Management Theory Review: October 2024

October 24, 2024

Potential Business and Profit Opportunity in Personalization in Goods and Services - $2 Trillion Global Business Opportunity

a new BCG book by Mark Abraham and David Edelman, published by HBR, called Personalized: Customer Strategy in the Age of AI.

The book demystifies personalization, distilling it into five promises consumers expect companies to keep in order to deepen customer relationships. These include “empower me,” “know me,” “reach me,” “show me,” and “delight me.” Delivering on each one requires a human touch and the right technology.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/2-trillion-opportunity-boston-consulting-group-nsxte/

October 21, 2024

2024 Perspectives - Themes for Operations and Supply Chain Management & Managers

New Video

Supply Chain Trends 2024 | What You NEED to Know!

Copper Digital

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4k09vQCGXJA

In 2024— productivity, technology enablement, and sustainability are the key drivers of future success.

Navigating the new normal: Operations insights for 2024

November 10, 2023. McKinsey Podcast

https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/operations/our-insights/navigating-the-new-normal-operations-insights-for-2024

Cost Reduction through Productivity Improvement is Industrial Engineering.

2023 BEST New E-Book on Industrial Engineering.

INTRODUCTION TO MODERN INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING. FREE Download.

https://academia.edu/103626052/INTRODUCTION_TO_MODERN_INDUSTRIAL_ENGINEERING_Version_3_0

Industrial engineering improves technology, facilities and processes in the dimension of productivity.

This article is a Top 10 for 2023. Hence more needs to be written highlighting the issues and supporting points.

‘Operational’ twins should rise in their use in 2024

Jan. 4, 2024

Applied to the production process, these twins integrate data from disparate IT and OT systems and generate a holistic view of operations easily understood by employees.

https://www.smartindustry.com/special-reports/article/33016743/operational-twins-should-rise-in-their-use-in-2024

McKinsey Podcast

What are the three things companies should be thinking about when it comes to their operations agendas?

Number one, how to apply generative AI and automation to the back-office and shared-service functions.

Number two, purchasing under inflationary circumstances; there are huge gains to be had quickly if you navigate this space.

And third, sustainability. In operations, we’ve long been optimizing for efficiency, quality, and cost. Now, it’s also about sustainability and carbon footprint.

Your company’s future success demands agile, flexible, and resilient operations.

There is an increasing demand on supply chains and organizations to deliver productivity.

The second thing is that supply chain executives are also being asked to deliver on sustainability and to help improve the carbon footprint and reduce the impact on our environment. And they’re also being asked to increase the resiliency of their operations coming out of a global pandemic, not to mention the many other disruptions we’ve had.

Consumer-facing industries are relatively weak. At the same time, some industry sectors are booming. For example, green-energy transition and battery factories. So the combination is an unusual one. I would say in both of these extremes, operations has never been higher on the CEO agenda.

A new trend is purchasing in an inflationary environment. We have had 25 to 30 years since we saw something similar. So the capabilities needed to purchase the tools are quite different from what we’ve seen for a while. We also have new technological opportunities, opening up brand-new opportunities to restructure back-office and such functions. And given the macroeconomics, tying back to that, I think the urge to move has never been bigger among our clients. And it’s not just a COO topic; it’s really a CEO topic.

Where are clients placing their big bets and using consultancy services?

The reality is that for a lot of operations leaders, productivity is a nonnegotiable.

It’s just the reality of where we sit and the reality of the cost pressures a lot of people have faced—whether you’re a product manufacturer and input costs and raw materials or whether you’re a services company, you’ve seen the cost of labor grow meaningfully. The need to drive productivity has never been higher. So I would say for most of our clients and companies, that’s kind of a nonnegotiable.

Then what we see on top of that is a lot of supply chain leaders and executives thinking really hard about where they’re going to make their big bets.

For example, resiliency and how to build in more operational flexibility were supercritical capabilities that were front and center for everybody over the last couple of years. But the question is, how much will companies invest in that supply chain and operational resiliency as we return to something that feels more normal? And will the importance there continue to be as high as it has been the past couple of years? While we can’t predict what the next disruption will be, we are quite confident that there are more and more disruptions coming down the pike.

On the sustainability front, we’ve also got to tackle head-on where the emissions sit today. A lot of companies are heavy emitters, and a lot of that is upstream from their individual supply chains, so they are having to place big bets on how they can improve impact and the environment through their operations. And some of those things actually reduce costs, which is a very good thing.

Automation now a savior for how we get the work done.

Now, there are nearly a million manufacturing jobs open in the US.

And that’s before we add the billions and billions of dollars of investment that will come from IRA [Inflation Reduction Act], the CHIPS [and Science] Act, and the [Bipartisan] Infrastructure Law that the US government has passed. When you look at that, the increasing demand for manufacturing jobs, construction jobs, etcetera, is going to put real strains on our ability to fill them and, therefore, to produce the products we need to make and get the jobs done that need to get done we welcome automation.

The capital intensity in the world is seemingly going up, driven by a number of megatrends. We touched upon electrification, battery factories being built, the electric grid needing to be rebuilt, and more power generation needed in Europe. There’s a huge need for infrastructure investment, and infrastructure investment is going up. So any type of capital intensity is increasing, also driven by IT and different digital innovations that also require investment.

Therefore, capital excellence, or how to deal with large capital-consuming projects in an efficient way, is also a theme seeing increased traction. I think this trend will probably become more prominent in the next 15 to 20 years.

Fundamentals of operational excellence, COOs cut their teeth on the lean methodologies, and we’re seeing that back-to-basics approach happening now, but enhanced with technology and thinking differently, holistically, about purpose and how people are involved in delivering excellence.

Our practice was initially founded on the lean principles, and for many years, the vast majority of the work we did was around lean methodologies. I think over the past 15 years or so, we’ve seen a shift from classical lean toward more technology-driven operations of various forms. Most of our clients are pretty good at doing lean. Now our clients are thinking more about the next wave of lean and digital manufacturing and leveraging the latest procurement tools in digital.

We already spoke about service operations, automation, and what generative AI can mean for that. All of this is, of course, based on lean principles, but it’s really the technology-enabled, next-generation version of that. And I think the macroeconomic environment that we started talking about is driving a much faster adoption of these new technologies and new practices with our clients.

How are CEOs engaging with some of these typical operations topics?

For a lot of companies, things went wrong in operations and were very challenging over the last couple of years. Naturally, it has become more of a board- and a CEO-level topic.

One of the things I think has been lost in the discussion around the supply chain disruptions over the past couple of years is the crazy spikes in demand that we saw in different industries.

The second is this led to some challenging conversations and big strategic discussions. Early on in the pandemic, what we found in all of our surveys was that people were basically trying to increase inventory, and that’s fine. You can do that in relatively short order, etcetera. But as we’ve seen it evolve over the past couple of years—and it’s not just been the pandemic; there’s been the war in Ukraine and all these other disruptions—all of a sudden people are saying, “Should we be doing more nearshoring or reshoring and doing more production closer to the consumer? Should we be rethinking our talent profile? And are we overconcentrated in certain countries around the world? Should we be thinking about changing the specifications of our product?”

A lot of those things led to really strategic, important discussions that brought supply chain to the forefront of not just the CEO and the executive room, but the boardroom as well.

It’s a record time for the amount of different operations-related topics that reaches the board. Manufacturing and supply chain footprint has been a huge topic, given political tensions, and increased supply chain resiliency needs to be more focused than it was ten years ago. Sustainability is also a key consideration. A certain supplier of nickel can be thousands of times more environmentally hazardous than another supplier of the same metal. So your supplier selection matters greatly from a sustainability point of view. That’s also on the board agenda.

How do you save money? is, of course, on the agenda. We have a shortage of some professions, so we can’t hire for some jobs. Why do we have unemployment in other areas? There’s just a record number of very different operations topics that all reach a CEO or reach a board. And then prioritizing where we start and how we make sense of this is, of course, much more difficult now than it ever has been before.

And of course, part of that is around transparency, data information, and having that at your fingertips at a much faster pace. Which is presumably an opportunity for the technology and the innovations that are coming down the pike and then also, potentially, the impact of generative AI.

The opportunities, leveraging data on digital across the operations space, are more or less infinite. We’ve seen it for a decade or more in digital manufacturing and in various next-generation digital applications. But now, we are expecting a new S-curve driven by generative AI. You can see applications of generative AI in most areas within operations. I think the shift will be almost as big as when the computer hit the desk in the office: what you can do, how it will change clients, how it will change the software industry, and how it will change customer service. It will be a big new revolution.

But to benefit from that, you need to have your data strategies well sorted. You need to have control of what data you are accessing, should be accessing, and should be leveraging to make your corporation even better.

The CTO [chief technology officer] and the COO have to be in lockstep right?

When you look backward at some of the technology implementations within operations, one of the failure modes you see is that sometimes the CTO and the head of operations or the head of the supply chain weren’t in lockstep. So what you end up with is a tool implementation that hasn’t reaped the benefits or had the impact that one might hope. We see this all the time, whether in advanced planning or technology implementations or whether we see it with more source-to-pay in the procurement arena, where people have put the tool in but haven’t gotten the value.

So the idea of being super clear on the business case, understanding where the impact comes from, and also recognizing the nontechnological factors that are required to deliver the impact are crucial. For example, how do you build the capabilities of your organization to actually use the tool? How do we put the right performance management and metrics in place to measure how we’re doing, both in terms of compliance with tool usage and the outputs? As these technologies get better, and as people get clearer on what it requires to deliver impact, the CTO and the CEO will need to be in lockstep.

The other way we need to look at it is for each area where you’re trying to improve your business, what’s the full potential of the technology in generative AI? We should never do a planning transformation that isn’t really looking across "how do you improve the process and the capabilities of the people? How do you leverage traditional technology, such as an advanced planning system? And do you leverage generative AI, etcetera?" So not only should we be looking at it as generative AI end to end across your company, but we should be asking the question, “For each business problem, what full suite of tools, including the more advanced technologies, do we have to solve that problem?" And that’s a learning and an adaptation for people across a lot of client organizations.

Global Lighthouse Network

I know we’ve been working on the Global Lighthouse Network with the World Economic Forum, and it’s encouraging to see the number of lighthouses being called out; they’re growing each year.

Value of Industry 4.0 Technology Set

This is super exciting. We’ve been able to generate several lighthouses proving the latest and greatest in different operations technologies—most notably, various types of digital manufacturing or digital tools, generating results that bring them to the top of the top in their respective industries. Speaking of the impact and common thread across those cases, I believe the key concept is value. I think that’s an evergreen topic, something every operations leader needs to bring with them. All these lighthouses began by identifying the applications for new technologies within operations that can bring them the biggest value. Then within those areas, how do we apply the technology in the most efficient way and get the most bang for the buck? Then actually do it so you have a proof point—a lighthouse—to show that it can be done, and you can prove the impact with it.

This staging, starting value back, and then deciding which technology to apply sounds very simple. But actually, very few do that. We all have a tendency to go with the latest trend and get excited about some tool and then invest many millions of dollars in applying various tools without always getting the value for it.

One of the things that’s been really interesting is making sure companies are thinking about scaling the impact from these use cases and the digital journeys from the very beginning. In the good old days, people would try something, see if it worked, then have the proof point, and then think about how they scale it. Well the reality is, what you need to do to scale it could be very different from what you need to do to prove that it works the first time.

We see a lot of leading companies changing their mindset of trying to figure it out in one place. And not only [are they] doing that, but also they’re thinking what are the things that I need to put in place so I can scale this across my entire network from the beginning, and that is a massive shift in thinking.

As C-suite leaders and the boardroom are thinking about their planning for 2024 and the opportunities, but also the challenges that need to be navigated, what are the three things they should be thinking about when it comes to their operations agenda, Axel?

Number one, how to apply generative AI and automation to the back-office and shared-service functions; there’s a huge opportunity for every company I know of regardless of industry.

Number two, purchasing under inflationary circumstances; there are huge gains to be had quickly if you navigate this space. It has been a long time since we faced a similar environment. So most people in the purchasing department are not up to speed with what can be done.

And third, sustainability in operations. In operations, we’ve long been optimizing for efficiency, quality, and cost. Now it’s also about sustainability and carbon footprint. There are many methodologies to do both at the same time, and you can make money from that.

Another Three

One is, while I think a lot of our clients feel enormous pressure to deliver productivity in this environment, I would encourage people to use this environment as a chance to change the mindset around productivity within your organizations.

There’s never been a better opportunity to get heads of marketing, CFOs, and heads of sales focused on productivity to tackle some of the things that an operations executive can’t do on their own, but that require collaboration with others.

The second thing I would think about is, how do we infuse technology enablement into everything we do from an operations perspective and have it not be a tech agenda versus an operations agenda—but bring those two things together?

And the third mindset I encourage people to have is, how do we ensure that supply chains and operations remain a boardroom topic and a CEO priority? As we return to something that feels more “normal”—I’m not sure any of us know what normal means anymore— this has been a unique time where operations and supply chains have moved into the boardroom, and I think that’s a really good thing. It’s especially good for companies to have more boards and CEOs thinking about supply chains and operations every day.

The CEO: Architect of the new operations agenda

December 6, 2021 | Article

https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/operations/our-insights/the-ceo-architect-of-the-new-operations-agenda

22.10.2024, 27.9.2024, 29.12.2023

Pub. 13.11.2023

Supply Chain Manager - Jobs - Job Descriptions

21.10.2024

Supply Chain Manager, Castings, Semi

Job Category Supply Chain

Location Fremont, California

Req. ID 229746

APPLY - Currently Required.

https://www.tesla.com/careers/search/job/supply-chain-manager-castings-semi-229746

October 17, 2024

Resource Based View Definition of Management - Narayana Rao K.V.S.S.

Management is doing things acquiring and using resources. - Prof. Narayana Rao K.V.S.S. - 18.10.2024

A manager or an entrepreneur visualizes doing a thing, for example in business, it would be exchanging goods or services. He may produce the goods or services or he may procure them and offer to customers. To put the visualized idea into practice he requires resources. He has to acquire them and then use them to do business and pay for the services of each factor or resource used in the business. Theoretically, the entrepreneur only needs the idea which is acceptable to the resource providers.

The manager makes resource requirement plan. Initially it is an unconstrained resource requirement plan. He will list all the ideal resources. But as he tries to acquire resources constraints become visible and the manager has to modify the resource requirements to use available resources or resources that he could acquire.

Earlier Explanation by me.

Definition of Management: Its Nature and Purpose

Management of an organization is the process of establishing objectives and goals of the organization periodically, designing the work system and the organization structure, and maintaining an environment in which individuals, working together in groups, accomplish their aims and objectives and goals of the organization effectively and efficiently (Narayana Rao). (3rd December 2008, Version 1 of this article)

Management of an organization is the process of establishing objectives and goals of the organization periodically, designing the work system and the organization structure, and maintaining an environment in which individuals, working together in groups in combination with capital equipment and current assets (working capital), accomplish their aims and objectives and goals of the organization effectively and efficiently (Narayana Rao). (24 January 2016).

The above definition was a modification of the definition given by Koontz and O'Donnell.

The definition implies the following.

(i) Management is a process.
(ii) Management applies to every kind of organization, government, profit making, or nonprofit making.

(iii) It applies to managers at all levels in the organization.

(iv) Management is concerned with effectiveness and efficiency. Effectiveness is producing the product or service the customer wants in business context with the required functional benefits and product attributes at the price he is willing to pay. Efficiency is minimization of resources to produce the saleable output.

Weirich and Koontz

Weihrich and Koontz defined Management and explained it as follows in the tenth edition of their book Management: A Global Perspective (p.4).

"Management is the process of designing and maintaining an environment in which individuals, working together in groups, efficiently accomplish selected aims." This definition needs to be expanded:

1. As managers, people carry out the managerial functions of planning, organizing, staffing, leading, and controlling.
2. Management applies to any kind of organization.
3. It applies to managers at all organizational levels.
4. The aim of all managers is the same: to create a surplus.
5. Managing is concerned with productivity; this implies effectiveness and efficiency.

Functions of Management

The process of management can be better understood by breaking it down into the five basic functions of a manager – planning, organizing, staffing, leading and controlling. All the management concepts, principles, theories and techniques can be grouped under these five functions.

Professor Narayana Rao suggests planning, organizing, resourcing, executing and controlling as the appropriate steps for operational approach.

The resource point of view is emphasized in the RBV Definition of Management.

No doubt planning is required to establish the feasibility of the idea and to make a list of resources required. After resources are acquired execution of processes has to be there and control has to be there to modify plans based on achieved results to reach the expected final result for a period.

Management - Definition and Process

https://nraomtr.blogspot.com/2012/03/management-definition-and-process.html

Definition of Management: Its Nature and Purpose

New

Management is doing things acquiring and using resources. - Prof. Narayana Rao K.V.S.S. - 18.10.2024

Resource Based View Definition of Management - Narayana Rao K.V.S.S.

https://nraomtr.blogspot.com/2024/10/resource-based-view-definition-of.html

Management of an organization is the process of establishing objectives and goals of the organization periodically, designing the work system and the organization structure, and maintaining an environment in which individuals, working together in groups in combination with capital equipment and current assets (working capital), accomplish their aims and objectives and goals of the organization effectively and efficiently (Narayana Rao). (24 January 2016).

(iii) It applies to managers at all levels in the organization.

Weirich and Koontz

Weihrich and Koontz defined Management and explained it as follows in the tenth edition of their book Management: A Global Perspective (p.4).

Functions of Management

Professor Narayana Rao suggests planning, organizing, resourcing, executing and controlling as the appropriate steps for operational approach.

Management Functions at Different Organizational Unit Levels

All managers carry out managerial functions. However the proportion of time spent for each function may differ from level to level. The top managers may spend more time on planning in choosing the corporate objectives and business unit objectives and in developing the work system and the organization structure. The first level supervisors may spend more time in leading the staff under them and in doing operational control.

Managerial Skills

Managers require four kinds of skills: technical, human, conceptual and design.

1. Technical skills are knowledge of and proficiency in working with the tools and specific techniques on given processes. For example, mechanics work with tools, and their supervisors should have the ability to train them how to use these tools and periodically evaluate and improve the skills of the staff under them. Similarly accounts use various formats of accounting records like journal, ledger, trial balance, balance sheet and use various procedures like entry, posting, reconciliation and reversing etc. and the supervisor of the accountants has to know these records and procedures to train the staff under him and evaluate their work for accuracy. The first level supervisors have to demonstrate or use their technical skills on a day to day basis as managers. In an MBA curriculum number of technical disciplines are taught like marketing, purchasing, production, accounting, human resource recruiting and training, industrial engineering etc.

2. Human skills are the concepts, methods and techniques that facilitate working with people. Managers have to create an environment in which people feel comfortable, motivated, secure, and committed to the objectives and goals of the group or the organizational unit in which they are members. Organizational behavior is the subject taught in MBA curriculums to provide human skills.

3. Conceptual skill is the ability to see the “big picture.” It is the ability to recognize significant issues or elements in a situation and to understand the relationships among these key issues.

Concept skills are better understood or interpreted as business conceptual skills. Every manager at every level must be able to see his customer, his suppliers and his associates in the organization, superiors, subordinates and peers. He should be able to visualize the motivations of these agents to engage with him and the value that they are seeking and the value that they are willing to exchange. Every manager must be able to visualize how the business of the group he is managing is going to survive and prosper. Whenever managers cannot see this clearly, he will be failing in his managerial responsibility and the group is going to suffer.

4. Design skill is the ability to solve problems in ways that benefit the enterprise. To be effective managers in the organization must be capable of doing more than just seeing a problem (If they merely confine their attention to the problem, they become ‘problem watchers’ and they will not fulfill their responsibility). They Must have, in addition to the skill of identifying key problems, the skill of a good design engineer to work out a practical solution to a problem in the light of the realities they face in the situation. Solution design skills are synthesis skills. When a problem arises analytical skills may be used to identify various dimensions of the problems and possible solutions to each of these dimensions. But to solve the problem, a synthesis of all possible and useful alternatives has to be developed. Skills of synthesis are important in solution design.

The intensity or frequency with which these groups of skills are applied varies with the managerial level.

First line supervisors use their technical skills on a day to day to basis to observe the working of the staff in the department or section and guide them in carrying out the allotted tasks as per the specification of the customer or the design and in proper use of machines and tools. Quality and quantity control on a continuous basis becomes the important responsibility of first line supervisors and technical skills play a very important part in this role. Human skills are also important to both to get the task done and to make the operator feel happy and satisfied in completing the task, receiving the reward and also by the various physical facilities provided to him to take care of his professional and personal needs at the work place.

At the top level, conceptual skills and design skills have to be employed to recognize the opportunities and threats that keep on emerging in the environment. Solutions to benefit from the opportunities and contain the ill effects of threats have to be developed.

My article in my blog on the same topic

http://nrao-mgmt-smi-handbook.blogspot.com/2007/10/principles-of-management-chapter-1.html

____________________________________________________________________________

References

Seven Strategy Questions: A Simple Approach for Better Execution

Robert Simons, Professor, HBS
2010
https://books.google.co.in/books?id=tIYrly9QjTIC

Video Introduction to Management

___________

___________

Principles of Management – Koontz and O’Donnell

Planning - A Management Process

Decision Making

Resourcing - A Function of Management

The concepts of Leadership and Management

Leardership

Gestalt Techniques in Supervision and Management

______________________________________________________________________________________

Original post - http://knol.google.com/k/narayana-rao/management-definition-and-process/ 2utb2lsm2k7a/ 547

Revision Article for 22 January
2nd article: Global and Comparative Management

January - Management Knowledge Revision Schedule

Updated 18.10.2024, 4 June 2019 22 January 2017, 24 Jan 2016, 19 July 2014, 2 Dec 2013

October 12, 2024

Industrial Engineering and Scientific Management in Japan

Japanese scholars and business men embraced scientific management, efficiency movement, and industrial engineering right from the inception and excelled in implementing it and reaped great rewards in economic as well as academic spheres. In the process there were many innovations in the subject on the Japanese soil.

Early Adoption of Scientific Management by Japan

Late nineteenth century Japan was a rational shopper for products, technology and organizational models[1]. Scientific management of F.W. Taylor was quickly spotted by Japanese and was translated into Japanese in 1912, within one year of its publication in USA in 1911 [1]. It is an astonishing fact that one million copies were sold to workers in a special edition for workers. Yoichi Ueno and Araki Toichiro were enthusiastic supporters. Yoichi Ueno was responsible for organizing the Industrial Efficiency Research Institute (Sngyo Noritsu Kenkyujo) in 1921.

Motion analysis techniques were used in Japanese companies in starting in 1913. Firms like Mitsubishi Electric and Nippon Electric took the lead. In the area of textiles, Kannebo and Toyobo took the initiative.

Industrial engineering was organized as a subject that increases the education and skills of workmen in Japan. Improving the education and skill of a workman is a dominant concept in Japanese industrial set up compared to the slogan of deskilling in US systems. Also, the Efficiency Research Institute was an initiative of Harmony and Cooperation Society (Kyochokai) formed in 1919 by the state and leading corporations of Japan. Industrial engineering has a more welcome environment in Japan to deliver its scientific potential.

Zenjiro Imaoka [3] explained Industrial Engineering as a concept for improving the efficiency of production and is the driving force that brings success in mass production today. OR (Operations Research) is an approach to explore optimization using statistical figures and linear programming. Both of them are included in supply chain flow [2]. IE (industrial engineering) is a concept that was first structured as a concept to enable the improvement of production efficiency. Various scientific approaches started by Taylor were tried out to improve production efficiency by various companies. During the Civil War, the U.S. promoted the standardization of firearms and parts of munitions. As a result, the U.S. succeeded in the mass production of parts by realizing low-cost and short-lead time production. The engine of the further success of mass production was the concept of IE. IE was employed by Henry Ford for producing the Model T Ford and that was a starting point of growth for auto industry. The base of business administration and management consulting methodology of today started with IE. We can also say that IE is a technology that combines manufacturing techniques and product technologies or it synchronizes management resources. If IT (information technology) can be used together with IE (manufacturing technologies), information and communication will be combined with production systems, leading to the efficient flow in supply chain management which resulted in supply chain innovations such as CALS, BPR, ECR, and QR.

Contribution of JMA in Promoting and Using IE and Scientific Management in Japan

Scientific Management began in 1880s and spread quickly around the world. In Japan, this concept evolved into the pursuit of efficiency, and in 1942 the Japan Management Association (JMA) was established as an organization to promote that concept, based on IE and other management methods.

JMA set three basic principles to govern all its activities.

1. Japan-oriented strategy toward efficiency.
2. Execution than vacuous theory
3. Priority basis than all-round policy

Contribution of Taichi Ohno and Shigeo Shingo

An interesting point is that Taichi Ohno did not accept the present method as the best method. He advocated that it can be improved today or tomorrow. It is only a present standard operating procedure subject to improvement today or tomorrow. He wanted every body to believe in progress and improvement of methods.

Total Productive Maintenance - Japan Management Association ( Zero Breakdowns for Elimination of delays in material flow)

https://nraoiekc.blogspot.com/2013/12/total-productive-maintenance-japan.html

_______________________________________________________________

References

1. Oxford handbook of work and organization, OUP 2005
2. http://www.lean-manufacturing-japan.com/scm-terminology/ieor-industrial-engineering-operational-research.html
3. Zenjiro Imaoka, Understand Supply Chain Management through 100 words,
KOUGYOUCHOUSAKAI

________________________________________________________

Bibliography

Manufacturing Ideology: Scientific Management in Twentieth-Century Japan
By William M. Tsutsui, Princeton University Press, 2001
http://books.google.com/books/p/princeton?id=Np9Y0x-b37sC

Manufacturing Ideology: Scientific Management in Twentieth-Century Japan - A Review
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3024/is_2_11/ai_n28809136/

___________________________________________________________________
Related Articles

Industrial Engineering

Industrial Engineering - Articles of Narayana Rao K V S S

Total Industrial Engineering - H. Yamashina

Reviewed 3.3.2011

Originally posted on
http://knol.google.com/k/industrial-engineering-and-scientific-management-in-japan

Industrial Engineering Knowledge Revision Plan - One Year Plan

January - February - March - April - May - June

July - August - September - October - November - December

Ud. 13.10.2024

Pub. 15.12.2011

October 11, 2024

Systems and Processes - Improvement Made Easy (IME) - Improvement Management Made Easy (IMME)

Improvement of systems and processes is required in every management function.

But improvement task in operations management will be mainly covered in this note.

Industrial engineering is also focused on improvement of systems and processes. The role of industrial engineering in operations function is large relative to other management functions. The IE aspects are also covered in this note.

This note is initiated after viewing some posts by KaizenMadeEasy profile on LinkedIn. Plain English for the Japanese word "Kaizen" is "Improvement" - Good change.

Articles on Improvement and Improvement Management

System Design Principles

https://nraomtr.blogspot.com/2011/11/system-design-principles.html

Systems Improvement

https://nraomtr.blogspot.com/2011/12/systems-improvement.html

October 1, 2024

Management of Service Businesses - Processes

Harvard Business Review (HBR) articles on service business literature

1. Customer Fit in Service Operations (I)

Chase, Richard B. (1978), “Where Does the Customer Fit in a Service Operation?,” Harvard Business Review, 56 (November-December), 137-42.

2. Behavioral Sciences (I)

Chase, R.B., Dasu, S., 2001. Want to perfect your company’s service? Use behavioral science. Harvard Business Review (June), 79–84.

3. Service Factory – Productivity (III)

Chase, R.B.,Garvin, D. (1989) The Service Factory, Harvard Business Review, July-August 1989 (lead article), pp. 61-69.

4. Service Science (I, II II)

Chesbrough, H. (2005) Toward a science of services. Harvard Business Review 83, 16–17.

5. Industrialization of Service – Productivity (III)

Levitt, Ted (1976), “Industrialization of Service,” Harvard Business Review, 54 (September-October), 63-74.

6. Designing Services that Deliver – Quality (II)

Shostack, Lynn (1984), “Designing Services that Deliver,” Harvard Business Review, 62 (January-February), 133-39.

7. Putting the Service-Profit Chain to Work – Quality (II)

Heskett, James L., Thomas O. Jones, Gary W. Loveman, W. Earl Sasser, Jr., and Leonard A. Schlesinger (1994), “Putting the Service-Profit Chain to Work,” Harvard Business Review (March/April), 164-72.

8. Quality Comes To Services – Quality (I & II)

Reichheld, Frederick and W. Earl Sasser, Jr. (1990), “Zero Defections: Quality Comes to Services,” Harvard Business Review, 68 (September/October), 105-11.

9. Profitable Art of Service Recovery – Quality (I & II)

Hart, Christopher W.L., W. Earl Sasser, Jr., and James L. Heskett (1990), “The Profitable Art of Service Recovery” Harvard Business Review, (July-August), 148-56.

10. Matching Supply and Demand (Productivity)

Sasser, W. Earl (1976), “Match Supply and Demand in Service Industries,” Harvard Business Review, 54 (November-Decem- ber), 133-40.

11. The Service Driven Company (Quality)

Schlesinger, Leonard A. and James L. Heskett (1991), “The Service-Driven Service Company,” Harvard Business Review (September/October), 71-81.

12. Effective Marketing for Professional Services (Growth)

Bloom, Paul N. (1984), “Effective Marketing for Professional Services,” Harvard Business Review (September/October), 102-10.

13. Capturing Value of Supplementary Services (Growth, Scope, Adjacent Spaces, Sustainable Innovation, Quality)

Anderson, James C. and James A. Narus (1995), “Capturing the Value of Supplementary Services,” Harvard Business Review, 73 (January/February), 75-83.

14. Cost Accounting Comes to Service Industries (Productivity)

Dearden, John (1978), “Cost Accounting Comes to Service Industries,” Harvard Business Review, 56 (September-Oc- tober), 132-140.

15. Production-Line Approach to Services (Productivity)

Levitt, Theodore (1972), “Production-Line Approach to Services,” Harvard Business Review, 50 (September-Octo- ber), 42-52.

16. Knowledge Based Busienss (Sustainable Innovation)

Davis, S., J. Botkin. 1994. The coming of the knowledge-based business. Harvard Bus. Rev.72 (Sept./Oct.) 165-170.

17.Exploiting the Virtual Value Chain (Productivity)

Rayport, Jeffrey F. and John J. Sviokla (1995), “Exploiting the Virtual Value Chain,” Harvard Business Review, 73 (November/December), 14-24.

18. Surviving the Revolution

Karmarkar, Uday (2004).“Will You Survive the Services Revolution?,” Harvard Business Review, 82 (June) 100–108.

20. Making Mass Customization Work

Pine, Joseph B., II, Bart Victor, and Andrew C. Boynton (1993), “Making Mass Customization Work,” Harvard Business Re- view, 71 (September/October), 108-19.

21. Service Life Cycle of Products

Potts, G.W. (1988), ªExploiting your product’s service life cycleº, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 66 No. 5, pp. 32-5.

22. Beyond Products: Services-Based Strategy

Quinn, J.B., Doorley, T.L. and Paquette, P.C. (1990), “Beyond products: services-based strategy,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 68 No. 2, pp. 58-67.

23. Unconditional Service Guarantees

C.W.L. Hart, “The Power of Unconditional Service Guarantees,” Harvard Business Review, 66(4) July-August 1988, 54-62

24. Governance

Mintzberg, Henry. 1996. Managing Government, Governing Management. Harvard Business Review74(3): 75-83.

25. IT

McAfee A, Brynjolfsson E. 2008. Investing in the IT that makes a competitive difference. Harvard Business Review 86(7–8).

26. Sell Services More Profitably

Reinartz, W. and Ulaga, W. (2008) How to Sell Services More Profitably, Harvard Business Review, 86: 90-96.

27. Downstream profits

Wise, R. and Baumgartner, P. (1999) Go Downstream: The New Profit Imperative in Manufacturing. Harvard Business Review, Sept-Oct, 133-141.

29. Experience Economy

Pine, B. Joseph and James H. Gilmore (1998), Welcome to the Experience Economy.Harvard Business Review.

31. Co-opting Customer Competence

Prahalad, C.K and Venkatram Ramaswamy (2000), “Co-opting Customer Competence,” Harvard Business Review, 78 (January- February), 79-87.

32. Strategy and the New Economics of Information

Evans, Philip B. and Thomas S. Wurster (1997), “Strategy and the New Economics of Information,” Harvard Business Review, 75 (September-October), 71-82.

33. Symbols for Sale

Levy, Sidney J. (1959), “Symbols for Sale,” Harvard Business Review, 37 (July–August), 117–24.

35. Reengineering works

Hammer, M. (1990). ‘Reengineering works: Don’t automate, obliterate’, Harvard Business Review, 68(4), pp. 104–112.

36. Lean Service Machine

Swank CK. The lean service machine. Harvard Bus Review 2003; 81(10):123-129, 38.

37. Fixing Health Care

Spear SJ. Fixing health care from the inside, today. Harvard Bus Review 2005;83(9):78-91.

41. Lessons in the Service Sector

Heskett, James L. (1987), “Lessons in the Service Sector,” Harvard Business Review, 87 (March-April), 118-26.

44. Learning to love the service economy

Canton, I. D. [1984] ‘Learning to love the service economy’, Harvard Business Review, may-June, 89-97.

45. Hearing the voice of the market

Barabba, Vincent and Gerald Zaltman (1991), Hearing the Voice of the Market. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

46. Information and Competitive Advantage

Porter, Michael E. and Victor E. Millar (1985), “How Information Gives You Competitive Advantage,” Harvard Busi- ness Review, 85 (July-August), 149-60.

47. Relationship marketing

Fournier, Susan Susan Dobscha, and David Glen Mick (1998), “Preventing the Premature Death of Relationship Marketing,” Harvard Business Review, 77 (January/February), 42-51

49. Trust and virtual organization

Handy, C. (1995). Trust and the virtual organization. Harvard Business Review, 73(3), 40-48.

50. Contextual marketing & Internet

Kenny, D., & Marshall, J. F. (2000). Contextual marketing: The real business of the Internet. Harvard Business Review, 78(6), 119-125.

51. Commoditization of Process

Davenport, T. The coming commoditization of processes. Harvard Business Rev. (June 2005), 100–108.

53. Knowledge Creating Company

Nonaka, I. The knowledge creating company. Harvard Business Review 69 (Nov–Dec 1991), 96–104.

56. Value Proposition

Anderson, J. C., Narus, J. A., & van Rossum, W. (2006). Customer value propositions in business markets. Harvard Business Review, 84, 90–99.

58. Restitching

Eisenhardt, K., and Brown, S. L. “Patching: Restitching Business Portfolios in Dynamic Markets,” Harvard Business Review (77:3), May/June 1999, pp. 72-82.

59. Coevolving

Eisenhardt, K., and Galunic, D. C. “Coevolving: At Last, a Way to Make Synergies Work,” Harvard Business Review (78:1); January/ February, 2000, pp. 91-102.

61. Strategy and the Internet

Porter, M. (2001) “Strategy and the Internet,” Harvard Business Review, March-April 2001, pp. 63-78.

62. Value Disciplines

Treacy, M., and Wiersema, F. “Customer Intimacy and Other Value Disciplines,” Harvard Business Review (71:1), January/February 1993, pp. 84-93.

65. Competitor collaboration

Hamel, G., Doz, Y. L., & Prahalad, C. K. 1989. Collaborate with your competitors-and win. Harvard Business Review, 67(1): 133-140.

70. Planning as Learning

DeGeus, Arie P. (1988), “Planning as Learning,” Harvard Business Review, 66 (March/April), 70-74.

71. Competing on the Eight Dimensions of Quality

Garvin, David A. (1987), “Competing on the Eight Dimensions of Quality,” Harvard Business Review, 57, 173-84.

72. Customer-Centered Brand Management

Rust, R. T., V. A. Zeithaml, K. N. Lemon. 2004. Customer-centered brand management. Harvard Bus. Rev. 82(9) 110-118.

74. Cultural Issues

Nonaka, Ikujiro (2007) The Knowledge-Creating Company. HBR.

M. Baba and J. Gluesing (1992), Knowledge creation: Japan vs. the West, HBR 70(1):157-58.

75. Supply Chain

Bowersox, Donald J. 1990. The Strategic Benefits of Logistics Alliances. HBR 90(4):4-11.

76. Service Worker Productivity

Drucker, Peter F. 1991. The New Productivity Challenge. HBR 91, November/December, 70-79.

77. Service Analytics

Davenport, T., Mule, L. D., & Lucker, J. (2011), Know what your customers want before they do. Harvard Business Review, 89, 84-92.

78. Service Excellence

Frei, F. X. 2008. The four things a service business must get right. Harvard Business Review 86(4): 70–

80.

79. Value-cocreation

Ramaswamy, V., Gouillart, F., 2010, Building the cocreative enterprise, Harvard Business Review, Volume 88 (10): 100-109.

80. Customer Experience

Meyer, Christopher and Andre Schwager (2007), “Understanding Customer Experience,” Harvard Business Review, February 117–26.

81. Customer-Employee Interactions

Fleming, J. H., Coffman, C., & Harter, J. K. (2005). Manage your human sigma. Harvard Business Review, 83(7/8), 106–114.

83. Self-Service

Moon, Y. and Frei, F.X. (2000), “Exploding the self-service myth’’, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78 No. 3, pp. 26-7.

84. Customers

Dougherty D, Marty A (2008). What service customers really want? Harvard Business Review, September: p. 22.

85. Customer loyalty

O’Brien, Louise and Charles Jones, “Do Rewards Really Create Loyalty?”, Harvard Business Review (May – June, 1995), 75–82.

86. Strategy

Allmendinger, G.; Lombreglia, R.; Four Strategies for the Age of Smart Services. Harvard Business Review, Oct2005, Vol. 83 Issue 10, pp.131-145.

87. Customer Satisfaction

Taylor, A. (2002, July). Driving customer satisfaction. Harvard Business Review, 24-25.

88. Quality and Productivity Tradeoff

Frei, Frances X. (2006), “Breaking the trade-off between efficiency and service,” Harvard Business Review, 84 (11), 92-101.

89. Service Innovation

Thomke, Stefan (2003), “R&D Comes to Services,” Harvard Business Review, 81 (4), 70-79.

91. Employees and Customers

Chun, Rosa, and Gary Davies. “Employee Happiness Isn’t Enough to Satisfy Customers.” Harvard Business Review 87.4 (2009): 19.

92. Service Quality and Customer Trust

Bell, Simon J. and Andreas B. Eisingerich (2007), ―Work With Me,‖ Harvard Business Review, 85 (March), 32.

93. Productivity

Merrifield, R., Calhoun, J., & Stevens, D. (2008). The next revolution in productivity. Harvard Business Review, June, 72–80.

94. Global Networks

Bartlett, C., & Ghoshal, S. 1989. Managing across borders: The transnational solution. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

100. Not-for-profit service

Harvey, P. D., and Snyder, J. D. (1987) Charities need a bottom line too. Harvard Business Review (January-February). Harvard Business Publishing, Boston.

https://service-science.info/archives/2210

Production Line Approach Service System Design

Industrialization of services business model

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrialization_of_services_business_model

Interesting Article

Creating Customer Value through Industrialized Intimacy

To really serve customers requires a deep understanding of their needs. It also requires customization, personalization and empathy.

by Peter Kolesar, Garrett van Rysin, and Wayne Cutler

July 1, 1998

Consumer & retail/ Third Quarter 1998 / Issue 12

https://www.strategy-business.com/article/19127

Both manufacturing and services have their origins in craft production -- the village smith and cooper, the town barber and the household servant. More than a century ago, with the Industrial Revolution, manufacturers took great strides forward in productivity and quality by abandoning the craft production model in favor of mass production, standardization, division of labor and control, while service providers largely continued operating in a craft production mode. In the late 1960's, some service establishments began to move toward industrialization. Theodore Levitt , observing these trends, argued for bringing factory management concepts into the service industries -- the "industrialization of services" as he called it.

https://typeset.io/papers/production-line-approach-to-service-4jk536rv2y

shows limited information on the paper AI application on the paper

Applicability of Lean Thinking in Service Industries

Khalil Amiroune

Entrepreneur

March 6, 2016

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/applicability-lean-thinking-service-industries-khalil-amiroune/

Management Theory Review

Pages

October 24, 2024

Potential Business and Profit Opportunity in Personalization in Goods and Services - $2 Trillion Global Business Opportunity

October 21, 2024

2024 Perspectives - Themes for Operations and Supply Chain Management & Managers

What are the three things companies should be thinking about when it comes to their operations agendas?

The reality is that for a lot of operations leaders, productivity is a nonnegotiable.

Automation now a savior for how we get the work done.

Another Three

Supply Chain Manager - Jobs - Job Descriptions

October 17, 2024

Resource Based View Definition of Management - Narayana Rao K.V.S.S.

Definition of Management: Its Nature and Purpose

Functions of Management

Top 25 Management Theory Articles - Online

Management - Definition and Process

Definition of Management: Its Nature and Purpose

Functions of Management

Management Functions at Different Organizational Unit Levels

Managerial Skills

Seven Strategy Questions: A Simple Approach for Better Execution

Related Knols

October 12, 2024

Industrial Engineering and Scientific Management in Japan

Early Adoption of Scientific Management by Japan

Industrial Engineering Knowledge Revision Plan - One Year Plan

October 11, 2024

Systems and Processes - Improvement Made Easy (IME) - Improvement Management Made Easy (IMME)

October 1, 2024

Management of Service Businesses - Processes

Production Line Approach Service System Design