外文翻译
海鸥照相机原文
The Toyota Production System and art: making highly customized and creative products the
Toyota way
Ｍaterial Source: International Journal of Production Rearch, Vol. 45, No. 16, 15 August 2007,
3681–3698
Author: E. LANDER*y and J. K. LIKERz
The Toyota Production System has led to a movement of ‘lean production’focud on taking waste out of value streams.Most applications have been to high volume,and relatively standardized products.Under this system work becomes highly standardized specifying to the cond what the operator should do.Buffers are precily sized and controlled through various types of pull signals.When possible, u of one-piece flow cells result in a completely balanced production line. The performance benefits of the lean systems are often remarkable,greatly improving quality,cost,and del
ivery. But what of companies that are not making standardized products at high volume? What can they learn from lean? In this paper we argue there is a fundamental misunderstanding of TPS, viewing it as a specific tool kit technically implemented in a formulaic way to achieve pre-specified results. In fact, TPS is a philosophy that can be better described as a t of general principles of organizing and managing an enterpri which can help any organization get on a path of positive learning and improvement.
Keywords: Toyota way;TPS; Learning organization; Lean manufacturing;Custom manufacturing; High variability manufacturing
1. Is TPS universally applicable?
After the first oil crisis in the early 1970s Toyota began to draw attention as people noticed that it suffered less during the downturn and recovered much faster than its competitors. The key to its success was the Toyota Production System (TPS), which was described by four Toyota managers, in the first paper on the topic in this journal, as being bad on two basic concepts: ‘Cost reduction through the
elimination of waste’, and ‘Full utilization of worker’s capabilities’ (Sugimori et al. 1977). They further
explain that, cost reduction is achieved through the u of just-in-time production (comprid of pull systems, one-piece flow, levelling) and jidoka, the main components of what is today recognized as the TPS hou (Japan Management Association and Lu 1989, Shook 2002, Liker 2004). Fully utilizing worker’s capabilities requires a system of respect for people bad on minimizing wasted movements of workers,ensuring their safety, and giving them greater responsibility by allowing them to participate in running and improving their jobs. Thirteen years later, The Machine that Changed the World introduced the term ‘lean’ as the next paradigm of manufacturing beyond mass production (Womack et al. 1991). The Toyota Production System was the best-known example of lean and the model on which the book’s description was bad. Since then lean has taken on a life of its own and has been applied by many organizations throughout the world, including manufacturing and rvice firms. Most success stories however, come from the Toyota group or from firms operating under similar market and product technology conditions to tho for which Toyota has already developed lean solutions. The conditions include a limited product offering with little to no customization (other than cosmetic), production in high volume resulting in repetitive manufacturing, and a relatively stable (or predictable) demand.
Many companies deciding to ‘go lean’have struggled to figure out what that means in their type of bu
siness. They may build to order or have highly engineered products or be in a pure rvice organization like healthcare or banking and desire a vision for what lean looks like in their business. One approach to getting a vision is to go and e. But when they go and e a Toyota plant they find it difficult to relate. They e a highly repetitive and standardized process and cannot imagine how they can replicate what they e. We believe the problem is in the way companies are looking at TPS and how they are trying to approach implementation.
In practice, TPS is most often viewed as a t of tools to remove ‘waste’ from process. Individual tools have been explained exhaustively (Shingo 1985, 1986, Japan Management Association and Lu 1989, Hirano 1995, Rother and Shook 1999, Smalley 2004) and yet companies often struggle when attempting to apply lean to novel circumstances. This is particularly true for the firms operating in high variability, low volume environments where the general belief is that lean is not very helpful (the rearch that led to thi s paper focud on such firms). ‘We are different’ is a
commonly heard refrain. Of cour the answer is that every company is in fact different. But that is not the problem. Difficulties ari from trying to apply tools in a formulaic way when they were never intended to be ud as a cookie cutter template. In fact, the perspective of lean as a toolkit in which to reach to grab the most applicable or handy tool reprents a fundamental misconception of TPS.
足伤故事吧The next level of understanding comes when the tools are en as an integral part of a wider system (Suzaki 1987, Shingo and Dillon 1989, Monden 1993). This perspective, although still mostly focusing on the technical aspect, usually leads to better results but still allows for little adaptation to conditions different from tho for which the TPS tools were developed.
Adaptation to new environments starts to become possible when the purpo of particular tools and of TPS in general is understood. At this level it is possible to define rules about the behaviour of the system (Spear and Bowen 1999) and methods (Womack and Jones 1996) that can guide the development of Toyota-style systems in different environments. For example, Womack and Jones (1996) advi us to: define customer value, identify the value stream, to make it flow, pull, and strive for perfection. Although procedures like this are powerful for their simplicity, the approaches remain formulaic and leave out important features of Toyota’s system.
On the opposite end of the spectrum from the tool-bad perspective, Toyota’s system can be en as a t of principles (Liker 2004) that define the thinking that led to the development of the TPS tools. It is interesting to note that even though Ohno is credited with developing most of the tools that enabled the ideas behind TPS to be implemented in practice, his books (Ohno 1988, b, Ohno and Mito 1988) remain at a philosophical level and provide only superficial descriptions of the tools. Inste
ad of providing a solution, his intention ems to be to help the reader develop the mental models that will enable her to devi her own countermeasures. Perhaps then, the critical features of TPS are the ideas it supports, while the tools that compri its current form should be adapted as needed for the particular conditions the organizations operates in.
In this article we argue that the only way to develop true Toyota-style systems in environments vastly different from tho for which the lean solution has already been developed, is to apply the same principles that people in Toyota have ud to shape what is recognized today as TPS. Applying the same thought process to a novel environment will result in a Toyota-style system customized for the particular中国历史电影
conditions the firm faces. This is not to say that the other perspectives described above are wrong or uless. On the contrary, a thorough understanding of how the tools work, their purpo, and how they fit together to form an integral system is what will enable us to develop Toyota-style systems in less than the 70 years it took Toyota.
We will illustrate this perspective by looking at a firm that is very different from a Toyota asmbly plant. The ca study is bad on a custom artistic process rather than mass production of standardi
zed products. If the approach had been to simply imitate Toyota’s solutions in this environment it would have been an exerci in frustration.In contrast, by understanding the actual situation in great detail and then flexibly applying the principles that define Toyota’s thi nking, it was possible to fundamentally transform this craft-bad company making it far more productive and profitable. The principles of flow and pull and levelling and team associate involvement in problem solving were all ud, but the way they were implemented was customized to fit the environment and the peculiarities of the organization.The ca illustrates that lean is a way of thinking about people and process aimed at creating a high-performance learning organization.
2. True Toyota-style syste ms result from applying the principles behind Toyota’s thinking and lead to the development of learning organizations
The tendency when a tools approach is taken is to define problems in technical terms. If the intention is to improve productivity, isolated process can be transformed into one-piece flow cells building to takt time. Then if the process is a natural batch one, or if there is so much variability in demand that it is difficult to calculate a stable takt time, or if products differ so much that it is not possible to balance the workload, it becomes frustrating and we hear the common mantra ‘lean does not apply becau we are different’.
班级演讲A principle-bad approach provides an understanding of why things are being done and a basis for judging whether the progress made is consistent with the principle. That enables the creative adaptation of the tools to meet the requirements of the environment, as long as their application is consistent with the principle.To illustrate this point, let us look at one of the 14 principles defined in The Toyota Way (Liker 2004):
Principle 2: Create continuous flow to bring problems to the surface—Create flow to move materials and information fast as well as to link process and people together so that problems surface right away.
Note that this principle does not say to make a cell or how to make a cell. The principle is to move material and information faster while linking process and people. Thus, when studying the current situation the idea is to look for areas where people and process are disconnected and material stagnates. Then, find creative ways to increa the flow and connect process better. That could be a cell or could be a first-in, first-out lane or could be reducing inventory or improving communication between two steps in the process. Furthermore, this is being done to ‘surface problems’. So even if inventory is reduced and material is flowing more quickly, but problems are not being surfaced and solved (not specifically stated in this principle) the solution is not being true to th
宝顶山石刻e principle. Simply eliminating inventory is not sufficient to satisfy the principle.
研究课题怎么写>喉咙干>张晓唯Furthermore, compliance with the principles necessarily leads to the implementation of technical solutions (the tools of TPS) as well as the development of the social system necessary to make them effective. Therefore, understanding lean as a wider socio-technical system (Trist and Bamforth 1951, Cherns 1976) is a more accurate view than the predominant tools-bad view that focus mostly on the technical aspect alone.
Ohno always emphasized understanding the true purpo of the system, implicitly highlighting the need to understand the principles guiding the changes being implemented. He focud on the core transformation process of converting inputs to outputs distinguishing value-added from non-value-added steps and developing technical solutions to eliminate the latter and facilitate the former. And yet, he also had a clear vision for the human role as problem solver and enabler of further progress. The Sugimori paper (Sugimori et al. 1977) emphasizes this socio-technical perspective by describing TPS as bad on two concepts, one technical that includes JIT and jidoka , and the other one focusing on the social aspect of fully utilizing workers’ capabilities. Ohno’s approach was never to implement a particular tool, but to build appropriate social and technical capabilities to fit the circumstances.
Bad on this system’s concept of fit we would not expect a ‘one-size fits all’ t of solutions to all manufacturing problems. We would expect to flexibly u tools bad on a t of principles to accomplish the intended purpo. We would also expect that people involved in doing the work should be engaged in controlling variances in their process. We would expect ownership by tho inside the system to be a necessary precondition for high performance. And we would expect that
