From lean supply and relationships to SME assessment : executive summary

This Executive Summary is a summary of the author's Engineering Doctorate research and the application of that research. The Executive Summary has sufficient detail and description to be read independently from the other pieces of research, called submissions, to which this refers. In outline, the three areas of research arose from the three research programmes with which the author was closely involved. The first area of research involved the identification of critical success factors within customer-supplier relationships in the automotive industry. An extensive literature review was performed using Lamming's Lean Supply Model (1993) as a starting point. A number of gaps in the body of knowledge were identified and were grouped into five areas for the purpose of further research. One area was subsequently addressed as part of the second area of research. The second area of research was aimed at assisting small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) in their use of the internet to improve their performance. A means of assessing the effectiveness of the operations of the SMEs was a critical part of this programme. A new tool called the SME (Operations) Assessment Tool, (SOAT) was developed because it focused on key business processes as the basis for assessment instead of the more traditional financial analysis. Having developed SOAT within the specific research programme, it was applied to three SMEs as a test of the methodology as a more general tool. Feedback from the three SMEs and those within the research programme showed that SOAT was straightforward to apply. The third area of research allowed the author to develop his interest in customer supplier relationships, as this was seen to be the main focus of concern within companies within the programme. A Memorandum of Understanding and Intent (MUI) was developed and justified, but was in the process of being applied by other researchers

Resolving the productivity paradox of digitalised production

[EN] Although Industry 4.0 and other initiatives predict widespread adoption of digitalised technology on the factory floor, few companies use new digitalised production technology holistically in their ecosystems; in practical implementation, companies often decide against digitalisation for financial reasons. This is due to a paradox (akin to the so called “productivity paradox”) caused by the complexity of value creation and value delivery within digitalised production. This article analyses and synthesises cross-disciplinary research using a grounded theory model, thus offering valuable insights for businesses considering investing in digitalised production. A qualitative model and an associated toolbox (complete with tools for practical application by business leaders and decision-makers) are presented to address organisational uncertainty and leadership disconnect that often contribute to the paradoxical gap between digital strategy and operational implementation.Dold, L.; Speck, C. (2021). Resolving the productivity paradox of digitalised production. International Journal of Production Management and Engineering. 9(2):65-80. https://doi.org/10.4995/ijpme.2021.15058OJS658092Al-Debei, Mutaz M.; Avison, David (2010): Developing a unified framework of the business model concept. In Euro-pean Journal of Information Systems 19 (3), pp. 359-376. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2010.21Andulkar, Mayur; Le, Duc Tho; Berger, Ulrich (2018): A multi-case study on Industry 4.0 for SME's in Brandenburg, Germany. Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Hawaii, 2018. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2018.574Arnold, Christian; Kiel, Daniel; Voight, Kai-Ingo (2017): Innovative Business Models for the Industrial Internet of Things. In Berg Huettenmaenn Monatsh 162 (9), pp. 371-381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00501-017-0667-7Arnold, Christian; Voight, Kai-Ingo (2017): Ecosystem Effects of the Industrial Internet of Things on Manufacturing Companies. In Acta INFOLOGICA 1 (2), pp. 99-108.Berghaus, Sabine (2018): The Fuzzy Front End of Digital Transformation. Activities and Approaches for Initiating Organizational Change Strategies. Universität St. Gallen. Available online at https://www1.unisg.ch/www/edis.nsf/SysLkpByIdentifier/4704/$FILE/dis4704.pdf.Berghaus, Sabine; Back, Andrea; Kaltenrieder, Bramwell. (2017): Digital Maturity & Transformation Report 2017. Zürich: Crosswalk AG,. In Veröffentlichung zur Studie der Universität St. Gallen in Kooperation mit Crosswalk. St. Gallen, March 2017.Bouwman, Harry; Nikou, Shahrokh; Molina-Castillo, Francisco J.; Reuver, Mark de (2018): The impact of digitaliza-tion on business models. In Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance 20 (2), pp. 105-124. https://doi.org/10.1108/DPRG-07-2017-0039Buchholz, Birgit; Ferdinand, Jan-Peter; Gieschen, Jan-Hinrich; Seidel, Uwe (2017): Digitalisierung industrieller Wertschöpfung. Eine Studie im Rahmen der Begleitforschung zum Technologieprogramm AUTONOMIK für In-dustrie 4.0 des Bundesministeriums für Wirtschaft und Energie. Berlin: iit-Institut für Innovation und Technik der VDI/VDE Innovation + Technik GmbH.Burggräf, Peter; Dannapfel, Matthias; Voet, Hanno; Bök, Patrick-Benjamin; Uelpenich, Jérôme; Hoppe, Julian (2017): Digital Transformation of Lean Production. Systematic Approach for the Determination of Digitally Pervasive Val-ue Chains. In World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic, Business and Industrial Engineering 11 (10), 2462-2471.Burmeister, Christian; Luettgens, Dirk; Piller, Frank T. (2016): Business Model Innovation for Industrie 4.0. Why the 'Industrial Internet' Mandates a New Perspective. In Die Unternehmensführung ; RWTH-TIM Working Paper 70 (2), pp. 124-152. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2571033Cañas, Héctor; Mula, Josefa; Díaz-Madroñero, Manuel; Campuzano-Bolarín, Francisco (2021): Implementing Industry 4.0 principles. In Computers & Industrial Engineering 158 (1), p. 107379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2021.107379Charmaz, Kathy (2014): Constructing grounded theory. 2nd edition. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: SAGE.Chesbrough, Henry (2010): Business model innovation: opportunities and barriers. Opportunities and Barriers. In Long range planning 43 (2-3), pp. 354-363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.010Chesbrough, Henry; Rosenbloom, Richard S. (2002): The role of the business model in capturing value from innova-tion: evidence from Xerox Corporation's technology spin‐off companies. In Industrial and corporate change 11 (3), pp. 529-555. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/11.3.529Cottyn, Johannes; Stockman, Kurt; Hendrik, van Landeghem (2008): The Complementarity of Lean Thinking and the ISA 95 Standard. WBF 2008. WBF. Barcelona, November 2008. Available online at http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-524679.Dold, Luzian (2020): Beurteilung von Investitionen in die digitalisierte Produktion. Eine Mixed-Method-Studie zur moderierenden Wirkung von Nutzenkonstrukten aus Geschäftsmodellen an der Lücke zwischen digitaler Strategie und operativen Prozessen. Dissertation. Middlesex University, London.Dold, Luzian (2021): A Value Centred Paradigm to Moderate the Digital Transformation of Manufacturing. In Adv. J Social Sci. 8 (1), pp. 86-95. DOI: 10.21467/ajss.8.1.86-95.Döring, Nicola; Bortz, Jürgen (2016): Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation in den Sozial- und Humanwissenschaften. With assistance of Sandra Pöschl. 5. vollständig überarbeitete, aktualisierte und erweiterte Auflage. Berlin, Heidel-berg: Springer (Springer-Lehrbuch). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41089-5Dorst, Wolfgang (2016): Implementation Strategy Industrie 4.0. Report on the results of the Industrie 4.0 Platform. With assistance of W. Dorst, C. Glohr, T. Hahn, U. Loewen, Rosen, R. Schiemann, T., F. Vollmar et al. Edited by BITKOM e.V., VDMA e.V., ZVEI e.V. Berlin, Frankfurt am Main.Eruvankai, Saju; Muthukrishnan, Murugesan; Mysore, Anantharamaiah Kumar (2017): Accelerating IIOT Adoption with OPC UA. In INTERNETWORKING INDONESIA 9 (1), pp. 3-8. Available online at http://www.internetworkingindonesia.org/Issues/Vol9-No1-2017/iij_vol9_no1_2017_eruvankai.pdf.Fleisch, Elgar; Weinberger, Markus; Wortmann, Ass Felix; Wortmann, Felix (2014): Geschäftsmodelle im Internet der Dinge. In HMD Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik 51 (6), pp. 812-826. https://doi.org/10.1365/s40702-014-0083-3Geissbauer, Reinhard; Schrauf Stefan; Koch Volkmar; Kuge Simon (2014): Industry 4.0 : Opportunities and Challenges of the Industrial Internet. Edited by Pricewaterhousecooper Aktiengesellschaft. München.Gibbons, Paul M.; Burgess, Stuart C. (2010): Introducing OEE as a measure of lean Six Sigma capability. In Lean Six Sigma Journal 1 (2), pp. 134-156. https://doi.org/10.1108/20401461011049511Grebe, Michael; Rüssmann, Michael,Leyh Michael; Franke, Roman (2019): HOW DIGITAL CHAMPIONS INVEST. Edited by Boston Consulting Group. München. Available online at http://image-src.bcg.com/Images/BCG-How-Digital-Champions-Invest-June-2019_tcm15-223286.pdf, checked on 1/6/2020.Gürdür, Didem; El-khoury, Jad; Törngren, Martin (2019): Digitalizing Swedish industry. What is next? In Computers in Industry 105 (1), pp. 153-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2018.12.011Henssen, Robert; Schleipen, Miriam (2014): Interoperability between OPC UA and AutomationML. In Procedia CIRP 25, pp. 297-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2014.10.042Hopp, Wallace J.; Spearman, Mark L. (2004): To Pull or Not to Pull. What Is the Question? In Manufacturing & Ser-vice Operations Management 6 (2), pp. 133-148. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.1030.0028Imtiaz, Jahanzaib; Jasperneite, Jürgen (2013): Scalability of OPC-UA down to the chip level enables "Internet of Things". In IEEE intelligent Systems, pp. 500-505. https://doi.org/10.1109/INDIN.2013.6622935Industrial Value Chain Initiative (2018): Industrial Value Chain Reference Architecture -Next. Strategic implementation framework of industrial value chain for connected industries. Edited by Industrial Value Chain Initiative. Monozu-kuri Nippon Conference c/o. Tokyo.Jesse, Norbert (2016): Internet of Things and Big Data - The Disruption of the Value Chain and the Rise of New Soft-ware Ecosystems. In IFAC-PapersOnLine 49 (29), pp. 275-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.11.079Jüttemann, Gerd (Ed.) (1989): Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie. Grundfragen, Verfahrensweisen, Anwen-dungsfelder. 2. Aufl. Heidelberg: Asanger.Kagermann, Henning; Anderl, Reiner; Gausemeier, Jürgen; Schuh, Günther; Wahlster Wolfgang (2016): Industrie 4.0 im globalen Kontext. Strategien der Zusammenarbeit mit internationalen Partnern. Acatech Studie. München: Her-bert Utz Verlag.Kagermann, Henning; Wahlster, Wolfgang; Helbig, Johannes (2013): Umsetzungsempfehlungen für das Zukunftspro-jekt Industrie 4.0. Abschlussbericht des Arbeitskreises Industrie 4.0. Edited by Prof. Dr. Henning Kagermann. For-schungsunion Wirtschaft und Wissenschaft, Arbeitskreis Industrie 4.0. Frankfurt am Main.Kagermann, Henning; Wahlster, Wolfgang; Lukas, Wolf-Dieter (2011): Industrie 4.0 : Mit dem Internet der Dinge auf dem Weg zur 4. Industriellen Revolution. In VDI Nachrichten 2011, 4/1/2011 (13).Kiel, Daniel; Müller, Julian; Arnold, Christian; Voight, Kai-Ingo (2017): Sustainable Industrial Value Creation. Benefits and Challenges of Industry 4.0. In International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim) 21 (8), pp. 1-34. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919617400151Koch, Arno (2016): OEE für das Produktionsteam. Das vollständige OEE-Benutzerhandbuch - oder wie Sie die ver-borgene Maschine entdecken. 3., korrigierte Auflage. Herrieden: CETPM Publishing (Operational Excellence, Nr. 5).Legrenzi, Christopher (2017): THE DIGITAL PARADOX. INFORMATION, INFORMATICS, AND INFOR-MATION SYSTEM. In ISM Journal of International Business, pp. 35-42.Lerch, Christian; Jäger, Angela; Maloca, Spomenka (2017): Wie digital ist Deutschlands Industrie wirklich. Arbeit und Produktivität in der digitalen Produktion. In Mitteilungen aus der ISI-Erhebung Modernisierung der Produktion, Ausgabe 71.Leyh, Christian; Bley, Katja (2016): Digitalisierung. Chance oder Risiko für den deutschen Mittelstand? - Eine Studie ausgewählter Unternehmen. In HMD 53 (1), pp. 29-41. https://doi.org/10.1365/s40702-015-0197-2Lin, Shi-Wan; Crawford, Mark; Mellor, Stephen (2017): The Industrial Internet of Things Volume G1: Reference Architecture. Version 1.80. Needham, MA. In Industrial Internet Consortium (IIC) Tech. Rep.Magruk, Andrzej (2016): Uncertainty in the Sphere of the Industry 4.0 - Potential Areas to Research. In Business, Management & Education/Verslas, Vadyba ir Studijos 14 (2), pp. 275-291. https://doi.org/10.3846/bme.2016.332Maier, W.; Weber, M. (2013): Management von Big-Data-Projekten. Leitfaden. Berlin: Bundesverband Information-swirtschaft,Telekommunikation und neue Medien e. V.Maklan, Stan; Peppard, Joe; Klaus, Philipp (2015): Show me the money. In European Journal of Marketing 49 (3/4), pp. 561-595. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-08-2013-0411Mayring, Philipp (2008): Einführung in die qualititative Sozialforschung. Eine Anleitung zu qualitativem Denken. 5. Aufl. Weinheim, Basel: Beltz (Beltz Studium).Obermaier, Robert (2019): Industrie 4.0 und Digitale Transformation als unternehmerische Gestaltungsaufgabe. In Robert Obermaier (Ed.): Handbuch Industrie 4.0 und Digitale Transformation. Betriebswirtschaftliche, technische und rechtliche Herausforderungen. 1st ed. 2019. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, pp. 3-46. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-24576-4_1Obermaier, Robert; Schweikl, Stefan (2019): Zur Bedeutung von Solows Paradoxon. Empirische Evidenz und ihre Übertragbarkeit auf Digitalisierungsinvestitionen in einer Industrie 4.0. In Robert Obermaier (Ed.): Handbuch In-dustrie 4.0 und Digitale Transformation. Betriebswirtschaftliche, technische und rechtliche Herausforderungen. 1st ed. 2019. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, pp. 529-564. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-24576-4_22Osterwalder, Alexander (2004): The business model ontology: A proposition in a design science approach. Disserti-ation. Universite de Lausanne, Lausanne. Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales. Available online at https://doc.rero.ch/record/4210/files/1_these_Osterwalder.pdf.Osterwalder, Alexander; Pigneur, Yves (2010): Business model generation: a handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.Palm, Florian; Grüner, Sten; Pfrommer, Julius; Graube, Markus; Urbas, Leon (2014): open62541-der offene OPC UA Stack. In Onlinepublikation des Fraunhofer IOSB, Lehrstuhl Prozessleittechnik der RWTH Aachen; TU Dresden, Professur für Prozessleitechnik,Porter, Michael E. (2010): Wettbewerbsvorteile. Spitzenleistungen erreichen und behaupten. 7. durchgesehene Auflage Auflage. Frankfurt, New York: Campus.Porter, Michael E.; Heppelmann, James E. (2014): How smart, connected products are transforming competition. In Harvard business review 92 (11), pp. 64-88.Rachinger, Michael; Rauter, Romana; Müller, Christiana; Vorraber, Wolfgang; Schirgi, Eva (2019): Digitalization and its influence on business model innovation. In Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 30 (8), pp. 1143-1160. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-01-2018-0020Remane, Gerrit; Hanelt, Andre; Wiesboeck, Florian; Kolbe, Lutz M. (2017): Digital maturity in traditional industries - an exploratory analysis. Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS),. Guimarães,Portugal, 2017.Rese, Mario; Meier, Horst; Gesing, Judith; Boßlau, Mario (2013): An ontology of business models for industrial prod-uct-service systems. In Yoshiki Shimomura, Koji Kimita (Eds.): The Philosopher's Stone for Sustainability. Pro-ceedings of the 4th CIRP International Conference on Industrial Product-Service Systems, Tokyo, Japan, Novem-ber 8th - 9th, 2012. Heidelberg: Springer (Lecture Notes in Production Engineering), pp. 191-196. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32847-3_32Sauer, Olaf (2014): Information Technology for the Factory of the Future - State of the Art and Need for Action. In Procedia CIRP 25, pp. 293-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2014.10.041Schmenner, Roger W. (2015): The Pursuit of Productivity. In Production and Operations Management 24 (2), pp. 341-350. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.12230Schuh, G.; Anderl, R.; Dumitrescu, R.; Hompel, M. ten; Krüger, A. (Eds.) (2020): Industrie 4.0 Maturity Index. Man-aging the Digital Transformation of Companies - UPDATE 2020 - (acatech STUDY). MUNICH: Herbert Utz Verlag.Schuh, Günther; Reuter, Christina; Hauptvogel, Annika; Dölle, Christian (2015): Hypotheses for a Theory of Produc-tion in the Context of Industrie 4.0. In : Advances in Production Technology: Springer, pp. 11-23. Available online at https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-12304-2_2 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12304-2_2Skilton, Mark; Gordon, Penelope; Harding, Chris (2010): Building return on investment from cloud computing. Cloud Business Artifacts Project, Cloud Computing Work Group, The Open Group. Edited by The Open Group. Burling-ton, MA.Solow, R. M. (1987): We'd better watch out. In New York Times Book Review 36.Strauss, Anselm; Corbin, Juliet (2010): Grounded theory. Grundlagen qualitativer Sozialforschung. Unveränd. Nachdr. der letzten Aufl. Weinheim: Beltz.Tantik, Erdal; Anderl, Reiner (2016): Industrie 4.0. Using Cyber-physical Systems for Value-stream Based Production Evaluation. In Procedia CIRP 57, pp. 207-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.036Veile, Johannes; Kiel, Daniel; Voight, Kai-Ingo; Müller, Julian Marius (2019): Lessons learned from Industry 4.0 implementation in the German manufacturing industry. In Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management (ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-08-2018-0270Witzel, Andreas (2000): Das problemzentrierte Interview. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research 1 (1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2015.04.001Ylipää, Torbjörn; Skoogh, Anders; Bokrantz, Jon; Gopalakrishnan, Maheshwaran (2017): Identification of maintenance improvement potential using OEE assessment. In International Journal of Productivity and Performance Manage-ment 66 (1), pp. 126-143. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-01-2016-0028Zennaro, Ilenia; Battini, Daria; Sgarbossa, Fabio; Persona, Alessandro; Marchi, Rosario de; van der Wiele, Ton (2018): Micro Downtime - Data Collection, Analysis and Impact on OEE in Bottling Lines The San Benedetto Case Study. In Int J Qual & Reliability Mgmt 17 (9), p. 0. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-11-2016-0202Zott, Christoph; Amit, Raphael; Massa, Lorenzo (2011): The Business model: Recent Developments and Future Re-search. In Journal of management 37 (4), pp. 1019-1042. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311406265Zuehlke, Detlef (2010): SmartFactory-Towards a factory-of-things. In Annual Reviews in Control 34 (1), pp. 129-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arcontrol.2010.02.00

Metodología para implementación de CPPS en SME ́s

Actualmente las Small and Medium sized enterprises (SME ́s) de manufactura en Colombia se han visto afectadas por el surgimiento de la industria 4.0 (I4.0), lo cual ha llevado a que busquen la manera de adaptarse a las necesidades del siglo XXI. Por lo tanto, es de suma importancia plantearse cómo las SME ́s puedan implementar los avances tecnológicos que vienen junto al nuevo desarrollo industrial dentro de su sistema de producción. A nivel educacional y en el ámbito laboral existen casos de éxito en la aplicación de Cyber Physical Production System (CPPS), pero sigue existiendo una brecha entre CPPS y las SME ́s en Colombia. Así mismo, no existe un estudio que vincule los conceptos de Low Cost Automation (LCA), CPPS, SME ́s, y Human Machine Interface (HMI). Debido a lo mencionado anteriormente existe la oportunidad de evaluar una metodología que le permita a las SME ́s en Colombia incorporar las tecnologías enmarcadas en la I4.0 dentro del sistema de producción. Para poder elaborar la metodología se desarrollará una fase diagnóstica y por otro lado una de emulación del proceso de manufactura. Este procedimiento se llevará a cabo dentro de la empresa caso de estudio seleccionada, para así poder analizar, mediante el uso de indicadores de productividad, la adopción de las tecnologías. Con el desarrollo de la metodología propuesta, se espera identificar los requisitos para poder implementar un CPPS que responda a las necesidades del proceso de manufactura de la empresa, buscando tener un impacto en su productividad.Ingeniero (a) IndustrialPregrad

Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Production Systems and Logistics (CPSL 2021)

Proceedings of the CPSL 202

Cluster programmes in Europe and beyond

Dokumenty Evropského dokumentačního střediskaLuxembour