Development and validation of resource flexibility measures for manufacturing industry

Purpose: Global competition and ever changing customers demand have made manufacturing organizations to rapidly adjust to complexities, uncertainties, and changes. Therefore, flexibility in manufacturing resources is necessary to respond cost effectively and rapidly to changing production needs and requirements. Ability of manufacturing resources to dynamically reallocate from one stage of a production process to another in response to shifting bottlenecks is recognized as resource flexibility. This paper aims to develop and validate resource flexibility measures for manufacturing industry that could be used by managers/ practitioners in assessing and improving the status of resource flexibility for the optimum utilization of resources. Design/methodology/approach: The study involves survey carried out in Indian manufacturing industry using a questionnaire to assess the status of various aspects of resource flexibility and their relationships. A questionnaire was specially designed covering various parameters of resource flexibility. Its reliability was checked by finding the value of Cronback alpha (0.8417). Relative weightage of various measures was found out by using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). Pearson’s coefficient of correlation analysis was carried out to find out relationships between various parameters. Findings: From detailed review of literature on resource flexibility, 17 measures of resource flexibility and 47 variables were identified. The questionnaire included questions on all these measures and parameters. ‘Ability of machines to perform diverse set of operations’ and ability of workers to work on different machines’ emerged to be important measures with contributing weightage of 20.19% and 17.58% respectively. All the measures were found to be significantly correlated with overall resource flexibility except ‘training of workers’, as shown by Pearson’s coefficient of correlation. This indicates that companies do not want to spend on worker training. Practical implications: The study provides guidelines to managers/ practitioners in assessing and managing resource flexibility for optimum utilization of resources. This study can also help the firm’s management to identify the measures and variables to manage resource flexibility and the order in which stress should be given to various measures and actions. The developed and validated measures can be used globally for managing the resource flexibility in manufacturing sector. Originality/value: In this work, the theoretical perspective has been used to prepare the instrument from a detailed review of literature and then the study carried out using the questionnaire in an area where such studies were not carried out earlier.Peer Reviewe

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium ) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the fi eld understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field

Development and validation of resource flexibility measures for manufacturing industry

Purpose: Global competition and ever changing customers demand have made manufacturing organizations to rapidly adjust to complexities, uncertainties, and changes. Therefore, flexibility in manufacturing resources is necessary to respond cost effectively and rapidly to changing production needs and requirements. Ability of manufacturing resources to dynamically reallocate from one stage of a production process to another in response to shifting bottlenecks is recognized as resource flexibility. This paper aims to develop and validate resource flexibility measures for manufacturing industry that could be used by managers/ practitioners in assessing and improving the status of resource flexibility for the optimum utilization of resources. Design/methodology/approach: The study involves survey carried out in Indian manufacturing industry using a questionnaire to assess the status of various aspects of resource flexibility and their relationships. A questionnaire was specially designed covering various parameters of resource flexibility. Its reliability was checked by finding the value of Cronback alpha (0.8417). Relative weightage of various measures was found out by using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). Pearson’s coefficient of correlation analysis was carried out to find out relationships between various parameters. Findings: From detailed review of literature on resource flexibility, 17 measures of resource flexibility and 47 variables were identified. The questionnaire included questions on all these measures and parameters. ‘Ability of machines to perform diverse set of operations’ and ability of workers to work on different machines’ emerged to be important measures with contributing weightage of 20.19% and 17.58% respectively. All the measures were found to be significantly correlated with overall resource flexibility except ‘training of workers’, as shown by Pearson’s coefficient of correlation. This indicates that companies do not want to spend on worker training. Practical implications: The study provides guidelines to managers/ practitioners in assessing and managing resource flexibility for optimum utilization of resources. This study can also help the firm’s management to identify the measures and variables to manage resource flexibility and the order in which stress should be given to various measures and actions. The developed and validated measures can be used globally for managing the resource flexibility in manufacturing sector. Originality/value: In this work, the theoretical perspective has been used to prepare the instrument from a detailed review of literature and then the study carried out using the questionnaire in an area where such studies were not carried out earlier.Peer Reviewe

Glyphosate Efficacy in <i>Chloris virgata</i> Sw. in Response to Temperature and Tank Mixing

Glyphosate alone or a tank mixture of glyphosate and 2,4-D is commonly used for broad-spectrum weed control under fallow conditions in Australia. Air temperature or mixing glyphosate with 2,4-D, may influence the efficacy of glyphosate on feather fingergrass (Chloris virgata Sw.), a problematic summer-season weed of Australia. Dose–response studies were conducted with four populations of feather fingergrass under temperature-controlled glasshouse conditions (35/25 °C and 25/15 °C at 12 h/12 h) to assess the level of glyphosate resistance in relation to temperature regimes. Four parameter log-logistic models were used to develop dose–response curves. Based on plant mortality percentage, LD50 (lethal dose for 50% mortality) values of glyphosate at 25/15 °C for populations Ch, SGM2, SGW2, and CP2 were 137, 60, 650, and 1067 g ae ha−1, respectively. However, at 35/25 °C, the corresponding LD50 values were 209, 557, 2108, and 2554 g ae ha−1, respectively. A similar response was observed for the parameter GR50 (dose for 50% growth reduction) values of glyphosate. These results indicate that populations SGW2 and CP2 are highly glyphosate-resistant and in the summer season, it may be very difficult to control these populations due to poor glyphosate efficacy. These results further suggest that the efficacy of glyphosate for feather fingergrass control can be improved if applied during cooler temperatures (25/15 °C) or the spring season compared with warmer temperatures (35/25 °C) or the summer season. In another study, 2,4-D antagonized glyphosate remarkably in the CP2 (glyphosate-resistant) population but only marginally in the Ch (glyphosate-susceptible) population. Thus, it is not advisable to mix 2,4-D with glyphosate for the control of glyphosate-resistant feather fingergrass populations. The results further suggest that the use of this mixture is useful if the feather fingergrass is not glyphosate-resistant; however, the use of the mixture is to be avoided if the population is glyphosate-resistant in order to not exacerbate the potential resistance problem