JIT Implementation in Egyptian

JIT implementation in Egyptianmanufacturing firms: someempirical evidenceSalaheldin Ismail SalaheldinDepartment of Business Administration, College of Business and Economics,Qatar University, Doha, QatarAbstractPurpose ? This study aims to delineate the major human modifications to be undertaken prior tojust-in-time (JIT) implementation in Egyptian manufacturing firms; to discern the benefits obtainedfrom JIT implementation; to identify the problems that Egyptian manufacturing companies typicallyencounter in implementing JIT philosophy; and to explore the relationship between humanmodification efforts to be undertaken prior to JIT implementation and JIT success.Design/methodology/approach ? The data analyzed in this article was collected from a mailquestionnaire sent to 200 manufacturing firms in Egypt. The findings of this study indicate that JITsuccess is significantly associated with human resources modification efforts undertaken inpreparation for JIT implementation.Findings ? JIT philosophy can be successfully implemented in Egyptian manufacturing companies;just like their peers in developed countries including Japan, USA and the Far East; with thoughtfulattention applied to each individual company. Implementation of JIT can greatly improve theoperations performance of Egyptian manufacturing firms.Practical implications ? A very significant managerial implication of the current study is that theEgyptian manufacturing companies can use JIT as a strategic philosophy, rather than as a temporarysolution for operations obstacles. Another managerial implication of this study is that manufacturingfirms are advised to be aware of the meticulous relationship between human modification efforts andthe successful implementation of JIT philosophy.Originality/value ? This study contributes to what is a very limited amount of empirical studies ofJIT implementation in LDCs in general and in Egypt in particular.Keywords Just in time, Manufacturing systems, EgyptPaper type Research paperIntroductionEgypt, like most less developed countries (LDCs), strives to diagnose and find solutionsfor the severe problems that are obstructing the growth and development of itsindustrial sectors. Problems like high scrap, losing market shares, high levels ofinventory, poor quality in products and labor, long lead times and the existence ofmany sources of waste in production processes (Salaheldin and Francis, 1998).Studies have shown that the successful implementation of just-in-time (JIT) can helpto alleviate many of the obstacles mentioned above (Draper, 1995; Vuppalapati et al.,

1995; Walley, 2000; Cua et al., 2001). However, review of relevant literature reveals thatthe successful implementation of JIT philosophy hinges on several modification effortsto be undertaken prior to the implementation process.One major modification that should be undertaken prior to JIT implementation isthat it demands a major change in people?s attitudes and work habits (Gupta, 1990;Norris and Swanson, 1994; Yasin et al., 2001).The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available atwww.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/0144-3577.htmIJOPM25,4354International Journal of Operations &Production ManagementVol. 25 No. 4, 2005pp. 354-370qEmerald Group Publishing Limited0144-3577DOI 10.1108/01443570510585543Furthermore, it was discovered that only a few studies on JIT implementation indeveloping countries have appeared recently (Lawrence and Lewis, 1996; Gyampahand Gargeya, 2001). In view of that, the main task of the current empirical study is toinvestigate the critical human variables that are affecting the implementation of JITphilosophy in Egyptian manufacturing firms.Moreover, this investigation is seen as a principal step towards formulating strategiesand tactics that remove and avoid many of the severe obstacles that impede the successfulimplementation of JIT philosophy on the road to achieving its potential benefits.Review of relevant literatureNowadays, manufacturing firms are forced to implement a wide variety of innovativemanagerial tools and philosophies, in an effort to improve their performance whilereacting to external and internal pressures. One of the most popular businessrevitalization or renewal programs over the past two decades has been just-in-time(JIT) (Aladwani, 1999).JIT benefits and pitfallsResearch has shown that the successful implementation of JIT philosophy can producesignificant benefits for manufacturing firms; such as, improving quality thatconsistently and continually meets customers requirements; minimizing levels ofinventory and improving relationship with suppliers (Aghazadeh, 2003); reducing thelabor turn over rate; reducing manufacturing lead times; reducing set-up time (Wafa

and Yasin, 1998); reducing operations and materials handling costs; and maximizingthe use of space (Petersen, 2002).JIT can also improve the on-time receipt of material from suppliers (Yasin et al.,2001); improving purchasing function; improving preventive maintenance; increasingworker participation; improving the quality and timing of received material; fullutilization of people, equipment, materials and parts; and improving competition whilereducing paper work (Arnold and Bernard, 1989; Crawford and Cox, 1991; Markhamand McCart, 1995; Vuppalapati et al., 1995; Alternburg et al., 1999).Contrasted with this is the fact that caution is needed because the arrival ofmaterials must be accurate and continuous; plus the use of backup inventories isnecessary (Petersen, 2002).Moreover, Schermerhorn (1996) suggests that the effectiveness of JITimplementation hinges on a wide range of special support that includes: highquality supplies; strong management commitment; a manageable supplier network;geographic concentration; plus efficient transportation; and materials handling.JIT implementation in developing nationsLawrence and Lewis (1996) concluded in their study of the use of JIT practices inMexico that JIT can be used successfully in some Mexican manufacturing firms.Furthermore, they found that there are three groups of obstacles that hinder theimplementation of JIT in Mexican operations:(1) Employee participation obstacles.(2) Supplier participation obstacles.(3) Obstacles to the managerial integration of the JIT companies.JITimplementation355Gyampah and Gargeya (2001) conducted a study on the implementation of just-in-timein manufacturing firms in Ghana. They found that JIT firms differ from non-JIT firmsin terms of their efforts with set-up time reduction, continuous quality improvements,suppliers? partnership and employees? training. However, there is no significantdifference with regard to the use of measurement systems.JIT modificationsResearchers and practitioners indicated that several modifications to existing systemsshould be undertaken prior to JIT implementation.First, JIT requires a modified approach by top management which may includesignificant modifications; such as, designing an organization that integrates strategywith people to achieve the basic premise of JIT, elimination of all types of waste; reducingspecialization and organization functions; creating project teams; making everyone

responsible for production of quality products and services; developing management andemployees? commitment to continuous improvement (Theng, 1993; and Chong et al.,2001); plus integrating people and organizational systems with hardware (Sim, 2001).Second, the engineering modifications of JIT include: changing work center layout;combining several operations to minimize the distance traveled; grouping machines incells; purchasing equipment with short setup (Wafa and Yasin, 1998); responsibility forproduct design; quality and reliability; using design of experiments to improve qualitywhile reducing costs; seeking product standardization wherever feasible; concentratingon continuous improvement in product design (Theng, 1993); using total productivemaintenance (TPM) as an integral part of a JIT system (Bamber et al., 2000); plusanalyzing the operations in order to identify where standardization, simplificationsand automation are needed (Yasin et al., 2001).Third, JIT requires modifying the material flow through changing inventory andorder policies, as well as production runs policies; reducing the number of vendors(Wafa and Yasin, 1998); stabilizing production schedules on a daily or weekly basis;planning production from final assembly; developing methods for estimatingwork-in-process and identifying why the company needs it; then trying to reduce itregularly (Theng, 1993); and establishing new procedures for dealing with suppliers likedefining the criteria for suppliers based on quality, cost and timing (Yasin et al., 2001).Finally, the implementation of JIT requires some human resources modificationefforts including training employees to improve their job skills in technical matters andproblems solving (Wafa and Yasin, 1998); changing from individual to groupincentives that are related to JIT accomplishment; reducing job classifications;substituting multi-skilled jobs; increasing flexibility of work reassignment; plusensuring the ability to work overtime to complete daily schedules (Theng, 1993);participation of employees in decision making (Ramarapu et al., 1995); training ofmanagement and employees to create an organizational culture consistent with the JITphilosophy (Jin et al., 1994); and building good relations with suppliers and improvingcommunications between management and employees (Ramarapu et al., 1995; Yasinet al., 2001).Key human resources problem areasWorks cited earlier by Celley et al. (1986); Klein (1988); Billesbach (1991); Jin et al.(1994); Mazany (1995); Wafa and Yasin (1998); and Yasin et al. (2001) have identified

IJOPM25,4356several human resources barriers that may hinder manufacturing companiesimplementing JIT philosophy successfully; such as, lack of formal training/educationfor management and workers; lack of communications between workers andmanagement; management and employees resistance; a lack of support from topmanagement; lack of company JIT expertise; lack of cooperation by suppliers tocorrectly supply materials on schedule; lack of support from production and materialmanagement; plus a lack of support from supervisors/foremen.As a consequence the following were observed:.the lack of empirical attempts to study the obstacles that impede theimplementation of JIT in less developed countries such as Egypt; and.the scarcity of detailed research that provide JIT users with guidance inidentifying the critical human variables affecting the JIT philosophyimplementation within manufacturing companies in less developed countries.Research questions and objectivesTo analyze the implementation of JIT philosophy by Egyptian manufacturing firms,the researcher developed two major questions:(1) Does JIT philosophy work equally well in Egyptian manufacturing firms as intheir peers in developed countries like Japan, USA and the Far East?(2) If so, how can JIT philosophy be implemented successfully in Egyptianmanufacturing companies?These were the overall questions to be answered by the current study; defined by thefollowing four objectives:(1) To delineate a set of human resources modification efforts to be undertaken inpreparation for the JIT implementation process in Egyptian manufacturingfirms.(2) To discern the benefits obtained from JIT implementation, based on theviewpoint of Egyptian manufacturing firms.(3) To identify the problems that Egyptian manufacturing companies typicallyencounter in implementing JIT philosophy.(4) To explore the relationship between human modification efforts that should beundertaken prior to JIT implementation and JIT success.Contribution to current knowledgeThe current study contributes to what is a very limited amount of empirical studies ofJIT implementation in LDCs in general and in Egypt in particular. In addition, thisstudy contributes to what is currently a limited amount of empirical evidence toexplore and examine the relationship between human modification efforts that shouldbe undertaken prior to JIT implementation and JIT success.This may provide the opportunity for other researchers to execute more researchin this field and to merge with other modification efforts that should be undertakenprior to JIT implementation; such as, management, engineering and logisticsmodifications.

JITimplementation357Furthermore, the current study is the third in a series planned to investigate theimplementation of innovative manufacturing tools and philosophies in the Egyptianindustrial sector (Salaheldin and Francis, 1998, Salaheldin, 2003).HypothesesThus, in order to shed light on the actual existence of JIT implementation patterns,while describing more precisely what the Egyptian manufacturing firms haveimplemented or are considering to implement with the JIT philosophy; it is importantto consider the following hypotheses:H1. Manufacturing firms which are more willing to undertake human resourcesmodification efforts prior to JIT implementation attain a higher level of JITbenefits.H2. There is no difference between the non-JIT companies concerning theobstacles that impede the implementation of JIT philosophy in the Egyptianindustrial sector.Study methodologyThe sampleThe mail survey questionnaire that was sent to approximately 200 manufacturingfirms in Egypt, focused on company characteristics, human modification efforts to beundertaken prior to JIT implementation, JIT benefits, and JIT implementationproblems.The survey population of this study is defined as all Egyptian manufacturingcompanies (200 companies) in the Egyptian ex-public industrial sector[1]. The targetrespondent in each company was the production manager or materials manager. Carewas taken to include all JIT and non-JIT firms in the sample.Usable responses of 94 were obtained resulting in a response rate of 47 percent (seeTable I). This rate was found to be better than similar studies reported in the literature(Mehra and Inman, 1992; Wafa and Yasin, 1998; Yasin et al., 2001). The final usablesample was broken into manufacturing firms that have implemented JIT philosophy(56) and manufacturing firms that are considering JIT implementation (38).The construction of the questionnaireThe mail survey questionnaire was constructed based on two successful studiespreviously conducted in related fields of study, i.e. the Lawrence and Lewis (1996)study and the Wafa and Yasin (1998) study. The modifications made to these studieswere determined by the researcher?s own knowledge of conditions of the Egyptianindustrial sector and the theoretical issues discussed previously.Mailing list 200Total responses 97Unusable responses 3a

Final usable responses 94Useable response rate (%) 47Note:aThree questionnaires are unusable because they are with a high proportion of missing valuesTable I.Survey responses rateIJOPM25,4358Validity of the questionnaireHaving established an approximate schedule of questions relevant to the issues underinvestigation in the current study, i.e. the significant human modification effortsaffecting the successful implementation of JIT in Egyptian manufacturing companies;it was decided to conduct a pilot study to confirm that the theoretical and practicalissues identified by the author were appropriate to the manufacturing environment inEgyptian manufacturing firms.Questionnaires were provided in Arabic language where appropriate. The Arabicversion was translated from English and then back-translated to ensure equivalency.The questionnaire was validated (face validity) by 20 operations and materialsmanagers in Egyptian manufacturing firms.MeasurementsProcedures for testing H1. Respondents were asked to determine the importance ofundertaking human resources modification efforts prior to JIT implementation.Accordingly, JIT companies were reclassified into JIT firms that were more willing andfirms that were less willing to undertake human modification efforts prior to JITimplementation.The cut-off point on the importance scale is 3. Those firms with the degree ofimportance less than 3 are classified as companies which were less willing to undertakehuman resources modification efforts prior to JIT implementation (11 companies).Those firms with the degree of importance greater than 3 are classified ascompanies that were more willing to undertake human resources modification effortsprior to JIT implementation (45 companies).Due to the survey containing a large number of variables, most were correlated.Factor analysis is used to examine the relationships among the interrelated variables todetermine the factors needed to represent them as in Lawrence and Lewis (1996), andYasin et al. (2001).By computing the Bartlett?s test sphericity and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measureseparately for the human modification efforts and JIT benefits variables, the results

indicated that all the values of Bartlett?s statistic are significant.Also, all the KMOs are $0.70 for each data set and are $0.60 for each variable,which means that all variables are likely to be worthwhile for running factor analysis.As a result, Bartlett?s test and KMO values were considered ?meritorious?.By implementing human resources modification efforts prior to JIT implementation,a principal component factor analysis indicated that the ten variables (i.e. humanresources modification efforts) are reduced to only three factors with an eigenvaluegreater than one.The three factors explained 72 percent of the total variance. The extracted factorsand their factor loadings are illustrated in Table II. Factor 1 is labeled as informativemodification efforts. Factor 2 is labeled as skill modification efforts. Factor 3 is labeledas educational modification efforts.A principal component factor analysis indicated that the 16 variables (i.e. JITbenefits) are reduced to only four factors with an eigenvalue greater than one.The four factors explained 83 percent of the total variance. The extracted factorsand their factor loadings are illustrated in Table III. Factor 1 is labeled as performancerelated benefits. Factor 2 is labeled as workers related benefits. Factor 3 is labeled asoperational related benefits. Factor 4 is labeled as purchasing related benefits.JITimplementation359FactorsFactor 1loadingsFactor 2loadingsFactor 3loadingsFactor 1: informative modification effortsImproving communication between managementand employees 0.865Management commitment 0.805Participating employees in decision making 0.670Factor 2: skill modification effortsChanging from individual to group incentives thatare related to JIT accomplishment 0.829Increasing flexibility of work reassignment 0.848Substituting multi-skilled jobs 0.918Ensuring ability to work overtime to complete dailyschedules 0.684Factor 3: educational modification effortsTraining employees 0.835Building good relations with suppliers 0.722Training management 0.903Table II.Factors related to humanresources modification

effortsFactorsFactor 1loadingsFactor 2loadingsFactor 3loadingsFactor 4loadingsFactor 1: performance related benefitsReduction in operations costs 0.625Reduction in materials handling costs 0.860Improvement of quality 0.832Increasing customer satisfaction 0.719Reduction in manufacturing lead times 0.852Improvements of competitive position 0.638Factor 2: workers related benefitsReduction in labor turnover 0.811Improvements of ability to perform in your job 0.678Increasing workers participation 0.601Factor 3: operations related benefitsIncreased utilization of people, equipment, materialsand parts 0.721Minimized raw material, work-in-process, andfinished goods inventory 0.769Reduced paper work 0.903Improved preventive maintenance 0.751Factor 4: purchasing related benefitsImproved quality and timing of received material 0.651Improved co-ordination with suppliers 0.883Improved purchasing function 0.925Table III.Factors related to JITimplementation benefitsIJOPM25,4360In computing Kendall coefficients of correlation between human modification factorsprior to JIT implementation and JIT benefits factors, the formula for the Kendallcorrelation coefficient is:Tau ?s??????????????????????????????????????1=2N?N 21?2Txp ??????????????????????????????????????1=2N?N 21?2Typ ?1?where Txdenotes the number of ties on X, and Tydenotes the number of ties on Y.Procedures for testing H2. H2 was tested using the Kruskal-Wallis test and one wayanalysis of variance (ANOVA) to indicate whether or not there is a difference between

non-JIT companies concerning the problems that impede the implementation of JIT inthe Egyptian industrial sector.Data analysisThe findings of the surveyManufacturing company profile. Type of industry. It appears from Table IV that someindustries were more involved in implementing JIT philosophy than the others, e.g.food, chemicals and engineering and electronics industries were more involved (16.08percent, 25 percent and 33.9 percent of JIT companies, respectively).In contrast, there are several industries where no firms in the sample haveimplemented JIT philosophy; such as, the garments and the plastics industries.This finding supports the results of Billesbach (1991), Norris and Swanson (1994),and Lawrence and Lewis (1996); who concluded that manufacturing firms in theengineering and electronics and machinery fields are the major industries in which JIThas been implemented.JIT company characteristics. It appears from Table V that the majority of JITcompanies are working in the ?make-to-order? manufacturing environment or?make-to-stock? at least part of the time; which suggests that many of these companiesare doing the design according to customers needs and requirements as stated in thesales order.JIT firms Non-JIT firms OverallDescription N % N % N %Textiles 4 7.16 8 21.07 12 12.76Mining and petroleum industries 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Drink and tobacco 7 12.50 4 10.53 11 11.70Engineering and electronic 19 33.90 6 15.78 25 26.59Garments 0 0.00 4 10.53 4 4.25Chemicals 14 25.00 4 10.53 18 19.14Leather 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Wood 3 5.36 3 7.89 6 6.38Food industries 9 16.08 6 15.78 15 15.95Paper 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 3.45Printing 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Plastics 0 0.00 3 7.89 3 3.19Total 56 100.00 38 100.00 94 100.00Table IV.Manufacturing firmsclassified according totype of industryJITimplementation361Moreover, this environment caters for complex products that have many parts andcomponents (Ong, 1997). This is a similar trend in relation to the manufacturingenvironment where JIT companies are working in Mexico as reported by Lawrence andLewis (1996).The JIT philosophy is also more often adopted by manufacturing companies that

work in continuous and repetitive manufacturing processes than in companies withassembly and fabrication processes.This is consistent with Moras and Dieck (1992), Vuppalapati et al. (1995), andBrowne et al. (1998) who reported that JIT programs are suited to more repetitiveproduction with steady demands. This may be driven from the fact that in the JITpurchasing environment, unexpected delays of the flow of materials from suppliers toproducers can be minimized.Furthermore, it appears from Table V that JIT elements are more likely to be foundin older companies. The interpretation of this finding is that when the companybecomes mature and more established, it is more willing to invest in innovativemanagerial philosophies or renewal programs; such as, MRP II, JIT, TQM or BPR; inorder to react to external and internal pressures (Lawrence and Lewis, 1996; Salaheldinand Francis, 1998; Aladwani, 1999).Company size. Figure 1 indicates that 26 (46 percent) of JIT companies arelarge manufacturing firms measured by gross sales. This is consistent with theprevious empirical findings of Schonberger (1986), Jin et al. (1994), and Lawrenceand Lewis (1996); who concluded that as companies increase in size, as measuredby gross sales, they have a greater inclination to implement JIT philosophy.JIT companiesNon-JITcompanies OverallCharacteristics N % N % N %Type of productsMake-to-order only 19 33.93 9 23.68 28 29.78Make-to-stock only 11 19.65 15 39.47 26 27.66Make-to-order and make-to-stock 26 46.42 14 36.84 40 42.56Total 56 100.00 38 100.00 94 100.00Manufacturing processAssembly only 13 23.22 7 18.42 20 21.29Fabrication only 8 14.28 9 23.68 17 18.08Assembly and fabrication 10 17.86 14 36.85 24 25.53Continuous or repetitive 25 44.64 8 21.05 33 35.10Total 56 100.00 38 100.00 94 100.00AgeLess than three years 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Four-five years 2 3.57 0 0.00 2 2.12six-ten years 0 0.00 6 15.79 6 6.3811-15 years 10 17.86 10 26.32 20 21.28More than 15 years 44 78.57 22 57.89 66 70.22Total 56 100.00 38 100.00 94 100.00Table V.Company characteristicsreported by the totalsampleIJOPM25,4362

This result suggests that larger companies have a greater ability to spend money andtolerate risks for implementing new managerial tools and philosophies, than the small-or medium-sized companies have.Human modification efforts to be undertaken in preparation for JIT implementation.Respondents were asked to list the importance of each of the following humanmodification efforts (see Table VI) to be undertaken prior to JIT implementation intheir companies.It appears from Table VI that training of JIT management and employees on JITimplementation is the most important modification that should be undertaken prior toJIT implementation.Figure 1.Year 2000 gross salesItem Mean scoreTraining management 4.94aTraining employees 4.80Building good relations with suppliers 4.61Improving communication between managementand employees 4.33Employees participation in decision making 4.07Management commitment 3.79Changing from individual to group incentives thatare related to JIT accomplishment 3.56Substituting multi-skilled jobs 3.04Increasing flexibility of work reassignment 2.46Ensuring ability to work overtime to complete dailyschedules 2.27Note:aBased on a five-point scale, score (1) extremely unimportant, and (5) extremely importantTable VI.Human resourcesmodification effortsreported by JITcompaniesJITimplementation363This finding concurs with the findings of Yasin et al. (2001) who found that trainingmanagement and employees is one of the most important modifications that should beundertaken prior to JIT implementation in US manufacturing companies. This resultsuggests that the success of the implementation of the JIT philosophy depends on theway it is implemented, i.e. how has JIT been implemented in manufacturingcompanies?Furthermore, Table VI shows that improving relationships with suppliers is thethird important modification to be undertaken prior to JIT implementation. This may

be derived from the fact that most Egyptian engineering and electronics and chemicalscompanies are importing their materials from foreign suppliers.As a consequence, they have to have a very good relationship with them in order tohave their supplies when they are needed. To a large extent, this result is similar to thefindings of Lawrence and Lewis (1996), where they found that a good relationship withsuppliers is a significant factor affecting the successful implementation of JIT inMexico.JIT implementation benefits. The benefits of JIT implementation were measured byasking users their opinion about the benefits obtained from JIT implementation.Table VII summarizes the benefits obtained from JIT implementation of the totalsample rated by JIT companies in the Egyptian industrial sector. A higher ratingindicates high benefits obtained and a lower rating indicates low benefits achieved.The main conclusion drawn from the findings illustrated below is that JITimplementations have had a very significant positive impact on workers.Improvements in the workers? ability to perform their jobs and increased workersparticipation received the highest rating by JIT implementers. To a large extent, thisresult is similar to Norris and Swanson (1994) who reported that worker motivation,job satisfaction, and low rate of absenteeism are associated with the successfulimplementation of JIT philosophy in the US companies.Item Meana,bImproved your ability to perform in your job 3.87Increased workers participation 3.72Improved purchasing function 3.56Increased utilization of people, equipment, materials and parts 3.37Minimized raw material, work-in-process, and finished goods inventory 3.31Increased customer satisfaction 3.24Reduced operations costs 2.99Reduced materials handling costs 2.81Improved quality 2.73Improved quality and timing of received material 2.63Reduced manufacturing lead times 2.51Reduced labor turnover 2.42Improved competitive position 2.40Reduced paper work 2.17Improved co-ordination with suppliers 2.12Improved preventive maintenance 2.09Note:aBased upon a four-point scale, score ?1? for little benefit, ?4? for very much benefit (n = 56);bthe higher the mean, the greater the user satisfaction of itemTable VII.The benefits obtainedfrom JIT implementationreported by JIT

companiesIJOPM25,4364Moreover, it appears from Table VII that improved competitive position was a lesscommonly recognized outcome of the implementation of JIT philosophy, receiving thefourth to lowest rating by JIT users.This result suggests that new managerial tools and philosophies are not used as astrategic philosophy by beginning implementers, such as Egyptian manufacturingcompanies, but it seems to be used as a temporary remedy for business obstacles.In contrast, this is inconsistent with the findings of Wafa and Yasin (1998), whoconcluded that the success with JIT can be achieved in any country when approachedas a strategic philosophy.JIT implementation problems. Table VIII shows that the most importantimplementation problems are:.lack of formal training/education for management and workers; and.lack of cooperation with suppliers, respectively.This concurs with the findings of Billesbach (1991); Mazany (1995); Wafa and Yasin(1998); and Yasin et al. (2001) who found that JIT companies did not have formaltraining for management and workers; did not have efficient cooperation with theirsuppliers; and had less satisfaction with JIT benefits than those firms having them.This result suggests that designing formal training on JIT implementation for bothmanagement and employees is an essential prerequisite for the successfulimplementation of JIT programs whether in developed or less developed countries.Obstacles that impede JIT implementation in non-JIT companiesThe findings in Table IX indicate that about 40.4 percent of companies participating inthe empirical study had not implemented the JIT philosophy. They reported thatlimited knowledge about JIT is the biggest obstacle impeding the implementation ofJIT-based on the point of view of non-JIT companies (the higher level of agreementbetween respondents ? SD 0.19).Testing hypothesesThe first hypothesis focused on the association between human resource modificationefforts and potential benefits obtained from JIT implementation.Problem Mean scoreLack of formal training/education for management 4.73aLack of formal training/education for workers 4.71Lack of cooperation of suppliers in correctly supplied materials 4.61Lack of cooperation of suppliers in timing of supplied materials 4.47Lack of company expertise in JIT 4.30Lack of communication between workers and management 4.01

Management resistance 3.89Employees resistance 3.46A lack of support from top management 3.15Lack of support from production management 3.01Lack of support from material management 2.96Lack of support from supervisor/foreman 2.68Note:aBased on a five-point Likert scale, score ?1? weak problem; ?5? for strong problem (n=56)Table VIII.JIT implementationproblems reported by JITcompaniesJITimplementation365Table X provides a clear support for the hypothesis, where human resourcemodification efforts to be undertaken prior to JIT implementation are significantlyassociated with JIT benefits. It is important to note that the correlation values, whilegenerally significant, indicate high association overall.This result suggests that as manufacturing firms increase their investments inmanufacturing infrastructure (as measured by the human resource modification effortsthat should be undertaken prior to JIT implementation), performance effectiveness isincreased (as measured by the benefits obtained from JIT implementation).H2 examines whether or not there is a difference between non-JIT companiesconcerning the problems that impede the implementation of JIT. Both Kruskal Wallistest and one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a significant differencebetween non-JIT companies concerning supplier relationship problems.An examination of Table XI shows a difference in mean for the relationship obstaclewith suppliers. H2 is partially supported. This finding can be interpreted in the light ofthe fact that chemicals and engineering companies are importing most of their needs fromforeign suppliers; therefore, they are more exposed to late suppliers deliveries than thosefirms (textiles and food companies) that obtain their needs from domestic suppliers.To a large extent, this result is similar to the findings of Alternburg et al. (1999),who reported that one of the conditions before JIT implementation by the automobileindustry is the need to change supplier relationships and purchasing methods.Item Mean scoreaSDbLimited knowledge about JIT 2.88 0.19Supplier relationships problems 2.73 0.69Cost too high 2.11 0.44Successful without JIT implementation 1.98 0.38Not felt to achieve big enough benefits 1.74 0.31

Potential staff attitude problems 1.39 0.27Note:aBased on a three-point scale ?1? for of no significance and ?3? for very significant (n=38);bthestandard deviation presents a measure of agreement among the respondents which means that a highstandard deviation refers to a low level of agreement while a low standard deviation indicates a highlevel of agreement (as in Salaheldin and Francis, 1998)Table IX.Obstacles that impede JITimplementation in Egyptreported by non-JITcompaniesHuman modifications factors PerformanceaWorkersaOperationsaPurchasinga1. Informative modification efforts 0.853*0.693*0.831*0.931*(45) (45) (45) (45)0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0002. Skill modification efforts 0.662*0.929*0.845*0.753*(45) (45) (45) (45)0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0003. Educational modification efforts 0.817*0.861*0.891*0.759*(45) (45) (45) (45)0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Notes:aKendall coefficient of correlation ? (number of observations);*significance at level 0.05Table X.

Relationship betweenhuman modificationefforts and JIT benefitsIJOPM25,4366This result suggests that before the implementation of JIT, the methods of purchasingand inventory management should be modified in order to meet the requirements ofJIT implementation.Conclusion and managerial implicationsMain findingsThe test of hypotheses provides some interesting results about the relationshipbetween human resource modification efforts and JIT success, including the problemsthat impede JIT implementation in the Egyptian industrial sector. The following is asummary of the statistical findings:.As companies increase their investments in human resource modification effortsundertaken in preparation for JIT, the operational efficiency and performanceeffectiveness are increased..Non-JIT companies indicated that the two critical obstacles that hinder JITimplementation are lack of knowledge of JIT and late supplier deliveries..Results show that the successful implementation of JIT in Egyptianmanufacturing firms is possible. The success demonstrated in the Far East,USA and Japan can be achieved in Egypt..The current study provides an indication of significant human modificationfactors that affect the implementation of the JIT philosophy withinmanufacturing companies; while the large number of statistically significantfactors affecting JIT implementation reported by the present study were notreported in previous studies..The survey findings suggested that JIT implementation is more likely to be inthe food, chemicals, engineering and electronic industries; while less likely to befound in other industries. Moreover, the need for implementing the JITphilosophy is likely to be greater when companies are larger and older..Lack of JIT training, education and expertise is identified as a critical problemencountered in the implementation process of the JIT philosophy.Managerial implicationsThis section is devoted to some managerial implications the successful implementationof JIT philosophy in the Egyptian industrial sector.JIT companiesProblems K-WaANOVALimited knowledge about JIT 0.22 0.14*

Supplier relationships problems 0.04 0.01*Cost too high 0.17 0.09*Successful without JIT implementation 0.15 0.17*Not felt to achieve big enough benefits 0.12 0.11*Potential staff attitude problems 0.21 0.23*Note:aUsing Kruskal Wallis and ANOVA;*significant at level 0.05Table XI.Significant levels(p-values) for theproblems that impede JITimplementation scored bynon-JIT companies*JITimplementation367.A very significant implication of the current study is that the Egyptianmanufacturing companies can use the JIT philosophy as a strategic competitiveweapon; if they use it as a strategic philosophy, rather than a temporary solutionfor operations obstacles..Another implication of this study is that manufacturing firms would be advisedto be aware of the connection between human modification efforts that should beundertaken prior to JIT implementation and the successful implementation of theJIT philosophy..Decision makers in manufacturing companies should understand that JIT is notequally effective in all manufacturing environments. It is more effective forrepetitive production with fairly stable demands..One of the main implications of the current study is that the successfulimplementation of JIT hinges on the effective modifications of purchasingmethods and inventory management in order to meet the JIT implementationrequirements. Moreover, open communication between management andworkers should be a rule rather than an exception..Policy makers in the Egyptian industrial sector should pay more attention todomestic suppliers to help overcome unexpected delays when purchasing therequired parts and components from foreign suppliers..Non-implementers of the JIT philosophy can take advantage of the experiences ofJIT implementers, which provide a preview of what they can expect to be thechallenges and the pitfalls they need to avoid when they implement JIT.

.Finally, the research contends that JIT implementation may seem to be an easytask, but this is a very deceiving thought. The problem is not only how toimplement JIT, but how to make it work effectively.RecommendationsIn the light of the findings, the following future studies are believed to be essential for asounder understanding of the implementation of JIT in less developed countries and inEgypt in particular..Similar research should be undertaken concerning the implementation of the JITphilosophy in the private sector..An empirical study is needed to determine how transportation issues affect theuse of JIT purchasing practices..Case studies are needed to present more details regarding JIT implementationprocesses..Further research should be undertaken regarding the connection betweenlogistics and engineering modifications prior to JIT implementation withimprovements in operational performance.Finally, we hope this study opens new dimensions for others to develop more researchin the field, contributing to the knowledge and enhancement of the implementation ofinnovative manufacturing tools and philosophies for the benefit of the developingcountries of the third world.IJOPM25,4368Note1. Firms were identified from two sources: the general organization for industrialization (GOFI)of Egypt and the Egyptian industrial chambers.ReferencesAghazadeh, S. (2003), ?JIT inventory and competition in the global environment: a comparativestudy of American and Japanese values in auto industry?, Cross Cultural Management,Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 29-42.Aladwani, A. (1999), ?Implications of some of the recent improvement philosophies for themanagement of the information systems organization?, Industrial Management and DataSystems, Vol. 99 No. 1, pp. 33-9.Alternburg, K., Griscom, D., Hart, J., Smith, F. and Wohler, G. (1999), ?Just-in-time logisticssupport for the automobile industry?, Production and Inventory Management Journal,Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 59-66.Arnold, U. and Bernard, K. (1989), ?Just-in-time: some marketing issues raised by a popularconcept in production and distribution?, Technovation, Vol. 9, pp. 401-30.

Bamber, C., Sharp, J. and Hides, M. (2000), ?Developing management systems towards integratedmanufacturing: a case study perspective?, Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 11No. 7, pp. 454-61.Billesbach, T. (1991), ?A study of the implementation of just-in-time in the United States?,Production and Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 1-4.Browne, J., Harhen, J. and Shivnan, J. (1998), Production Management Systems: An IntegratedPerspective, Addison-Wesley, London.Celley, A., Clegg, W., Smith, A. and Vonderembse, M. (1986), ?Implementation of JIT in theUnited States?, Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 9-16.Chong, H., White, R. and Prybutok, V. (2001), ?Relationship among organizational support, JITimplementation, and performance?, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 101No. 6, pp. 273-81.Crawford, M. and Cox, F. (1991), ?Addressing manufacturing problems through theimplementation of just-in-time?, Production and Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 32,pp. 33-6.Cua, O., McKone, E. and Schroeder, G. (2001), ?Relationships between implementation of TQM,JIT, and TPM and manufacturing performance?, Journal of Operations Management,Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 675-94.Draper, M. (1995), Managing in the 1990s: Just-In-Time, Department of Trade and Industry,London.Gupta, P. (1990), ?A feasibility study of JIT purchasing implementation in a manufacturingfacility?, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 10 No. 1,pp. 195-204.Gyampah, K. and Gargeya, V. (2001), ?Just-in-time manufacturing in Ghana?, IndustrialManagement & Data Systems, Vol. 101 No. 3, pp. 106-13.Jin, H., Sandra, J. and Philip, J. (1994), ?How do JIT systems affect human resourcesmanagement??, Production and Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 35, 1st quarter,pp. 1-4.Klein, J. (1988), ?The human costs of manufacturing reform?, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 67No. 2, pp. 60-6.JITimplementation369Lawrence, J. and Lewis, H. (1996), ?Understanding the use of just-in-time purchasing in adeveloping country: the case of Mexico?, International Journal of Operations & ProductionManagement, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 68-90.Markham, S. and McCart, D. (1995), ?The road to successful implementation of just-in-timesystems?, Production and Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 36, 3rd quarter, pp. 67-70.

Mazany, P. (1995), ?A case study: lessons from the progressive implementation of just-in-time ina small knitwear manufacturer?, International Journal of Operations & ProductionManagement, Vol. 15 No. 9, pp. 271-88.Mehra, S. and Inman, A. (1992), ?Determining the critical elements of just-in-timeimplementation?, Decision Sciences, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 160-74.Moras, R. and Dieck, A. (1992), ?Industrial application of just-in-time: lessons to be learned?,Production and Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 33, pp. 25-9.Norris, D. and Swanson, R. (1994), ?Just-in-time production systems: a survey of managers?,Production and Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 35, 2nd quarter, pp. 63-6.Ong, N. (1997), ?Productivity improvements for a small-made-to-order-manufacturingenvironment?, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 97 No. 7, pp. 251-7.Petersen, P. (2002), ?The misplaced origin of just-in-time production methods?, ManagementDecision, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 82-8.Ramarapu, N., Mehra, S. and Frolick, N. (1995), ?A comparative analysis and review of JITimplementation research?, International Journal of Operations & Production Management,Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 38-49.Salaheldin, J. (2003), ?TQM strategy implementation in Egypt: a field-force analysis?, The TQMMagazine, Vol. 15 No. 4.Salaheldin, S. and Francis, A. (1998), ?A study on MRP practices in Egyptian manufacturingcompanies?, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18No. 5/6, pp. 588-611.Schermerhorn, J. (1996), Management, 5th ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.Schonberger, R. (1986), World Class Manufacturing: The Lessons of Simplicity Applied, FreePress, New York, NY.Sim, K. (2001), ?An empirical examination of successive incremental improvement techniquesand investment in manufacturing technology?, International Journal of Operations &Production Management, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 373-99.Theng, P. (1993), ?Overall approach to manufacturing management?, ManufacturingManagement, Vol. 2 No. 5, pp. 31-7.Vuppalapati, K., Ahire, S. and Gupta, T. (1995), ?JIT and TQM: a case for joint implementation?,International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 84-94.Wafa, A. and Yasin, M. (1998), ?A conceptual framework for effective implementation of JIT: anempirical investigation?, International Journal of Operations & Production Management,Vol. 18 No. 11, pp. 1111-24.Walley, K. (2000), ?TQM in non-manufacturing SMEs: evidence from the UK farming sector?,International Small Business Journal, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 46-61.

Yasin, M., Wafa, A. and Small, H. (2001), ?Just-in-time implementation in the public sector: anempirical study?, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21No. 9, pp. 1195-204.IJOPM25,4370