept as short as possible.


4. Boundary Location

In traditional organizations we primarily organize

around fragmented functions and one result of this is

that barriers arise which impede the sharing of data,

information, knowledge and experience.

Boundary should be designed around a complete

flow of information, knowledge and materials, so as

to enable the sharing of all relevant data, information,

knowledge and experience.

In other words one should create natural groups. This

is particularly crucial in agile manufacturing because

the sharing of these elements is very important to

achieving rapid response, customer satisfaction and

so on.


5. Information Flow

We need to provide information at the place where

decisions and actions will be taken based on the

information.

Many information systems are designed on the

opposite principle.

Information is usually provided to those distant from

the point where decisions are taken, thus decision-

making is not done by those who are best placed to

take decisions.

Empowerment and continuing improvement, both key

aspects of agile manufacturing, require that we

provide everyone involved with information to

support these activities.


6. Support Congruence

This principle states that we should design our

reward systems, performance measurement systems

and so forth to reinforce the behaviors that we seek.

For example, individual reward for individual effort is

not appropriate if team behavior is required.


7. Design and human values

One of the objectives of manufacturing enterprises

should be to provide a high quality of working life.

This is particularly important in an agile

manufacturing environment, where we will be faced

with rapid changes and where our aim is to use

human abilities to gain competitive advantage.

If we do not address the human factor, that is, issues

of stress, motivation, personal development and so

on, then agile manufacturing enterprises will be no

more agile than our current manufacturing systems.


8. Power and Authority

In agile manufacturing, when we assign responsibilities

to people for tasks, we should make the resources

that they need available to them, and give them the

power and authority to secure these resources.

In return we should expect people to accept

responsibility for the proper use of the resources.

We should also make sure that people have the

knowledge and skills needed, but having provided our

people with knowledge, skills and resources, we

should avoid interfering, unless we are equally

knowledgeable and skilled.


9. Transitional Organization

We can be faced with two quite distinct problems

when creating new organizations.

We could be dealing with the design and start-up of

plants on green field sites, or on brown field sites

(existing plants). The second is much more difficult.

When we are designing agile manufacturing

enterprises, we will be faced with both types of

situation.

We should in both situations, view the design team

and the processes it uses, as a tool to support the

transitions that we wish to see.

In other words, the design team is an integral part of

the process of managing change.


9. Transitional Organization cont’d

As such it should embody the new values and culture

and be diffusing them throughout the enterprise.

The actions taken by the design teams will speak

louder than any words embedded in mission

statements.

If we really want to see participation, empowerment

and all the other good things of which we have

spoken, then we should start by ensuring that the

design teams become the messengers of our new

values and concepts.

Proposal for Vocational Courses / Certifications

Documents

Transcript of Proposal for Vocational Courses / Certifications