Strategies and Success Factors for Overcoming Challenges in TPM Implementation

REVIEWS AND CASE STUDIES

Strategies and success factors forovercoming challenges in TPM

implementation in Indianmanufacturing industry

I.P.S. Ahuja and J.S. KhambaUniversity College of Engineering, Punjabi University, Patiala, India

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this study is to evaluate the challenges before Indian manufacturingorganizations for adapting to proactive total productive maintenance (TPM) initiatives. The aim of thisresearch is to critically examine the factors influencing the implementation of TPM practices in theIndian manufacturing industry, and to devise an overall maintenance strategy for overcomingobstacles to successful TPM implementation.

Design/methodology/approach – The study focuses on systematic identification of obstacles inTPM implementation and working out success factors towards improving manufacturingperformance in Indian industry through strategic TPM initiatives.

Findings – The study highlights the strong potential of TPM implementation initiatives in affectingorganizational performance improvements. The paper reveals that implementing TPM is by no meansan easy task, which is heavily burdened by organizational, cultural, behavioral, technological,operational, financial, and departmental barriers.

Research limitations/implications – The study has been conducted in Indian manufacturingorganizations to formulate the critical success factors and enablers for overcoming obstacles tosuccessful TPM implementation with regard to its preparedness to face global challenges.

Practical implications – The study stresses the need for improving the synergy between themaintenance function and other organizational quality improvement initiatives in the organizations, toestablish maintenance as a competitive strategy for meeting the challenges of a highly competitiveenvironment.

Originality/value – The study highlights the difficulties faced by Indian manufacturingorganizations in their attempt to implement TPM initiatives in order to improve organizationalefficiency.

Keywords Productive maintenance, Organizational performance, Critical success factors,Manufacturing industries, India

Paper type Research paper

IntroductionThe manufacturing industry has experienced an unprecedented degree of change in thelast three decades, involving drastic changes in management approaches, product andprocess technologies, customer expectations, supplier attitudes as well as competitivebehavior (Ahuja et al., 2006). The contemporary dynamic environment has becomehighly challenging and the manufacturing organizations are finding it extremelydifficult to manage competition and consumer expectations. The global marketplacehas witnessed an increased pressure from customers and competitors for greater value

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1355-2511.htm

Strategies andsuccess factors in

TPM

123

Journal of Quality in MaintenanceEngineering

Vol. 14 No. 2, 2008pp. 123-147

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited1355-2511

DOI 10.1108/13552510810877647

from their purchase whether based on quality, faster delivery, and lower cost inmanufacturing as well as service sector (Basu, 2001; George, 2002). The contemporarybusiness environment has become considerably complex and challenging, and as aresult variety of factors influence the manufacturing organization’s ability to competeeffectively. Organizations today compete on several factors such as time, price,technology, innovation, quality, reliability, and information management. Kumar et al.(2006) impress upon the manufacturing organizations to adapt lean and six sigmaprincipals, and business process improvement strategies for achieving dramaticresults in cost, quality and time by focusing on process performance.

The rapidly changing needs of modern manufacturing and the ever increasingglobal competition has emphasized upon the re-examination of the role of improvedmaintenance management towards enhancing organization’s competitiveness (Riis et.al., 1997). It has been realized and well accepted by manufacturing organizations thatthe equipment maintenance and reliability are important strategies that canconsiderably influence the organization’s ability to compete effectively (Madu, 2000).The maintenance processes can be streamlined to eliminate waste and producebreakthrough performance in areas valued by customers (Hammer and Champy, 1993).This has encouraged the manufacturing organizations to adopt Total ProductiveMaintenance (TPM) as a significant process improvement and problem solvingapproach for enhancing the organization’s responsiveness for catering to customerneeds and affecting cost optimization as part of management strategy to increase themarket share and maximize profit. TPM has been accepted as the most promisingstrategy for improving maintenance performance in order to succeed in a highlydemanding market arena (Nakajima, 1988). The TPM implementation methodologyprovides organizations with a guide to fundamentally transform their shop floor byintegrating culture, process, and technology (Moore, 1997).

Total productive maintenanceTotal Productive Maintenance (TPM) is a production-driven improvementmethodology that is designed to optimize equipment reliability and ensure efficientmanagement of plant assets through the use of employee involvement andempowerment, by linking manufacturing, maintenance and engineering functions.Ahuja and Khamba (2006) report that TPM implementation can significantlycontribute towards improvement in organizational behavior in the manufacturingenterprises leading to world class competitiveness. TPM initiatives are focused uponaddressing major losses, and wastes associated with the production systems byaffecting continuous and systematic evaluations of production system, therebyaffecting significant improvements in production facilities (Ravishankar et al., 1992;Gupta et al., 2001, Juric et al., 2006). The main goal of an effective TPM effort is to bringcritical maintenance skilled trades and production workers together (Labib, 1999).There are three ultimate goals of TPM: zero defects, zero accident, and zerobreakdowns (Willmott, 1994; Noon et al., 2000).

The manufacturing organizations in their pursuit of beating the competition in thedemand-driven environments are increasingly adapting proactive strategies like TPMand total quality management (TQM) to achieve fast, focused, and sustainable results.The TQM strategy focuses upon employee empowerment for improving productquality and appropriately complements the TPM focus on employee empowerment for

JQME14,2

124

enhancing production system availability, reliability, and capacity. TPM is aninnovative approach to plant maintenance that is complementary to total qualitymanagement (TQM), just-in-time manufacturing (JIT), total employee involvement (TEI),continuous performance improvement (CPI), and other world-class manufacturingstrategies (Schonberger, 1996; Ollila and Malmipuro, 1999, Cua et al., 2001). Willmott(1994) portraits TPM as a relatively new and practical application of TQM and suggeststhat TPM aims to promote a culture in which operators develop “ownership” of theirmachines, learn much more about them, and in the process realize skilled trades toconcentrate on problem diagnostic and equipment improvement projects.

TPM improves the competitiveness of an organization by providing enhancedequipment availability and utilization while optimizing the maintenance expendituresin the organizations. The evaluation of TPM efficiency can facilitate significantlyenhanced organizational capabilities across variety of dimensions (Wang, 2006). TPMenhances the competitive advantages of improved quality, improved delivery, andincreased flexibility without excessive maintenance investments. TPM initiatives canalso be effectively integrated with other manufacturing management programs likeTQM, JIT, or Cellular Manufacturing to optimize improved performance, andultimately competitiveness (Currie and Seddon, 1992; David, 1995).

The emergence of TPM is intended to bring both production and maintenancefunctions together by a combination of good working practices, team-working andcontinuous improvement (Cooke, 2000). TPM can be defined as a partnership betweenthe maintenance and production organizations to improve product quality, reduce waste,reduce manufacturing cost, increase equipment availability, and improve organization’soverall state of maintenance (Maggard and Rhyne, 1992). TPM permanently improvesthe overall effectiveness of equipment with the active involvement of operators(Hartmann, 1992). TPM has been widely recognized as a strategic weapon for improvingmanufacturing performance by enhancing the effectiveness of production facilities(Dwyer, 1999; Dossenbach, 2006). Wireman (1991) suggests that TPM is maintenanceimprovement strategy that involves all employees in the organization and includeseveryone from top management to the line employee, and it encompasses alldepartments including, maintenance, operations, design engineering, projectengineering, inventory and stores, purchasing, accounting finances, plant management.

TPM embraces series of methods that ensures every piece of equipment in aproduction process is always able to perform its required task. TPM also links togetherall other maintenance and reliability programs together for a new business strategythat focuses on results and changes the work culture along the way. TPM schedulesmaintenance as an integral part of the manufacturing process to increase equipmenteffectiveness, to minimize and eventually eliminate emergency and unscheduledmaintenance. TPM comprises of a company wide equipment maintenance programthat covers the entire equipment life cycle and requires participation by everyemployee (Nakajima, 1988). TPM harnesses the participation of all the employees toimprove production equipment’s availability, performance, quality, reliability, andsafety. TPM endeavors to tap the “hidden capacity” of unreliable and ineffectiveequipment. TPM capitalizes on proactive and progressive maintenance methodologiesand calls upon the knowledge and cooperation of operators, equipment vendors,engineering, and support personnel to optimize machine performance, therebyresulting in elimination of breakdowns, reduction of unscheduled and scheduled


TPM

125

downtime, improved utilization, higher throughput, and better product quality. Thebottom-line achievements of successful TPM implementation initiatives in anorganization include lower operating costs, longer equipment life and lower overallmaintenance costs.

Obstacles to TPM implementationIt has been reported in the literature that TPM implementation is not an easy task byany means. The failure of TPM implementation is due to lack of a support system tofacilitate learning and transform learning into effective diffusion of the practices ofTPM. It has been observed that many of the organizations that attempt to implementTPM initiatives experience difficulties and are not able to achieve the anticipatedbenefits. The failure of an organization to successfully implement a TPM program hasbeen attributed to the various obstacles including lack of management support andunderstanding, lack of sufficient training, failure to allow sufficient time for theevolution (Bakerjan, 1994). Some of the prominent problems in TPM implementationinclude partial implementation of TPM, overly optimistic expectations, lack of awell-defined routine for attaining the objectives of implementation (equipmenteffectiveness), cultural resistance to change, lack of training and education, lack oforganizational communication, and implementation of TPM to conform to societalnorms rather than for its instrumentality to achieve world class manufacturing(Crawford et al., 1988; Becker, 1993).

Another significant contributor for failure of TPM implementation program is theorganization’s inability to obviate resistance to change. The resistance to change takes anumber of forms, that is, reluctance of individuals to change roles (Riis et al., 1997; Cooke,2000), inability to create dissatisfaction with the present situation (reason to change)(Maggard and Rhyne, 1992; Ireland and Dale, 2001) and inability to changeorganizational roles and culture (Patterson et al., 1995; Lawrence, 1999). Bamber et al.(1999) has conducted a study aimed at discovering the factors affecting the successfulimplementation of TPM at UK manufacturing small to medium-size enterprise (SME).Davis (1997) has outlined various reasons for TPM failure within UK manufacturingorganizations including lack of commitment of top management, deployment ofinexperienced consultants, lack of structure, failure to implement change on the shopfloor, lack of education and training for employees, lack of employee involvement, andpoor structure to support the TPM initiatives. McAdam and Duffner (1996) describe thatmany issues arise when trying to implement TPM in a union environment. Workers fearthat the only drive is to improve production efficiency, reduce labor, and increaseemployee work load. Many operators don’t want additional responsibility and are happywith the situation the way it is. In addition the skilled trades enjoy feeling indispensableand think that the autonomous maintenance activity threatens their jobs.

Moreover Cooke (2000) has attributed the failure of TPM implementation programto the inability of management to holistically implement the TPM practices at theworkplace and highlights that serious deviations have been observed betweenofficially laid out TPM policies and actual practices employed at workplace.

Success factors for successful TPM implementationTPM is a result of this corporate focus on making better use of available resources.TPM literature presents many success criteria for TPM implementation. In order to

JQME14,2

126

realize the true potential of TPM and ensure successful TPM implementation, TPMgoals and objectives need to be fully integrated into the strategic and business plans ofthe organization because TPM affects the entire organization and is not limited toproduction. For TPM to be successful, the improvement process must be recognized asbenefiting both the organization and the worker (Robinson and Ginder, 1995). Lyckeand Akersten (2000) have suggested that careful, thorough planning and preparationare keys to successful company-wide implementation of TPM and so is seniormanagement’s understanding and belief in the concept. Bohoris et al. (1995) haveemphasized upon affecting changes in the management structure, focusing oncontinuous production system improvements, managing synergic cooperation ofproduction and maintenance, deployment of effective developed computerizedmaintenance management system (CMMS) and gradual implementation of TPM ona handful of machines at a given time as key contributors towards successful TPMimplementation. Hansson et al. (2003) have emphasized upon effectively managingorganizational change for enhancing organization’s performance for strategic survivalin the competitive environment.

Groote (1995) proposes a maintenance performance evaluation approach based on aquality audit and quantifiable maintenance performance indicators. He suggests thatthe maintenance function effectiveness must be defined through relative economic andtechnical ratios, to permit the maintenance manager to follow the evolution ofmaintenance performance and to make decisions necessary for improved maintenancemanagement. Leblanc (1995) recommends the postulates for realizing the true potentialof TPM including evaluating cost savings from TPM can be predicted and measured,cross- functional teams integrated to enhance the value of TPM, and identification andmitigation of the root cause of equipment problems effectively. Fredendall et al. (1997)emphasize that a TPM development program should typically emphasize among otherthings the leadership role of top management in launching and implementing TPM,establishment of TPM policies, goals, and master plan and communicating these toeveryone in the organization, and building a system for training and employeeinvolvement. The commitment of top management in preparing a suitableenvironment for TPM’s introduction and in planning and coordinating for itsimplementation is considered crucial to TPM’s success. Hutchins (1998) has advocatedfor making considerable efforts for recognizing teams and enabling them to displaytheir work for successful TPM implementation.

However, there has not been any reference to strategic initiatives for overcoming theobstacles to successful TPM implementation in the Indian context. Thus the presentstudy assumes significance since it emphasizes upon evolution of key success factorsfor overcoming the obstacles to TPM implementation in the Indian manufacturingindustry.

Challenges for TPM implementation in Indian manufacturing industryAs the organizations across the globe have faced stiff cut-throat competition in the lastthree decades, the Indian industry too could not escape the brunt of globalization.Indian manufacturing industry has also witnessed irrepressible competition in therecent times, predominantly due to the entry of multinational companies in the wake ofliberalization, since early 1990’s. Owing to opening up of the Indian economy frommerely a regulated economy, the manufacturing industry has been faced with uphill


TPM

127

task of competing with the best in the world. The intense competition has beenwitnessed in terms of low costs, improved quality and products with high performance,competition (Chandra and Sastry, 1998). Moreover shorter lead times, shorterinnovation times and reduced inventories have lead to increasing demands on theorganization’s preparedness, adaptability and versatility.

Traditionally, Indian manufacturing organizations have suffered from inherentdeficiencies like poor responsiveness to changing market scenarios, low productivity,poor quality, poor cost effectiveness of production systems, stubborn organizationalcharacter and structures, uncertain policy regimes, low skill and knowledge base ofemployees, low production automation, non-motivating work environments, highcustomer complaints, high utility rates, high wastages associated with productionsystems, high labor rigidity, high internal taxes, and infrastructural glitches. TheIndian industry is faced with the challenge of adopting cost effective manufacturingstrategies for staying competitive. While implementing effective TPM programs, theIndian Manufacturing organizations have often been plagued with teething problemsand challenges like difficulties to understand business economics, reluctance tochanging practices, vague worker’s apprehensions, inability to realize the same level ofbenefits as reaped by developed countries by imitating the TPM implementationprocedures and practices adopted abroad. Thus Indian manufacturing organizationsneed to shed the sluggish character and move forward aggressively to develop adaptproactive processes and practices for overcoming the inherent deficiencies inmanufacturing systems for harnessing distinct competencies in comparison to theirglobal competitors. The present study critically examines the factors influencing theimplementation of TPM practices in Indian manufacturing industry. Currently manymodels are undergoing failures. In this scenario this study is relevant.

MethodologyThe study has been carried out in the medium and large scale manufacturingorganizations in the country that have successfully implemented TPM or are in theprocess of implementing TPM, to study the TPM implementation issues andachievements realized as a result of strategic TPM implementation. The methodologyfor the study has been depicted in Figure 1. In this study, a reasonably large number ofmanufacturing organizations (80 organizations) have been extensively surveyed, toascertain contributions made by TPM initiatives in the Indian manufacturingindustries towards realization of manufacturing performance enhancements. It hasbeen observed that though about 300 odd organizations are registered with “TPM ClubIndia” for TPM implementation, but only about 55 per cent (about 165 organizations) ofthe organizations have made reasonably significant interventions regarding adaptingTPM initiatives in a serious manner, while rest of the organizations have yet to made ahead-start regarding effective TPM implementation. It is pertinent to mention that theorganizations involved the study have at-least two years of experience regarding TPMimplementation. Thus a total of 80 responses regarding the “TPM Questionnaire” inthe present study, represents about 49 per cent of the total number of organizationspracticing the TPM principals rigorously. This can be treated as a representativesample of the Indian Industry.

In order to evaluate the critical obstacles hampering successful TPMimplementation in Indian manufacturing industry, and evolving success factors

JQME14,2

128

contributing to successful TPM implementation, a detailed “TPM Questionnaire” hasbeen designed. The approach has been directed towards justification of TPMimplementation for its support to competitive manufacturing in Indian industries. Thequestionnaire survey technique has been deployed in the present study for seekinginformation on the issues related to scrutinizing barriers to effective TPMimplementation and developing an understanding of success factors and enablersfor successful TPM implementation in the Indian manufacturing industry. Foreffectively conducting the survey, the TPM Questionnaire has been designed throughextensive literature review (Maggard et al., 1989; Ravishankar et al., 1992; Kodali andChandra, 2001; McKone et al., 2001; Seth and Tripathi, 2005; Shamsuddin et al., 2005),and validated through peer review from academicians, consultants, TPM councilors,and practitioners (TPM Co-coordinators) from the industry. To ensure the relevanceand the effectiveness of the questions to the manufacturing industry, the questionnairehas been pre-tested on a representative sample of industry. The suggestions from thepeers, consultants, TPM councilors, senior executives from the industries andacademicians have been incorporated to make the questionnaire relevant to thepurpose and bring out key outcomes as a result of strategic TPM implementation.

The manufacturing organizations across the country were first screened, and anindustrial database was created for the purpose of mailing the “TPM Questionnaire”.

Figure 1.Methodology employed

for the study


TPM

129

The “TPM questionnaires” were mailed to the selected organizations, and weresubsequently contacted through postal mail, E-mail and telephonically to explain thecontext of the present research work, its significance and to clarify any queries/doubtsto facilitate comprehensive and clear-cut responses to the TPM Questionnaires. Thetarget respondents for the “TPM Questionnaire” have been the organizations that havemade serious interventions in the field of TPM and realized significant achievementsthrough adoption of strategic TPM initiatives. The respondents of the “TPMQuestionnaire” have been the top brass of management executives that includedseveral Vice presidents, heads of operations, heads of quality assurance, generalmanagers (GM), heads of maintenance, head – process engineering, TPM coordinators,heads of improvement management, management system manager-TPM, chiefmanagers, manufacturing managers, GM – TPM, head TPM, GM technical, qualitymanagers, TPM secretaries and President operations etc. The responses to the TPMquestionnaire have been subsequently compiled and analyzed critically to ascertain thebarriers to TPM implementation and evolving success factors, enablers for successfulTPM implementation. The TPM questionnaire serves the purpose of revealing theexploits of Indian entrepreneurs with TPM practices.

Barriers to TPM implementation in Indian manufacturing industryThe literature review has revealed that maintenance and human factors have oftenbeen treated as neglected areas in traditional Indian manufacturing organizations.Traditionally, Indian manufacturing organizations have suffered from inherentdeficiencies, having often been plagued with teething problems and inherentdeficiencies like poor responsiveness to changing market scenarios, low productivity,poor quality, poor cost effectiveness of production systems, stubborn organizationalcharacter and structures, uncertain policy regimes, low skill and knowledge base ofemployees, low production automation, non-motivating work environments, and highcustomer complaints (Bhadury and Mandal, 1998). With regards to Indian industry,maintenance has often been a disregarded issue. Maintenance has been treated as anunnecessary evil and seen as an uncontrollable black box in the operation anddevelopment of manufacturing systems. Maintenance has been considered as a lowprofile job with its scope limited to breakdown and preventive maintenance (Tripathy,2005). Due to protected and controlled economy, Indian executives did not pay muchattention towards equipment related failures and losses. Maintenance has been viewedas a reactive problem fixing and an operating expense to be minimized (Seth andTripathi, 2005). The potential of maintenance performance improvement towardsgaining competitive advantage has been overlooked for long.

Owing to general apathy of Indian manufacturing organizations towards affectingmanufacturing performance improvement through strategic maintenance initiatives,there has been sluggish growth in the Industry and Indian entrepreneurs have found itextremely hard to compete effectively in highly dynamic global marketplace. However,of late, Indian entrepreneurs have realized and understood the true potential formaintenance function towards enhancing manufacturing performance, and majorproactive maintenance initiatives have been adapted in the manufacturingorganizations, since early 1990s, due to the burgeoning pressure due tomulti-national corporations, rapid product development, increased qualityconsciousness, cost optimizations, waste reductions and lead time optimization.

JQME14,2

130

Over a decade, India’s has affirmed its stern determination to acquire thecapabilities that will add to its competitiveness and enable it to be counted amongother recognized global players (Sahay et al., 2006). The Indian executives haveunderstood the significance of making investments in TPM initiatives for improvingthe competitiveness of the manufacturing organizations. In the last one and a halfdecades, leading Indian manufacturing entrepreneurs have taken proactive initiativesto imbibe state-of-art maintenance improvement initiatives and philosophies in theorganizations to realize enhanced manufacturing performance (Ahuja et al., 2004).TPM has gained wide acceptance in Indian industry as prime mover for increasingcompetitiveness (Bhadury and Mandal, 1998; Sahay et al., 2000). TPM is being lookedupon as a potential profit source, capable of leading the organizations to meet thechallenges posed by globalization.

In the quest for achieving manufacturing excellence through maintenanceimprovement initiatives, the leading Indian manufacturing organizations have madesincere efforts to adopt proactive TPM implementation initiatives in the last onedecade. However due to passive organizational approaches and the colonial roots of themanufacturing environment, these organizations have faced a lot of difficulties andbarriers in effectively adapting to aggressive TPM principles. The systematicidentification and recognition of barriers to effective TPM implementation programcan lead to fostering of a favorable environment in the organization and helping theorganizations to develop focused TPM implementation program for successfullyovercoming the obstacles for TPM implementation in Indian manufacturing industry.

The present study highlights the difficulties faced by Indian manufacturingorganizations in their quest to effectively implement TPM initiatives in the pursuit ofimproving organizational efficiency. In this regard, a detailed survey of the Indianmanufacturing industry has been conducted and about 80 manufacturing units havebeen analyzed for ascertaining the obstacles affecting the success of TPMimplementation program. The various obstacles hindering the organization’s questfor achieving excellence through TPM initiatives have been classified asorganizational, cultural, behavioral, technological, operational, financial, anddepartmental difficulties or barriers.

The organizational obstacles affecting the successful TPM implementation inIndian manufacturing organizations include:

. Organization’s inability to bring about cultural transformations.

. Ineffectiveness of top management to holistically implement changemanagement initiatives.

. Inability of managements to convince stubborn unions about true potential ofTPM.

. Organization’s inability to change the mindset of people to obtain totalinvolvement.

. Lack of commitment from top management and communication regarding TPM.

. Wrong pace of TPM implementation and focus on too many improvementinitiatives.

. Lack of understanding of TPM concepts and principles.

. Inadequacies of master plan in the absence of focused approach.


TPM

131

. Lack of awareness of TPM concepts and principles among the employees.

. Middle management’s resistance towards offering empowerment andrecognition of bottom level operators due to fears of loss of authority and respect.

. Inability to strictly force laid out TPM practices and standards.

. Organization’s inability to enhance employee competencies towards job.

. Alienation of employees from growth and sustainability endeavors of theorganization.

. Inadequate services for the employees in most organizations.

. Absence of mechanisms to critically evaluate and monitor maintenanceperformance metrics like overall equipment effectiveness (OEE), return on netassets (RONA), and return on capital employed (ROCE).

. Inadequacies of reward and recognition mechanisms in the organizations.

The cultural obstacles affecting the successful TPM implementation in Indianmanufacturing organizations include:

. Lack of professionalism including lack of consistency, resistant to changes, poorquality consciousness coming in the way of organizational transformations.

. Inability to align employees to organizational goals and objectives.

. Strong unions, rigid mindsets, non flexible approaches, non adaptable attitudes.

. Stubborn attitudes regarding existing organization, knowledge and beliefs.

. Inability of top management to motivate employees to “Unlearn to learn”.

. Concern of employees with “What’s in it for me” attitude.

. Low skill-base also a deterrent to accept change at the workplace.

. Marginal employee participation in the organization towards decision making.

. Compromising attitude on quality of production and lack of quality, reworkaccepted as part of production activities.

The behavioral obstacles affecting the successful TPM implementation in Indianmanufacturing organizations include:

. Resistance from employees to adapt to the new concept and changes.

. Occasional difficulties to succeed as Cross Functional Teams (CFT).

. Lack of motivation on part of employees to contribute effectively towardsorganization development and sustainability efforts.

. Functional orientation and loyalty.

. Inadequate efforts towards multi-skilling and periodic skill updation ofemployees.

. Lack of willingness on part of operators to learn more regarding the functioningof production systems.

. Resistance to change due to job insecurity and apprehension of loss ofspecialization due to technological improvements.

JQME14,2

132

The technological obstacles affecting the successful TPM implementation in Indianmanufacturing organizations include:

. Little emphasis to improve the production capabilities beyond the designcapabilities.

. Little effort made to assess and improve the reliability of production system andensure the faster and dependable delivery.

. Highly inadequate predictive maintenance (Pd. M.) infrastructural facilities inthe organization.

. Highly inadequate computerized maintenance management systems (CMMS)infrastructural facilities in the organization.

. Non realization of inefficiencies of production system, losses, wastes leading tolack of impetus for affecting manufacturing improvements.

. Poor flexibilities offered by production systems due to long set up andchangeover times.

. Less educated workforce due to lack of training on new technologies.

. Lack of training opportunities and skills regarding quality improvementtechniques and problem diagnostics.

. Little emphasis on maintenance prevention initiatives regarding possibilities ofimprovements in the existing products and manufacturing systems.

. Poor energy efficiency of the production systems.

The operational obstacles affecting the successful TPM implementation in Indianmanufacturing organizations include:

. General acceptance of reasonably high levels of defects associated withproduction system with little emphasis on realization of world-class 6 sproduction philosophies.

. Absence and lack of implementation of standard operating procedures.

. Little empowerment to operators to take equipment related or improvementdecisions.

. Absence of planned maintenance (PM) check-sheets to conduct routinemaintenance jobs efficiently.

. Apathy and inability of the top management to implement safe work practices atthe workplace.

. Resistance from production operators to perform basic autonomous maintenancetasks.

. Poor and non encouraging workplace environments in the absence of 5 Simplementation.

. Emphasis on restoration of equipment conditions rather than prevention offailure.

. Little motivation or time available for affecting process related improvementswhile the major focus of the organization is on meeting routine productiontargets by any means.


TPM

133

The financial obstacles affecting the successful TPM implementation in Indianmanufacturing organizations include:

. Requirement of significant additional resources in the beginning of TPMimplementation program with moderate performance improvements in initialstages of TPM.

. Inability of top management to support improvement initiatives due to resourcecrunch.

. Absence of appropriate motivating reward and recognition mechanisms.

The departmental obstacles affecting the successful TPM implementation in Indianmanufacturing organizations include:

. Low synergy and coordination between maintenance and productiondepartments.

. Reluctance of production operators to accept autonomous maintenanceinitiatives as part of their routine jobs.

. Existence of firm divisions between the maintenance and production departmentresponsibilities.

. A general lack of trust by maintenance department in the productive operator’scapabilities for performing basic autonomous maintenance tasks.

Success factors and enablers for successful TPM implementationThe strategic implications of quality and maintenance to improve competitivenesshave been well understood by Indian business captains in the beginning of last decade(Tripathi, 2005). In the present context, Indian manufacturing organizations have risento the occasion and progressed to envisage efficient maintenance policies helping theenterprise to enhance production system reliability, cost effectiveness of productionoperations, thereby enabling the organizations to realize competencies for mitigatingthe challenges posed by global competition. The role that effective maintenance playsin cost effective manufacturing has received a greater attention in the recent times.

Bamber et al. (1999) has outlined a generic model indicating factors affecting thesuccessful implementation of TPM in the UK manufacturing small-to-medium sizeenterprises (SME) which include alignment to mission, the existing organization, theinvolvement of people, an implementation plan, knowledge and beliefs, time allocationfor implementation, management commitment, the motivation of management andworkforce, and measures of performance. The experience of TPM implementation inthe UK has shown that the key factors for successful implementations are to approachTPM realistically; developing a practical plan and employing program and projectmanagement principles; accept that TPM will take a long time to spread across thecompany and change existing maintenance culture; be determined to keep going, put inplace, train and develop a network of TPM co-coordinators that will promote andsupport TPM activities every day; support TPM co-coordinators with time andresources, plus senior level back up; put in place relevant measures of performance andcontinually monitor and publicize benefits achieved in financial terms (Davis, 1997).Davis and Willmott (1999) have recommended two significant enablers for successfulimplementation of TPM initiatives in the manufacturing organizations:

JQME14,2

134

(1) A structured approach which uses a number of tools and techniques to achievehighly effective plants and production equipment and to measure itseffectiveness; and

(2) A philosophy which is based upon the empowerment and encouragement offactory floor-based personnel from all areas.

It has been observed that Indian manufacturing organizations have faced strongresistance from within, and have suffered due to lacking organizational cultures,inappropriate maintenance improvement initiatives, low skill and knowledge ofoperators, inadequate resources, and poor work environments. Indian manufacturingorganizations need to take appropriate initiatives to overcome the obstacles mentionedearlier to ensure the realization of true potential of TPM. Thus it becomes imperativefor the Indian organizations to evolve proactive strategies for indigenous TPMimplementation program for the Indian industry. There is an urgent need forestablishing and holistically adopting key enablers and success factors in theorganizations to ensure the success of TPM implementation program by harnessingthe participation of all the employees in the organization. The key enablers and successfactors for successful implementation of TPM in Indian manufacturing industry can beclassified into six categories:

(1) Top management contributions.

(2) Cultural transformations.

(3) Employee involvement.

(4) Traditional and proactive maintenance policies.

(5) Training and education.

(6) Maintenance prevention and focused production system improvements.

The enablers and success factors for TPM Implementation in the Indianmanufacturing organization have been depicted in Figure 2. The strategic issuesrelated to various TPM enablers and success factors have been explained using anIshikawa diagram. It is strongly believed that the holistic adaptation of the laid outenablers and success factors can obviate the ill effects of obstacles to TPMimplementation and can strategically lead the organization to harness competencies forsustained competitiveness.

The successful implementation of TPM requires top management support,commitment and involvement. Top management needs to have a strong commitmentto the TPM implementation program and should go all-out for evolving mechanismsfor multi-level communication to all employees explaining the importance and benefitsof the whole program, and whole heartedly propagating the TPM benefits to theorganization, employees by linking TPM to the overall organizational strategy andobjectives. The first course of action is to establish a strategic direction for TPM. Thiscan be achieved by evolving appropriate TPM policy and Master-plan towards TPMimplementation in the organization. This must be followed by evolving structuredTPM secretariat in line with organization’s policies involving employees from variousorganization functions and hierarchical levels. The management contributions towardssuccessful TPM implementations can include revising business plans to include TPMgoals, affecting appropriate cultural transformations in organizational culture,


TPM

135

Figure 2.Enablers and successfactors for TPMimplementation in theorganization

JQME14,2

136

building strong success stories for promoting motivation for TPM implementations,communicating the TPM goals to the entire organization, providing adequate financialresources for affecting business improvements, promoting cross-functional working inthe organization, providing training and skill enhancements for production andmaintenance workers, evolving reward and incentive mechanisms for promotingproactive maintenance, supporting changes and improvements in the workplace,removing barriers related to middle level management and enhancinginter-department synergy in the organization.

The biggest challenge before the organization is to be able to make radicaltransformation in the organization’s culture for ensuring overall employeeparticipation towards the maintenance and manufacturing performanceimprovement through TPM initiatives. For long, Indian organizations have beenstrongly resisting any changes at the workplace. Thus focused and concerted effortshave to be made by the top management to bring about motivating organizationculture by creating awareness to the employees about the true potential of TPM and bycommunicating to the employees about the contributions of TPM towards theemployees in particular. In this regard, organizations should go in for “union buy-in”,since by roping in employee’s union representatives in the TPM implementationplanning and execution, many of the employee behavioral barriers and obstacles toTPM implementation can be appropriately addressed. The unions can directly beconvinced that the affected employees will be helped by developing additional skillsthat make them more valuable to the organization and TPM can effectively be used tocreate a more multi-skilled workplace, which usually improves employee job security.This practice can effectively help the top management to foster successful TPMimplementation program in the organization while avoiding the misconceptions aboutmyths regarding TPM in the organization. Moreover, many other strategic initiativescan also be successfully deployed in the organizations for motivating and aligning theemployees to the organizational goals and objectives of growth and sustainabledevelopment for meeting the global corporate challenges. These include evolvingmechanisms for employee empowerment, recognition of efforts made by the employeestowards the organizational performance improvement, evolving reward and incentivemechanisms acceptable to all employees, making efforts for improving the skill andknowledge base of all the employees and promoting cross-functionality betweenvarious organization functions and departments. The strategic issues for achievingcultural transformations in manufacturing organizations have been depicted inFigure 3. The holistic deployment of these initiatives can go a long way in improvingthe much needed employee involvement for successful TPM implementation in theorganization.

In order to ensure the alignment of employees towards the organization’s goals andobjectives towards a sustainable TPM implementation program, an appropriateunderstanding of underlying TPM principles and strategies must be provided toemployees at all levels in the organization. Total employee involvement is indeed apre-requite to successful TPM implementation and can be ensured by enhancing thecompetencies of employees towards the jobs, evolving the environment of equipmentand system ownership by the employees, adequate employee counseling, union buy-in,effective appropriate suggestions schemes and deploying encouraging and safe workenvironment in the organizations.


TPM

137

Figure 3.Strategic issues forachieving culturaltransformations inorganizations

JQME14,2

138

Moreover it has been observed that for successful TPM implementation, theorganizations must harness competencies for improving the traditional maintenanceperformance in the organization. In this regards, the organizations need to developstandard work practices and safe operating procedure covering entire range ofproduction systems, and also need to ensure holistic implementation of laid outprocedures by motivated and competent workforce, since it has been observed thatmost of the failures of TPM programs can be attributed to the failure of theorganization to observe and maintain the standard operating procedures forproduction systems and other business functions. The organizations need to evolveprocedures for collecting and analyzing data related to the manufacturing systemperformance and focus upon affecting continuous improvements in manufacturingperformance by continuously affecting production system improvements. Theorganizations must impress upon addressing the problems related to the productionsystem by focusing upon the root causes of the problems, rather than emphasizingupon mere restorations. Moreover, the organizations must make concerted efforts toadopt state-of-art maintenance initiatives like predictive maintenance andcomputerized maintenance management systems in order to enhance themanufacturing performance through contemporary proactive maintenanceimprovement initiatives. Finally the organization needs to evolve and implementstrategic TPM implementation initiatives for improving the manufacturingperformance. To begin with, the organization needs to demonstrate the truepotential of TPM by laying down and communicating exhaustive TPM policy andmaster-plan, establishing organization structure for TPM deployment, and focusingTPM initiatives at critical model machines, thereby creating an environment ofacceptability towards TPM practices in the organization. This should be followed byhorizontal TPM deployment throughout the organization. The various issues related toholistic TPM implementation should be holistically followed in the organization forrealizing the true potential of TPM including autonomous maintenance activities,focused improvement to make equipment more efficient, planned maintenance for themaintenance department, quality maintenance activities, technical training inequipment maintenance and operation, a system for increasing the efficiency ofadministrative and support functions, an early equipment management program, anda system for management of safety and environmental issues.

The success of the organization in fully realizing the benefits through effectiveimplementation of traditional and proactive maintenance initiatives including TPM iscritically dependent upon the competencies of the employees towards the job.Therefore adequate training and education for employees at all levels should be treatedas key strategic initiative for successful TPM implementation. The employees must beprovided with not only technical job related skills and competencies, but also need tobe well equipped with quality improvement and behavioral training for changing themind set of employees from “I operate, you inspect, you maintain” to “I produce, Iinspect, I maintain”. The training objectives must include the systematic developmentof the knowledge, skill and attitude required by an individual to adequately perform agiven job. The top management responsibility in this regard becomes identification oftraining needs, setting training targets, training plan, preparation of training calendar,designing of training programs and material, execution of training and evaluation oftraining effectiveness. An overview of strategic skill enhancement training


TPM

139

methodologies to be deployed by manufacturing organizations has been outlined inFigure 4. The top management must endeavor to train and develop the employeecompetencies by updating their skill, knowledge and attitude to enable higherproductivity and achieve highest standards of quality, to eliminate product defect,equipment failure (breakdowns) and accidents, to develop multi skilled work force, andto create a sense of pride and belonging among all employees. The results of an

Figure 4.Skill enhancementtraining methodologies

JQME14,2

140

effective education and training program will include improvement in employeecompetencies, reduction in absenteeism, idle hours, wastage/scrap and breakdowns,zero accidents, and increase in number of multi-skilled workmen and number ofkaizens.

Further, the reliability of success factors and enablers in achieving success throughstrategic TPM implementation programs can be evaluated by deploying KeyPerformance Indices ‘KPI’s for assessing the manufacturing performance. KPI’s arewidely used within industry to measure specific parameters across all the classes ofmetrics. The strategic KPI’s should be adopted and appropriately deployed forassessing the success of TPM implementation programs. Table I describes thestrategic KPI’s associated with the total productive maintenance performance forassessing and improving organizational profitability. KPI’s are necessary to establishobjectives, measure performance and reinforce positive behaviors. The comparison ofthe current maintenance performance level must be made against future maintenanceperformance level to evaluating the strategic impact of TPM implementation program.The results of the TPM program should be realistically explored and shared with theemployees so as to improve the employee satisfaction, motivation, and ensuringenhanced employee participation and organizational contributions in the future too.

Finally the concerted efforts should be made for affecting manufacturing systemperformance improvements through emphasizing upon maintenance preventioninitiatives and enhancing focused production system improvements by fosteringcompetencies related to production facilities by deploying feedback from customer andvarious departments, focusing upon learning from existing equipments to newsystems, incorporating design related improvements, improving safety at workplace,improving workplace organization through focused 5S initiatives, and integratingTPM with other performance improvement initiatives.

ConclusionsIt has been revealed from the research that traditional Indian manufacturingorganizations have somewhat struggled in the past, while attempting to implementstrategic proactive TPM initiatives and practices, since it needs to bring aboutsignificant cultural transformations in the organization for changing the mind sets ofthe employees. The study critically examines various obstacles affecting the successfulimplementation of TPM in Indian manufacturing organizations. The difficulties facedby the organizations have been categorized into organizational, cultural, behavioral,technological, operational, financial, and departmental obstacles. The issues related tovarious obstacles have been critically analyzed to evolve strategic enablers and successfactors for successful TPM implementation program for Indian industry. Nevertheless,it has also been revealed by the study that successful implementation of strategic TPMinitiatives can be realistically achieved in an Indian manufacturing enterprise bybringing out successful cultural transformations and ensuring the whole heartedcommitments by the top management.

In order to ensure the successful implementation of TPM initiatives and practices inthe challenging Indian manufacturing environments, the organizations must be willingto foster an environment that is willing to support change in the workplace, and createsupport for TPM concepts. The top management’s contributions for successful TPMimplementation have been found to be highly critical and successful managers must


TPM

141

Au

ton

omou

sm

ain

ten

ance

Fai

lure

s(B

/ds)

du

eto

poo

rJH

(Nos

)Q

ual

ity

def

ects

du

eto

poo

rJH

(Nos

)S

pil

l-ov

erof

pro

du

cts

(not

hin

gon

floo

r)A

ccid

ents

du

eto

poo

rJH

(Nos

)N

o.of

dry

-mac

hin

es(z

ero

leak

age

No)

Un

safe

pla

ces

rect

ified

(Nos

)T

otal

No.

ofJH

acti

vit

y(C

LIR

)(N

os)

JHO

PL

imp

lem

ente

d(N

os)

Def

ects

rect

ified

(wh

ite

tag

sre

mov

ed)

JHtr

ain

ing

sess

ion

sco

nd

uct

ed(N

os)

Def

ects

rect

ified

(red

tag

sre

mov

ed)

JHKaizens

reg

iste

red

(Nos

)C

ircl

em

eeti

ng

sco

nd

uct

ed(N

os)

JHKaizens

imp

lem

ente

d(N

os)

Foc

use

dim

pro

vem

ent

Ov

eral

leq

uip

men

tef

fici

ency

(OE

E-

%)

WIP

inv

ento

ry(d

ays)

Pro

du

ctio

np

ersh

ift

WIP

inv

ento

ry(R

s.L

acs)

Lab

our

pro

du

ctiv

ity

*(q

ty/m

ansh

ift)

(Nos

)T

otal

Kaizen

reg

iste

red

((N

os)

Pro

du

ctio

nco

st(d

irec

t)(R

s.la

cs)

Tot

alKaizen

com

ple

ted

(Nos

)P

rod

uct

ion

cost

(OH

)(R

s.L

acs)

Kaizen

reg

iste

red

(hor

izon

tal

dep

loy

men

t)T

otal

loss

tim

e(h

rs)

Kaizen

com

ple

ted

(hor

izon

tal

dep

loy

men

t)P

lan

ned

mai

nte

nan

ceT

he

nu

mb

erof

eqp

t.fa

ilu

res

occu

rred

(Nos

)T

otal

cou

nte

rmea

sure

imp

lem

ente

d(N

os)

Rep

eate

db

reak

dow

ns

(rec

urr

ence

)(N

os)

Tot

alP

MKaizen

imp

lem

ente

d(N

os)

Fai

lure

sin

equ

ipm

ent

du

eto

poo

rJH

(Nos

)L

oss

ofp

rod

uct

ion

du

eto

fail

ure

s(H

rs)

Fai

lure

sin

equ

ipm

ent

du

eto

poo

rP

M(N

os)

Oil

con

sum

pti

onq

uan

tity

Fai

lure

sin

equ

ipm

ent

du

eto

poo

rd

esig

n(N

os)

Sp

ares

con

sum

pti

on–

qu

anti

tyF

ailu

res

ineq

pt.

du

eto

poo

rsp

are

qu

alit

y(N

os)

Sp

ares

con

sum

pti

on–

val

ue

Fai

lure

sin

eqp

t.d

ue

top

oor

skil

l/ed

uca

tion

(Nos

)T

otal

mai

nte

nan

ceco

st(i

ncl

ud

ing

cost

ofou

tsid

ela

bou

r/re

pai

rs,

mat

eria

ls,

spar

es)

MT

BF

(mea

nti

me

bet

wee

nfa

ilu

res)

(Hrs

)T

rain

ing

sess

ion

sh

eld

for

dev

elop

ing

mu

lti-s

kill

edte

chn

icia

nM

TT

R(m

ean

tim

eto

rest

ore)

(Hrs

)N

um

ber

ofm

ult

i-sk

ille

dte

chn

icia

ns

PM

,T

BM

,C

BM

:ac

tiv

itie

sat

ten

ded

/pla

nn

edO

ne

poi

nt

less

ons

imp

lem

ente

dM

ach

ines

un

der

pre

dic

tiv

em

ain

ten

ance

(Nos

)D

efec

tsd

ue

top

oor

inp

ut

qu

alit

y(N

os)

Tot

alre

dta

gs

rem

oved

(cu

mu

lati

ve)

(Nos

)D

ue

toR

M(N

os)

Qu

alit

yim

pro

vem

ent

Pro

cess

qu

alit

yd

efec

ts(P

cs)

Du

eto

tool

san

dfi

xtu

res

(Nos

)V

alu

eof

pro

cess

qu

alit

yd

efec

ts(R

s.L

acs)

Du

eto

cutt

ing

tool

s(N

os)

Rew

ork

edd

efec

tsq

uan

tity

(Pcs

)Kaizens

imp

lem

ente

d(N

os)

Rew

ork

edd

efec

tsv

alu

e(R

s.L

acs)

Kaizens

un

der

imp

lem

enta

tion

(Nos

)C

ust

omer

com

pla

ints

(Nos

)C

oun

term

easu

res

imp

lem

ente

d(N

os)

Zer

od

efec

tp

rod

n.

mac

hin

es(N

os)

On

ep

oin

tle

sson

sfo

rq

ual

ity

edu

cati

onim

ple

men

ted

(Nos

)Z

ero

def

ect

pro

du

cts

(Nos

)W

ork

inp

roce

ss(D

ays)

(continued

)

Table I.Total productivemaintenance KPIs forimproved profitability

JQME14,2

142

Def

ects

du

eto

poo

rJH

(Nos

.)F

inis

hed

goo

ds

stor

age

(Day

s)D

efec

tsd

ue

top

oor

PM

(Nos

.)R

awm

ater

ial

lead

tim

e(d

ays)

Offi

ceT

PM

No.

offi

les

han

dle

d(N

os)

Sp

ares

inv

ento

ry(R

s.L

acs)

Doc

um

ent

retr

iev

alti

me

(Sec

.)C

onsu

mab

les

inv

ento

ry(R

s.L

acs)

Man

hou

rre

du

ctio

n(M

anH

rs)

Wai

tin

gfo

rm

ater

ial

(No.

ofin

cid

ents

)(N

os)

Ind

irec

tp

erso

nn

elin

com

pan

y(N

os)

Cu

stom

erco

mp

lain

ts(N

os)

Kaizens

imp

lem

ente

din

non

-pro

du

ctio

nD

epts

(Nos

)R

edu

ctio

nin

pu

rch

ase

cost

(Rs.

Lac

s)O

ne

poi

nt

less

ons

imp

lem

ente

d(N

os)

Cos

tre

du

ctio

nin

adm

n.

Ov

erh

ead

s(R

s.L

acs)

No.

ofjo

ban

aly

sis

don

e(N

os)

Saf

ety

,h

yg

ien

e&

Accidents:

Un

safe

loca

tion

sid

enti

fied

(Nos

)en

vir

onm

ent

Tot

alac

cid

ents

(Nos

)L

ocat

ion

sw

ith

noi

sele

vel.

80d

B(N

os)

Maj

or/m

inor

acci

den

ts(N

os)

Loc

atio

ns

imp

rov

edto

,80

dB

lev

el(N

os)

Acc

iden

tsd

ue

top

oor

JH/P

M(N

os)

Pollution:

Acc

iden

tsd

ue

top

oor

edu

cati

on,

trai

nin

g(N

os)

Sol

idw

aste

let

out

afte

rtr

eatm

ent

(Ton

s)A

ccid

ents

–p

lan

tsh

utd

own

(Nos

)L

iqu

idw

aste

let

out

afte

rtr

eatm

ent

(KL

)A

ccid

ents

–n

op

lan

tsh

utd

own

(Nos

)G

aseo

us

was

tele

tou

taf

ter

trea

tmen

t(N

CM

)A

ccid

ents

ing

ang

way

s/w

alk

way

s(N

os)

Employee

participation:

Preventive

actions:

Saf

ety

sug

ges

tion

sre

ceiv

ed(N

os)

Un

safe

acts

iden

tifi

ed(N

os)

Saf

ety

sug

ges

tion

sim

ple

men

ted

(Nos

)U

nsa

feac

tim

pro

ved

tosa

fele

vel

(Nos

)S

afet

yO

PL

sre

ceiv

ed(N

os)

Dev

elop

men

tm

anag

emen

tT

otal

MP

shee

tsre

gis

tere

d(N

os)

Tim

eta

ken

for

an

ewm

ach

ines

toac

hie

ve

85%

OE

Esi

nce

ind

uct

ion

(Day

s)Jishu-Hozen

inia

tiv

es(C

LIA

R)

(Nos

)Im

pro

vem

ent

ofm

anu

alm

ech

anis

ms

toau

tom

ech

anis

ms

inol

d/n

ewm

ach

ines

Def

ect

pre

ven

tion

(Nos

)

No.

ofu

nm

ann

edop

erat

edm

ach

ines

(Nos

)P

ower

/fu

elco

nsu

mp

tion

(Nos

)

New

pro

du

ctd

evel

opm

ent

per

iod

(Day

s)H

oriz

onta

lre

pli

cati

onim

ple

men

ted

(Nos

)

Des

ign

stan

dar

ds

rele

ased

(No)

MP

shee

tsu

sed

for

new

mac

hin

es(N

os)

Imp

lem

enta

tion

ofL

CC

for

new

mac

hin

es(N

os)

Ov

eral

lor

gan

izat

ion

alR

etu

rnon

net

asse

ts(R

ON

A)

Ret

urn

oneq

uit

y(R

OE

)ac

hie

vem

ents

Ret

urn

onca

pit

alem

plo

yed

(RO

CE

)R

etu

rnon

asse

ts(R

OA

)M

ark

etsh

are

(%)

Cos

tp

eru

nit

ofp

rod

uct

(Rs.

)R

epla

cem

ent

asse

tv

alu

e(R

AV

)P

erce

nt

pla

nt

uti

liza

tion

(%)

Net

oper

atin

gp

rofi

t(R

s.C

rore

s)E

mp

loy

eetu

rnov

erP

lan

tw

ide

OE

E(%

)C

omp

lian

cew

ith

del

iver

ysc

hed

ule

s(%

)

Table I.


TPM

143

know how to use TPM initiatives in the different situations to develop employeeinvolvement in every step of the manufacturing process and facilities maintenance tooptimize production flow, increase product quality, and reduce operating costs.Moreover, it can be concluded from the research that the successful organizations needto strategically integrate proactive maintenance initiatives into their manufacturingstrategies and successfully boost organization’s productivity, improve maintenanceperformance, reduce costs, improve plant profitability, minimize unnecessarydowntime, ensure better utilization of resources, thereby enhancing thecompetitiveness of the organization.

References

Ahuja, I.P.S., Khamba, J.S. and Choudhary, R. (2006), “Improved organizational behavior throughstrategic total productive maintenance implementation”, IMECE2006-15783, Proceedingsof the 2006 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition(IMECE), Chicago, Illinois, November 5-10, pp. 1-8.

Ahuja, I.P.S., Singh, T.P., Sushil, M. and Wadood, A. (2004), “Total productive maintenanceimplementation at Tata Steel for achieving core competitiveness”, Productivity, Vol. 45No. 3, pp. 422-6.

Bakerjan, R. (1994), Tool and Manufacturing Engineers’ Handbook, Continuous Improvement,4th ed., Vol. 7, ASME, Fairfield, NJ.

Bamber, C.J., Sharp, J.M. and Hides, M. (1999), “Factors affecting successful implementation oftotal productive maintenance: a UK manufacturing case study perspective”, Journal ofQuality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 162-81.

Basu, R. (2001), “Six Sigma to fit Sigma”, IIE Solutions, Vol. 33 No. 7, pp. 28-33.

Becker, S.W. (1993), “TQM does work: ten reasons why misguided efforts fail”, ManagementReview, Vol. 82 No. 5, pp. 30-4.

Bhadury, B. and Mandal, P. (1998), “Adoption of quality management concepts amongst Indianmanufacturers”, Productivity, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 443-52.

Bohoris, G.A., Vamvalis, C., Tracey, W. and Ignatiadou, K. (1995), “TPM implementation inLand-Rover with assistance of a CMMS”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering,Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 3-16.

Chandra, P. and Sastry, T. (1998), “Competitiveness of Indian manufacturing: finding of the 1997manufacturing futures survey”, Vikalpa, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 15-25.

Cooke, F.L. (2000), “Implementing TPM in plant maintenance: some organizational barriers”,International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 9, pp. 1003-16.

Crawford, K.M., Blackstone, J.H. Jr and Cox, J.F. (1988), “A study of JIT implementation andoperating problems”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 26 No. 9,pp. 1561-8.

Cua, K.O., McKone, K.E. and Schroeder, R.G. (2001), “Relationships between implementation ofTQM, JIT, and TPM and manufacturing performance”, Journal of OperationsManagement, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 675-94.

Currie, W.L. and Seddon, J.M. (1992), “Managing AMT in a just-in-time environment in the UKand Japan”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 123-36.

David, A.T. (1995), “Japan’s new advantage: total productive maintenance”, Quality Progress,Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 121-3.

JQME14,2

144

Davis, R. (1997), “Making TPM a part of factory life”, TPM Experience (Project EU 1190,sponsored by the DTI), Findlay, Dartford.

Davis, R. and Willmott, P. (1999), Total Productive Maintenance, Asset MaintenanceManagement, Alden Press, Oxford.

Dossenbach, T. (2006), “Implementing total productive maintenance”, Wood and Wood Products,Vol. 111 No. 2, pp. 29-32.

Dwyer, J. (1999), “More than a maintenance technique”, Works Management, Vol. 52 No. 9,pp. 15-16.

Fredendall, L.D., Patterson, J.W., Kennedy, W.J. and Griffin, T. (1997), “Maintenance modeling,its strategic impact”, Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 440-53.

George, M. (2002), Lean Six Sigma: Combining Six Sigma Quality with Lean Speed, McGraw-Hill,New York, NY.

Groote, P.D. (1995), “Maintenance performance analysis: a practical approach”, Journal of Qualityin Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 4-24.

Gupta, R.C., Sonwalkar, J. and Chitale, A.K. (2001), “Overall equipment effectiveness throughtotal productive maintenance”, Prestige Journal of Management and Research, Vol. 5 No. 1,pp. 61-72.

Hammer, M. and Champy, J. (1993), Reengineering the Organization, Harper Business, New York,NY.

Hansson, J., Backlund, F. and Lycke, L. (2003), “Managing commitment: increasing the odds forsuccessful implementation of TQM, TPM or RCM”, International Journal of Quality& Reliability Management, Vol. 20 No. 9, pp. 993-1008.

Hartmann, E.H. (1992), Successfully Installing TPM in a Non-Japanese Plant: Total ProductiveMaintenance, TPM Press, London.

Hutchins, D. (1998), “Introducing TPM”, Manufacturing Engineer, Vol. 77 No. 1, pp. 34-7.

Ireland, F. and Dale, B.G. (2001), “A study of total productive maintenance implementation”,Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 183-92.

Juric, Z., Sanchez, A.I. and Goti, A. (2006), “Money-based overall equipment effectiveness”,Hydrocarbon Processing, (International edition), Vol. 85 No. 5, pp. 43-5.

Kodali, R. and Chandra, S. (2001), “Analytical hierarchy process for justification of totalproductive maintenance”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 12 No. 7, pp. 695-705.

Kumar, M., Antony, J., Singh, R.K., Tiwari, M.K. and Perry, D. (2006), “Implementing the LeanSigma framework in an Indian SME: a case study”, Production Planning and Control,Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 407-23.

Labib, A.W. (1999), “A framework for benchmarking appropriate productive maintenance”,Management Decision, Vol. 37 No. 10, pp. 792-9.

Lawrence, J.J. (1999), “Use mathematical modeling to give your TPM implementation effort anextra boost”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 62-9.

Leblanc, G. (1995), “Tapping the true potential of TPM: are you maximizing the value of yourplant’s program?”, Plant Engineering, Vol. 49 No. 10, pp. 143-8.

Lycke, L. and Akersten, P.A. (2000), “Experiences of implementing TPM in Swedish industries”,International Journal of Reliability and Application, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1-14.

McAdam, R. and Duffner, A.M. (1996), “Implementation of total productive maintenance insupport of an established total quality programme”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 7No. 6, pp. 613-30.


TPM

145

McKone, K.E., Schroeder, R.G. and Cua, K.O. (2001), “The impact of total productive maintenancepractices on manufacturing performance”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 19No. 1, pp. 39-58.

Madu, C.N. (2000), “Competing through maintenance strategies”, International Journal of Quality& Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 9, pp. 937-49.

Maggard, B.N. and Rhyne, D.M. (1992), “Total productive maintenance: a timely integration ofproduction and maintenance”, Production and Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 33No. 4, pp. 6-10.

Maggard, B.N., Bailey, C.L. and Moss, D. (1989), “Total productive maintenance: TPM that works”,Electronic Manufacturing Technology Symposium, 1989, Proceedings, 7th IEEE/CHMTInternational, 25-27 September, pp. 13-17.

Moore, R. (1997), “Combining TPM and reliability-focused maintenance”, Plant Engineering,Vol. 51 No. 6, pp. 88-90.

Nakajima, S. (1988), Introduction to Total Productive Maintenance (TPM), Productivity Press,Portland, OR.

Noon, M., Jenkins, S. and Lucio, M.M. (2000), “FADS, techniques and control: the competingagendas of TPM and Tecax at the Royal Mail (UK)”, Journal of Management Studies,Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 499-519.

Ollila, A. and Malmipuro, M. (1999), “Maintenance has a role in quality”, The TQM Magazine,Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 17-21.

Patterson, J.W., Kennedy, W.J. and Fredendall, L.D. (1995), “Total productive maintenance is notfor this company”, Production and Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 61-4.

Ravishankar, G., Burczak, C. and Vore, R.D. (1992), “Competitive manufacturing through totalproductive maintenance”, Semiconductor Manufacturing Science Symposium, ISMSS1992, IEEE/SEMI International, 15-16 June, pp. 85-89.

Riis, J., Luxhoj, J. and Thorsteinsson, U. (1997), “A situational maintenance model”, InternationalJournal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 349-66.

Robinson, C.J. and Ginder, A.P. (1995), The North American Experience, Productivity Press,Portland, OR.

Sahay, B.S., Gupta, J.N.D. and Mohan, R. (2006), “Managing supply chains for competitiveness:the Indian scenario”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 11 No. 1,pp. 15-24.

Sahay, B.S., Saxena, K.B.C. and Kumar, A. (2000), World Class Manufacturing: A StrategicPerspective, Macmillan India Limited, New Delhi.

Schonberger, L. (1996), World Class Manufacturing: The Next Decade: Building Power, Strengthand Value, The Free Press, New York, NY.

Seth, D. and Tripathi, D. (2005), “Relationship between TQM and TPM implementation factorsand business performance of manufacturing industry in Indian context”, InternationalJournal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 22 Nos 2/3, pp. 256-77.

Shamsuddin, A., Hassan, M.H. and Zahari, T. (2005), “TPM can go beyond maintenance: excerptfrom a case implementation”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 11 No. 1,pp. 19-42.

Tripathi, D. (2005), “Influence of experience and collaboration on effectiveness of qualitymanagement practices: the case of Indian manufacturing”, International Journal ofProductivity and Performance Management, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 23-33.

Wang, F.K. (2006), “Evaluating the efficiency of implementing total productive maintenance”,Total Quality Management, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 655-67.

JQME14,2

146

Willmott, P. (1994), “Total quality with teeth”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 48-50.

Wireman, T. (1991), Total Productive Maintenance: An American Approach, Industrial Press,New York, NY.

Further reading

Nakajima, S. (1988), TPM Development Program: Implementing Total Productive Maintenance,Productivity Press, Cambridge.

About the authorsI.P.S Ahuja holds a Bachelors Degree in Mechanical Engineering and Masters Degree inIndustrial Engineering from Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology, Patiala, Punjab,India. Currently, he is working as Reader in Mechanical Engineering at University College ofEngineering, Punjabi University, Patiala, Punjab (India). He has a number of publications inreferred International and National journals/conferences. His main research area is totalproductive maintenance (TPM). I.P.S. Ahuja can be contacted at [email protected]

J.S. Khamba holds a Bachelors Degree in Mechanical Engineering, Masters Degree inIndustrial Engineering and PhD in Technology Management from Thapar Institute ofEngineering and Technology, Patiala, Punjab, India. Currently, he is working as Professor inMechanical Engineering at University College of Engineering, Punjabi University, Patiala,Punjab (India). He has number of publications in referred International and Nationaljournals/conferences. His main research areas are technology management, non-traditionalmachining and total productive maintenance.


TPM

147

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Strategies and Success Factors for Overcoming Challenges in TPM Implementation

Documents

uncertain

uk manufacturing

standard operating

total productive

stubborn organizational

changing market

motivating

achieving