BACKGROUND Lean manufacturing has enjoyed a huge publicity and has been widely acknowledged to be very useful in improving

throughput, efficiency, competitiveness, large market share, and profit etc. No wonder more and more companies are inclined towards introducing the lean philosophy in order to achieve these results. According to Womack and Jones (1996), Lean manufacturing is a series of processes and steps that identify the value adding activities and then eliminate the non- valueadding activities. Initially known as the Toyota Production System (TPS), Toyota was able to record success by simply eliminating wastes in their system based on two themes, Just in Time and Jidoka. With JIT, movement of parts are coordinated using the Kanban etc so that there is a smoother flow of parts through the system. And with Jidoka, quality issues are eliminated because the human in the system can stop the line when he notices an error or problem with the aid of proper visual control. During this period , Fujo Choo of Toyota was also able to develop what is now popularly known as the seven types of wastes and on which most companies have based the Lean initiatives; wastes in overproduction, waiting , transportation, inventory, processing, motion and defects . Since the Toyota era, it has since metamorphosed and has been widely applied by different companies over the years to include much more tools and methods, and in 1996 Womack and Jones summarized the implementation of lean manufacturing to be based on 5 principles: Customer Value: What is value to the customer is most important and must first be identified, when this is done then the wastes or activities considered as unnecessary can then be identified and eliminated. Value Stream Analysis: Analysis is done on the business process to identify the actual activities or process that adds value towards meeting the customers needs Flow: This is about organizing the value adding processes to ensure a continuous flow of raw materials or processes to yield finished goods or services. Pull System: This simply means production is dependent on customer demand or request and ensures there is no over production. This means raw materials, services etc are requested, utilized and delivered Just In Time. Perfection: This is about ensuring the highest quality standards and thus the idea of continuous improvement meaning there is no end to reducing time, space, cost and mistakes.

A survey in 2003 suggested that of 40 companies that adopted Lean manufacturing they recorded success in reducing lead time, increasing productivity, reducing WIP inventory, improving customer service or satisfaction and reducing cost. (Roy, Henrik and Hakan, 2006) Despite these obvious advantages in implementing lean manufacturing, there have also been some criticisms. Dove (1999) argues that leanness reduces an organizations ability to react to changes, and Cusumano (1994) also argues that JIT could cause a backlog or congestion in the supply chain and thus cause congestion, shortage of workers etc. These criticisms however have not prevented much more companies in buying into the lean idea. Sadly though, research suggests that many more have been unsuccessful, thus sparking off

investigations whether lean manufacturing is truly universal, how to implement lean manufacturing in SMEs , is lean a method or philosophy? etc. Principles have been generated, tools and techniques have been developed, but there is yet to be a defined procedure or method to implement lean manufacturing that takes into account all the criticism and can be adopted by both small and large scale organizations. This research aims at analysing successful and unsuccessful lean implementation cases so as to identify critical success and failure factors in other to propose an optimum lean implementation method. THE NEED TO OPTIMIZE While Toyota and other large companies were successful in implementing lean manufacturing in their organization, many others unfortunately hasnt been that successful. Some find it difficult applying the concept in their organization and some overestimate the gains of lean manufacturing and thus wouldnt be able to justify the amount of time and finance spent in implementing lean to yield little or no financial gain. (Roy, Henrik and Hakan, 2006) Irani (2001) brought into question the universality of lean. He notes that job- shops which handle between 100 2000 product routes in their facility would find it difficult mapping and analysing their flow as it would require complicated and erroneously expensive IT systems. Ultimately, Bamber and Dale (2001) concluded that lean implementation has not been as successful in this area for three main reasons. Production approach cannot be standardised because each job is likely to be different due to the large product portfolio. These job shops cannot match the huge resources large firms enjoy that allow them to be inflexible along their supply chain. The characteristics of the products create production constraints.

Some other general reasons for implementation failure include: Lack of commitment or leadership from top management in ensuring lean manufacturing is fully implemented. (Lynds 2002) Management concentrate on teaching new improvement tools to employees rather than integrating them in the overall lean philosophy and the practical side of solving problems for improvement. (Spear, 2004) Without a review of organizational values when implementing lean, there is an adverse effect on workers in terms of morale, unhappiness which eventually leads to operational failures. (Hines et al , 2004) Lack of adequate funding in the case of SMEs including poor cost estimation and planning. (Pius et al, 2005) Unreliable raw material suppliers. (Lonnie, 2010) The effort required is underestimated.(Lonnie, 2010)

Furthermore, similar quality management concepts have a definite problem solving approach. For example TQM is implemented using the Plan Do Check Act (PDCA) cycle and Six Sigma is

implemented using the Define Measure Analyse Improve Control (DMAIC) methodology, which according to Andersson et al (2006) brings structure to process improvement. Jiju (2010) also argues that Lean fails in delivering effective bottom line results unlike Six Sigma partly because Six Sigma has a clear and well defined implementation process (DMAIC) which makes it easier for practitioners to implement in very clear steps while it is more difficult to clearly identify which tools to use and at what times when implementing Lean. With increase in technology and competition it has become obvious that the five implementation principles proposed by Womack and Jones (1996) is not universally applicable as various more tools and techniques in Lean manufacturing has been proposed by scholars in an attempt to adapt the Lean principles to unique organizations. Some of the common tools are as follows, details of which would be dealt more in chapter two (Bhasin and Burcher, 2006; a. Total Productive Maintenance (TPM): This fosters preventive maintenance in the workplace thereby improving efficiency, reliability and capacity of machines b. 5S: Aimed at keeping the workplace clean and organized thereby improving efficiency. c. SMED (Single minute exchange of dies): aimed at reducing delays in set-up times d. Cellular manufacturing: This is grouping machines of similar products together in a cell. e. Supplier relationships: Establishing long term relationship with suppliers f. Visual control: The use of visual systems to maintain quality g. Continuous improvement (kaizen): There is no end to perfection or improvements. This report also therefore looks at proposing such a structured approach for implementing Lean by also analysing historical implementation methods using case studies in order to develop an optimum structure for implementing Lean. PROJECT OVERVIEW As discussed above previous Lean implementation case studies are going to be analysed in other to establish optimum implementation methods. In other to establish this, chapter two reviews the origin and historical trend of Lean manufacturing. The tools, techniques and methods developed thus far and a structured review of lean manufacturing. Then, a number of case studies are reviewed that will be essential to the analysis. In chapter three the methods used in analysing the case studies reviewed earlier is outlined and justified. And details of these analysis presented and discussed in chapter four , and the report concluded in chapter five. DELIMITATIONS

Literature review structured review of lean manufacturing