Thus, in this paper, we evaluate the empirical evidence that examines the relationship between strategic consensus on manufacturing competitive priorities and performance. We analyse this evidence in light of the theory that has been developed in the operations management field. Our conclusion is that previous studies, while offering valuable insights, also observe several inadequacies and shortcomings, particularly in the methodologies used to model and study this topic. Arguably, these inadequacies might be responsible for the inconclusive and/or totally contradictory results of some studies (Joshi et al., 2003; Lindman et al., 2001). In spite of this evidence, we still think that strategic consensus on manufacturing competitive priorities should be positively and significantly related to organisational performance. In order to resolve some of the difficulties observed in previous studies, we propose a new approach to the study of strategic consensus and its effect on manufacturing performance. This new approach is consistent with previous theory in the field of operations management.
Specifically, this new methodology incorporates the trade-off – compatibility relationship that exists between any pair of manufacturing competitive priorities into the measurement of consensus and agreement on manufacturing competitive priorities. Trade-offs and compatibilities amongst manufacturing capabilities have been studied over the past four decades in the field of operations management (Skinner, 1969, 1974; Ferdows and de Meyer, 1990; Noble, 1995; Filippini et al., 1998; Collins et al., 1998; Rosenzweig and Roth, 2004). A trade-off relationship is found when the achievement of high levels of performance in one competitive priority comes at the expense of lower levels of performance in one or more priorities. A compatibility relationship is found when two competitive priorities can both achieve higher levels of performance (Filippini et al., 1998).
The remainder of the paper is structured as follows: Section 2 discusses the rationale behind strategic consensus on manufacturing competitive priorities and performance. Section 3 reviews and discusses the papers that examine the effect of strategic consensus along manufacturing competitive priorities on performance. Section 4 presents and discusses a new approach to the study of strategic consensus on manufacturing competitive priorities. Finally, the paper ends with conclusions and proposals for future research in Section 5.
Theorists and authors in both the business (Porter, 1980, 1985; Mintzberg et al., 2003) and manufacturing (Skinner, 1969, 1974; Hayes and Wheelwright, 1984; Hill, 2000) strategy fields agree that a sustainable and successful strategy centres on strategic compromises and trade-offs. Once the strategic plan (i.e. business/manufacturing strategy) has been developed, it is important to keep the structural and infrastructural resources aligned to that plan. On this point, authors in the business (Venkatraman, 1989; Whittington, 2001; Kaplan and Norton, 2001; Lynch, 2003) and manufacturing (Boyer and McDermott, 1999; Devaraj et al., 2004) strategy fields coincide again: the greater the consensus, fit, coherence, alignment, agreement, etc. amongst the firm's resources that support its strategy, the better its performance will be.
In the manufacturing strategy field, there has been a debate on whether trade-offs can be overcome/eliminated (Schonberger, 1986, 1990; Ferdows and de Meyer, 1990). It can be said that although the use of advanced manufacturing technologies (e.g. total quality management, total preventive maintenance) might improve and/or resolve some trade-offs, any manufacturing system is ultimately delimited by the physical, technical and human factors that are part of it. And since manufacturing strategy has all to do with design, even if those limitations keep changing, they cannot be ignored if the design of manufacturing systems is to be successful. Constraints are likely to always exist, which in turn makes the choice of strategic trade-offs still relevant and important (New, 1992; Skinner, 1992, 1996).
Уважаемый посетитель!
Чтобы распечатать файл, скачайте его (в формате Word).
Ссылка на скачивание - внизу страницы.