The Lean Enterprise In Aerospace Marketing EssayFor assignment help please contact

at help@hndassignmenthelp.co.uk or hndassignmenthelp@gmail.com 

Today most people identify lean with reducing waste, which is to take a

very narrow view of this exciting idea. Reduction of waste isn't the sole

focus of lean. In lean, waste reduction and value creation are two parallel

concepts which must be executed simultaneously to meet the demands of

the end customer.

Womack, Jones and Roos argue in their book, The Machine That Changed

the World- How Lean Production Revolutionized the Global Car Wars,

that while lean thinking can be applied by any company anywhere in the

world, its fullest potential is only realized when it is applied across the

spectrum of the enterprise. And they called such an enterprise as Lean

Enterprise.

'Lean Enterprise is an integrated entity that efficiently creates value for

its multiple stakeholders by employing lean principles and practices.'

(Murman et al, 2002)

Lean enterprise is a firm that embraces lean principles. The

organizational structure of a lean enterprise is intolerant of waste and

every member of the organization proactively seeks improvement in the

existing processes. Lean enterprise prioritizes customer value and every

activity within the organization aligns itself to achieve that goal. Another

trait of a lean enterprise is its outreach. As Womack et al points out in

their work, Toyota reached out to its suppliers and not only involved

them in the design process but also encouraged them to come up with

their own innovations. They encouraged their big suppliers to consolidate

the smaller suppliers to cope with the high demand from emerging

markets. Toyota itself holds an equity stake in its major suppliers.

The Toyota success story points out the importance of cooperation and

co-ordination between the firm and its various suppliers. In increasingly

complex world of Aerospace, most of the aircraft manufacturers are

acting as system integrators and rely on their first tier suppliers for

manufacturing individual parts of an aircraft and these lessons from

Toyota story are invaluable to the aerospace industry to understand the

firm and supplier relationship.

In this context, lean enterprise's definition needs to be extended to

include the phenomenon of outreach. Therefore, lean enterprise can be

defined as a collective group of organizations working together to

achieve a set of common goals. This collective group formulates a

common strategy to manage the value streams extending from one

organization to another, share gains and profit, manage targets for

improvement, and eliminate waste.

Murman et al in their book, Lean Enterprise Value, identify five

principles of Lean Enterprise Value. They fuse together the words lean

and value to emphasize the importance of simultaneously eliminating

waste and creating value in a lean enterprise. Enterprise represents a

firm centric approach rather than factory floor approach. An organization

can truly become lean only when the principles of eliminating waste and

value creation are applied across the spectrum of the firm. Five

principles of Lean Enterprise Value are,

Principle 1: Create Lean value by doing the job right and by doing the

right job.

This argues for a dynamic approach where exists a constructive

relationship between doing the job right and doing the right job.

Principle 2: Deliver value only after identifying stakeholder value and

constructing robust value propositions.

Value delivery is facilitated by a well structure value proposition and of

course, a solid value proposition can't be structure around poorly

identified value.

Principle 3: Fully realize lean value only by adopting an enterprise

perspective.

It is very important that lean is implemented at the enterprise level

otherwise overall net gain would be limited. A study conducted by Cook

and Graser for RAND Corporation suggests that all aerospace

manufacturers in the United States have adopted lean to a certain

degree. The problem is that these adoptions tend to be localized and as a

consequence there benefits. This creates isolated success stories of 'lean

projects.' Murman et al call these success stories as 'islands of success.'

Principle 4: Address the interdependencies across enterprise levels to

increase lean value.

There are different levels of enterprise and they are all interdependent.

Detail discussion of the various levels of enterprises follows.

Principle 5: People, not just processes, effectuate lean value.

In order to eliminate waste and create value, knowledge and capability

must exist at three distinct levels of enterprise, value identification, value

proposition and value delivery. For this to happen, people working an

enterprise to understand and facilitate lean principles. Talking about

Toyota Production Systems, Sugimori et al highlight the central role of

people.

"…'respect for human' systems where the workers are allowed to

display in full their capabilities through active participation in running

and improving their own workshops." (Sugimori et al, 1977)

Value Stream

Second step in formulation of research question is to define value stream.

Value Stream is broadening of Porter's concept of value chain. Porter

defines value chain as a basic tool for conducting a systemic analysis of

all of the activities (and their interactions) that a firm performs, in order

to understand the sources of competitive advantage.

Womack and Jones in their book Lean Thinking define value stream as

the set of all specific end-to-end and linked actions and processes and

functions necessary in transforming raw materials into a finished product

delivered to the customer, and then in providing post-sales customer

support. They argue that when value stream is mapped it gives a very

clear indication of processes and activities that a) create value, b) create

no value but are unavoidable and c) create no value and are avoidable.

This process of mapping the value stream facilitates the elimination of

waste and helps in implementation of lean principles.

Evolution of value stream is result of progress made in the sphere of

technology. In response to increasing technological complexity in recent

times, corporations have begun to concentrate all their efforts on their

core competency while outsourcing activities in the external periphery of

their value adding activities. While this approach creates a specialist

organization, it also results in loss of breadth of expertise. Johns, Crute,

and Graves (2006) argue that as a consequence, we find customers

seeking broad systemic offerings while suppliers are moving in opposite

direction of specialisation in narrow band of core competence. This

creates a vacuum which can be filled by organisations that can forge

strong supplier relationships and bring together a wide array of

specialists to develop a systemic offering and create value streams in the

process. . Aerospace Innovation and Growth Team (AIGT), a UK

government agency, reported in 2003:

"The nature of UK Aerospace Industries 2022 will have changed

considerably, driven primarily by globalisation. The business model of the

future will be value chain competing against value chain, not just single

company versus single company as we witness predominantly today.

Supply chains will have evolved to include the end-user or consumer in

value creation and through this will have become known as value chains."

While AIGT uses the phrase 'value chain', in author's opinion it

corresponds more closely with Womack and Jones' 'value stream' than

Porter's value chain! Johns, Crute and Graves' also comment on value

stream in their paper on lean supply,

"…to realise the full advantages, Lean practitioners in UK aerospace

must move beyond the current primary focus on manufacturing

techniques and optimising only their own company's part in the supply

chain as an isolated process, toward embracing a Value Stream

perspective."

This is not only true for UK but the entire industry as a whole. One

instance of failure on part of a manufacturer to involve suppliers in the

development and decision making process would be Boeing's attempt to

increase production of the 737 and 747 jumbo jets in 1997. Neither its

factories nor its suppliers could cope up with the production target and

Boeing had to shut down the production of the concerned aircrafts for a

month. This, in parts was responsible for the first net loss recorded by

Boeing in more than 50 years! Today when both big player in aerospace,

Boeing and Airbus are targeting an ambitious 40% increase in production

of single and twin aisle passenger aircraft by 2015, principles of lean

enterprise and value streams are more relevant and crucial to the

success of the industry than ever.

Lean Enterprise in Aerospace

Discussion of lean principle in context of aerospace presents its own

challenges. Lean philosophy, as discussed earlier, was developed by

Toyota in post-World War II Japan with focus on creating maximum value

with least investment of the resources whereas the rest of aerospace

industry, particularly the United States which 'was' also the

unchallenged leader in the field, had Cold War priorities. Implementing a

new business philosophy, which worked in the very dynamic market of

automobiles, in aerospace industries with its higher degree of complexity

and lower volumes is nothing short of introducing a new paradigm.

To continue the discussion further one must understand the evolution of

lean. Lean is a way of thinking and not a set of theoretical steps. Lean

philosophy was observed to work in practice and only then it was codified

into theory. This evolutionary curve provides lean it's 'legitimacy'.

Murman et al in their book, Lean Enterprise Value: Insights from MIT's

Lean Advancement Initiative put forward implications of lean thinking for

the aerospace industries. They point out the peculiar nature of

aerospace; industries are highly interdependent with a very wide

supplier base. They are both a source and importer of technological

innovation, and have a rich intellectual capital base and highly skilled

workforce. Also, failure is not an option in aerospace, the products and

systems must operate with zero failures! Another aspect of aerospace

industries which is poles apart from automobile is the lifecycle of

products. Aerospace systems and platforms have life cycles spanning

over decades with continuous evolution of the subsystems and

components. For instance, Boeing B-52 Stratofortress, a long range

strategic bomber first manufactured by Boeing in 1950s, is still in service

with the United States Air Force!

Murman et al argue for a broader and more holistic view of lean thinking,

centred on the enterprise, to be implemented in aerospace. Most of the

value addition in aerospace lies in upstream design and development

phase, which can last for years as oppose to months in case of

automobiles, and in downstream sustainment operations which typically

last for decades. These particular traits demand that lean enterprise

should be focus of the efforts of aerospace industries in implementing

lean thinking. Johns et al argue for the proliferation of value streams in

aerospace and that is another essential step in transforming aerospace

industries into 'lean enterprise'. Aerospace thrives on technological

innovation and lean's philosophy of Kaizen or continuous improvement

sits well with that trait. One can conclude on the basis of arguments laid

that lean thinking offers lots of incentives for aerospace.

Vision 2016

'People working together as a global enterprise for aerospace leadership'

Boeing - Forever New Frontiers

Values

Leadership

Integrity

Quality

Customer Satisfaction

People working together

A diverse and involved team

Good corporate citizenship

Enhancing shareholder value

Core Competencies

Detailed customer knowledge and focus

We will seek to understand, anticipate and be responsive to our customers' needs.

Large-scale systems integration

We will continuously develop, advance and protect the technical excellence that allows us to integrate effectively the systems we design and produce.

Lean Enterprise

Our entire enterprise will be a Lean operation, characterized by the efficient use of assets, high inventory turns, excellent supplier management, short cycle times, high quality and low transaction costs.

Figure 1 Boeing's Vision 2016 (Source: The Boeing Company)

Members of MIT's Lean Advancement Initiative consortium developed

generic process architecture for lean enterprise.

Lifecycle Processes

Business Acquisition and Program Management

Requirement Definition

Product/Process Development

Supply Chain Management

Production

Distribution and Support

Enabling Infrastructure Processes

Finance

Information Technology

Human Resources

Quality Assurance

Facilities and Services

Environment, Health, and Safety

Enterprise Leadership Processes

Strategic Planning

Business Models

Managing Business Growth

Strategic Partnering

Organizational Structure and Integration

Transformation Management

Figure 2 Enterprise Process Architecture

Processes under the label 'Lifecycle Processes' comprises of value stream

activities which directly contribute towards revenue generation through

creation of products, systems and services for the customer. The next set

of processes, 'Enabling Infrastructure Processes' provide support for

'Lifecycle Processes'. 'Enterprise Leadership Processes' deal with the

human aspect of the lean enterprise and plays a critical role in the

transformation to lean.

At Toyota, manufacturing and supply chain operations were main focus of

the transformation to lean (Womack et al, 2007). But in aerospace,

manufacturing contributes a much smaller proportion to the value

associated with a product. The challenge, therefore is, how to apply

lessons from automobile industry to aerospace with its greater product

and technological complexity, much lower production volumes, very

different (and small) customer base and business practices which directly

contradict principles of continuous improvement?

In 1995, Lean Advancement Initiative at MIT developed a Lean

Enterprise Model (LEM) to better understand these challenges.

"The LEM is a synthesis of principles and practices, a hypothetical model

of a generic lean enterprise." (Murman et al, 2002)

Principles

Overarching Practices

Enabling Practices

Supporting Practices

Figure 3 Lean Enterprise Model Architecture (Source: Murman et al,

2002)

Figure 3 represents the architecture of the Lean Enterprise Model

developed by MIT researchers and LAI consortium members. First in this

hierarchy are principles of a lean enterprise.

Waste Minimization

Responsiveness to change

Right thing at right place, at right time, and in right quantity

Effective relationships within the value stream

Continuous improvement

Quality from the beginning

Figure 4 Principle of a lean enterprise (Source: Murman et al, 2002)

First principle of lean enterprise is at the very core of lean thinking.

Eliminate waste, completely eradicate non-value adding activities.

Second guiding rule for lean enterprise is its agility in responding to

changing market demand and in case of aerospace, the evolving

challenges to national defence. Third principle of lean enterprise has its

roots in 'Just-in Time' (JIT) theory. JIT corresponds to a single piece flow

at factory floor where a part is delivered at its point of need without

creating inventory or shortage. This approach should be implemented

across the spectrum of enterprise, from human resources to finance to

sales. Effective relationships within the value stream highlight the

importance of honest communication and mutual respect within various

stakeholders in a lean enterprise. Continuous improvement, like first

principle, is part of the core structure of lean. Pursue perfection, always

strive for something better. The last principle again reflects one of the

fundamental aspects of lean thinking, reduce rework, and build the best

you can from the very outset. Quality should be already built into the

product.

Some of the overarching practices of lean enterprise which support the

principle of lean enterprise are listed in figure 5.

Human-Oriented Practices

Promote Lean Leadership at all Levels: Align and involve all stakeholders

to achieve the enterprise's lean vision.

Relationships Based on Mutual Trust and Commitment: Establish stable

and on-going relationships within the extended enterprise encompassing

both customers and suppliers.

Make Decisions at Lowest Possible Level: Design the organizational

structure and management systems to accelerate and enhance decision

making at the point of knowledge, application and need.

Optimize Capability and Utilization of People: Ensure that properly

trained people are available when needed.

Continuous Focus on the Customer: Proactively understand and respond

to the needs of the internal and external customers.

Nurture a learning environment: Provide for development and growth of

both organizations' and individuals' support of attaining lean enterprise

goals.

Process-Oriented Practices

Identify and Optimize Enterprise Flow: Optimize the flow of products and

services either affecting or within the process from concept design

through point of use.

Assure Seamless Information Flow: Provide processes for seamless and

timely transfer of and access to pertinent information.

Implement integrated product and process development (IPPD): Create

products through an integrated team effort of people and organizations

that knowledgeable of and responsible for all phases of the product's life

cycle from concept definition through development, production,

deployment, operations and support.

Ensure process capability and maturation: Establish and maintain

processes capable of consistently designing and producing the key

characteristics of the product or service.

Maintain Challenges of Existing Processes: Ensure a culture and systems

that use quantitative measurement and analysis to improve processes

continuously.

Maintain Stability in Changing Environment: Establish strategies to

maintain program stability in a changing customer-driven environment.

Figure 5 Overarching Practices of Lean Enterprise(Source: Murman et al,

2002)

These practices are interdependent and interconnected. Each must be

adapted to some extent. For instance, mutual trust is essential for

seamless flow of information and for implementation of integrated

product and process development, a seamless flow of information is

paramount.

Integrated Entities

Nightingale defines three levels of enterprise based on the entity being

considered. This is the next element in the definition of enterprise.

Program Enterprises

'A program is collection of activities that produces a particular product,

system, or service that is delivered to the customer and generates

revenue.' (Nightingale, 2003)

Program is the most basic unit of a business activity. A program

enterprise encompasses the Lifecycle processes in generic process

architecture for lean enterprise (figure 2). Most program enterprises

feature one core value stream.

In aerospace, programs can range from billions of dollars, like Joint

Strike Fighter (JSF) program of United States Air Force (USAF), to those

of a few million dollars. Largest program enterprises, such as JSF are

substantial enterprise in themselves. JSF is jointly funded by the United

States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Italy, Canada, the Netherlands,

Norway, Denmark, and Turkey. Its development is spread over last two

decades and organisations and people involve in JSF program would

continue to work in enterprise through the lifecycle of aircrafts produced

under JSF.

Multi Program Enterprises

Organisations involve in execution of multiple programs are multi-

program enterprises. Multi-program enterprises provide leadership and

enabling infrastructure in generic process architecture of lean enterprise

(figure 2).

Multi-program enterprises contain multiple value streams that are part of

several program enterprises. At the risk of simplification, multi-program

enterprises can also be treated as a program enterprise comprised of

many product lines. For instance; Airbus could be considered an

enterprise with many product lines. But 'fuselage' manufacturing

division/unit at Airbus is an enterprise in itself.

National and International Enterprise

'…the collection of all entities that contribute to the creation and use of

products, systems, or services comprise a national or an international

enterprise. This would include not only the products or service providers

but also their customers, suppliers, end users, government regulators,

etc.' (Nightingale, 2003)

For example, the United Kingdom Aerospace Enterprise includes all

customers (British Airways, Royal Air Forces, Satellite service providers

etc.), government end users, manufacturers ( BAE Systems, Rolls Royce,

domestic and international suppliers etc.) , infrastructure (civilian and

military airports, maintenance depots, air traffic management), and other

related institutions and civil bodies (universities, R&D laboratories etc.)

Enterprises are global entities now with military systems being sold all

over the world. Few countries, such as India, specifically ask for some

portion of the hardware to be manufactured in their countries through

transfer of technology agreements. This creates a larger international

aerospace enterprise comprising of various countries and organisations

working in the field of aerospace, and the UK aerospace enterprise, a

national enterprise, is part of this larger international aerospace

enterprise.

Core and Extended Enterprises

Each of these three distinct levels further have distinct core and

extended enterprises.

'The core enterprise consists of entities tightly integrated through direct

or partnering relationships. Less tightly coupled customers, suppliers,

and government agencies encompass the extended enterprise all the

entities along an organization's value chain, from its customer's

customers to its supplier's suppliers, that are involved with the design,

development, manufacture, certification, distribution, and support of a

product or family of products. In this definition, products include all of

the goods and services that satisfy the customer's, and ultimately the end

user's, needs.' (Nightingale, 2003)

This definition suggests that extended enterprise essential acts as a base

for core enterprise. And for an enterprise to become lean, both core and

extended enterprise have to transform into lean at all three levels of the

enterprise, program, multi-program and national and international. All

these levels of enterprises are interconnected and interdependent and

lean transformation must be across these levels otherwise it would just

lead to 'islands of success.'

Enterprise Stakeholders

Nightingale argues about the importance of stakeholders in lean

enterprise. Lean has always been focused on customer pull and as such is

customer driven. But in today's world, and aerospace industries, a much

broader vision is required to balance the needs of all the stakeholders.

This is not depreciating customer to a secondary role, quite contrary to

that, Lean Enterprise encourages a focus on customer to driver up the

revenue, which ultimately satisfies all the stakeholders!

Value Creation

As discussed earlier, focus of lean enterprise should be two forked,

eliminate waste and create value. Elimination of waste and creation of

value are the driving forces in a lean enterprise. Murman et al describes

value creation for stakeholders as a three phased framework.

Value

Identification

Value

Delivery

Value

Proposition

Find Stockholder Value

Execute on the promise

Agree to and develop the approach

Figure 6 Value Creation Framework (Source: Murman et al, 2002)

First phase of this framework involves identifying the stakeholders and

part/s of project adds value to their investment. Next step involve value

proposition where enterprise structures 'value exchanges', creating a

clear picture of how stakeholder values are being met and how

stakeholders are contributing towards enterprises value. Third phase is

focussed on delivering the value to various stakeholders as well as the

customers. This phase has been focus of lean and most widely discussed

in the context of lean enterprise.

One important aspect of this framework is interconnectedness and

interdependence of each phase. Nightingale suggests that each phase

should be revisited at different phases of the product life cycle, and

iteration must take place among levels of program enterprises, as well as

between the program enterprise and multi-program and national

enterprises.

Value Phases

Enterprises

Value Identification

Value Proposition

Value Delivery

Program

Opportunities

Opportunities

Most lean principles and practices have been focussed here

Multi-program

Opportunities

Opportunities

Most lean principles and practices have been focussed here

National and International

Opportunities

Opportunities

Most lean principles and practices have been focussed here

Table 1 Opportunities for Extension of Enterprise Value Creation

(Source: Nightingale, 2003)

Table 1 shows that there are many opportunities for extending the focus

of lean enterprise from just value delivery to the entire spectrum of value

creation phases.

Case Studies

Introduction

Islands of Success

Case A

An Engineering Support Island: The F-16 Build-To-Package Centre

When problems are found on a typical aircraft production line, the

solutions usually are included in the official product definition - the Build-

To-Package (BTP). Even minor changes can considerably delay the

engineering check and result in expensive rework.

To tackle this problem, engineers at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics (LMA)

created the F-16 Build-To-Package Support Centre. Before the F-16 BTP

support centre, changes had to pass through several stations-

engineering design, manufacturing planning, manufacturing engineering,

tool planning, tool design, tool manufacturing, and various support group

- before the final approval. This used to be a time consuming process

with lots of paperwork. This state of affairs was in conflict with all lean

principles.

LMA's solution employed classic value stream approach. LMA first

mapped the existing flow by following the paperwork, identifying where

it went and who touched it. They developed this flow with several

iterations to create a new and more 'lean' flow. Figure 7 shows the BTP

centre created on the factory floor.

BTP support centre works by pulling out the technical expertise to the

centre when required. Centre is arranged in a series of engineering cells.

Each package passes through the cells in single piece flow without

waiting and supports modification with the possibility that some tasks

can be performed in parallel, allowing scheduling improvement without

the dangerous elimination of necessary steps, checks, or reviews.

Communication is face-to-face with co-located personnel to minimize

delays and miscommunication.

LMA's approach has resulted in consistent, sustainable improvements:

40% fewer steps, 75% fewer handoffs, and a 90% reduction in travel

distance. Also, there has been a 75% cycle-time reduction, greatly easing

the paperwork pressure on operations personnel.

The biggest barrier to BTP's success has been the struggle for over

stretched personnel to function at full efficiency. For all its achievements,

BTP Support Centre remains an island of success as traditional functional

organisation goals from the outside tend to subvert the value stream and

functional interactions, it struggles to maintain critical personnel and it's

costly to implement.

While these isolated islands of success demonstrate suitability and

pragmatic advantages of lean, they still remain isolate in the enterprise.

And that is the strongest argument in support of lean enterprise. Only

when the entire enterprise is transformed to lean, and all these isolate

islands are linked that enterprise would be able to truly exploit the

benefit of lean practices.

Production Problem Release BTP, Available at Point of Use

BTP Support Centre

Computer

Tools

Pull on Demand

* Canopy *Fuel Sys. *Fire Control Sys. *Harness Def. *Avionics *Elect

Planner *TMP *MRP Planner

*Propulsion *Coproduction *Buyer *NC Programmer *Tool Design

*Wiring Instl. *CRB *ECS Insti.

*Life Suppt. *Process Control *Structure *Labs *M&P *Ldg Gear *PP&C

*Parts Engrg

*Escape Sys. *Safety*Customers *DCMC *Stress *ECS Sys. *Arm Sys.

*Scheduling *Hydraulics

*Equip Instl. *Program *PQA *Planner *Frac.& Fat. *Maintainability

*Tool Mfg

Figure 7 BTP Support Centre (Source: Murman et al, 2002; Garry

Goodman, Presentation to LAI Product Development Workshop, 2000)

Case B

Integrating Supplier and Material Management at GE Lynn

At the LAI 1998 Plenary workshop, Ernie Oliveira, the GE Lynn leader of

manufacturing initiatives, gave a presentation on lean transformation at

the GE aircraft engine plan in Lynn, Massachusetts. This lean

transformation was enabled by the changes to the manufacturing and

assembly facilities, the material management system and the supply

chain.

One of the fundamental changes implemented at Lynn plant involved

scrapping the functional department approach where one department

deals with many product lines. Instead a linear process approach was

established. Resources were grouped, according to requirement for

assembly of a particular engine to constitute one linear flow. These linear

flow lines were shorter and more linear (!), which meant that product

moved a shorter distance. Also, since there were fewer units in the

product line, it was easier to identify the delayed assemblies and rectify

them. All these improvements lead to a reduction in work-in progress.

Furthermore, GE developed an electronic data exchange system to

facilitate open and real time communication with suppliers and

customers. This electronic data exchange system also provided GE with a

medium to signal suppliers for parts and financial transactions. GE also

managed to establish a replenishment system with suppliers of highest-

cost parts which bear close resemblance to Toyota's supplier

arrangements.

GE developed a kanban system with the supplier for 100 percent on time

delivery. Factory also committed to freeze requirements two weeks prior

to the actual date parts are needed. GE managed to solve the parts

shortage - the most pressing problem at the plant - through this kanban

system of pull linkages with the internal and external supplier base.

C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\MEDIA\CAGCAT10\

j0240695.wmf

C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\MEDIA\CAGCAT10\

j0187423.wmf C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\MEDIA\

CAGCAT10\j0285360.wmf

MRP

CustomerC:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\MEDIA\CAGCAT10\

j0199549.wmf

This system helped GE to achieve 100 percent deliveries to customer's

schedule. Engines are completed, tested and loaded directly into a

customer truck every three days to match assembly requirements at the

customer site.

GE Lynn is a success story because of its lean approach to system

transformation and supplier relationship. Ernie Oliveira, who headed the

lean initiative at Lynn, also managed to involve critical stakeholders -

workforce and suppliers. The results of this transformation were

astounding as detailed in the table 2.

Performance Metric

Improvement (Actual Average)

Inventory Turnover

33%

Throughpput Time

35%

Quality (Internal -DPU's/engine)

28%

Human Effort per engine

17%

Table 2 Lean Manufacturing results at GE Lynn (Source: Murman et al

2002; LAI Plenary Workshop proceedings and presentation by Ernie

Oliveira, 'The transition to Lean Manufacturing in Lynn Engine Assembly

Operation, GE Aircraft Engines' 1998)

Case C

The Pratt & Whitney Story

During late 1992, Pratt & Whitney (P&W) refocused its energies to

reduce costs, improve manufacturing performance, and increase

competitiveness.

In 1993, in accordance with lean principles, P&W was trying to transform

its General Machining Product Centre in East Hartford, Connecticut from

a departmental layout to a series of manufacturing cells. Result of this

transformation was dramatic. Top performing cell's lead time saw a huge

reduction from eight to three weeks; average number of pieces in

process dropped from 233 to 77; travel distance went from 13,670 to

5800 feet; and average setup time shrank from 6 hour to 30 minutes.

Reference Profile (α)

Cook C. R., and Graser J.C., 'Military Airframe Acquisitions Costs: The

Effects of Lean Manufacturing' (Santa Monica, CA:RAND, 2001), RAND

Study MR-1325-A.

Johns R, Crute V and Graves, A. Working across the Value Chain:

Understanding the Challenges. School of Management, University of

Bath May, 2006.

Johns R., Crute V., and Graves A., Lean Supply: Cost Reduction or Waste

Reduction, A preliminary study of Lean initiatives and lower tier

suppliers in the Aerospace Sector. School of Management, University of

Bath October, 2002.

Murman E, Allen T, Bozdogan K, Cutcher-Gershenfeld J, McManus H,

Nightingale D, Rebentisch E, Shield T, Stahl F, Walton M, Warmkessel J,

Weiss S and Widnall S. Lean Enterprise Value: Insights from MIT's Lean

Advancement Initiative. Palgrave Macmillan. 2002.

Nightingale D., 'Lean Enterprises - A Systems Perspective', Engineering

Systems Division Working Paper Series, Massachusetts Institute of

Technology. 2003.

Ohno T, Toyota Production System-Beyond Large Scale Production.

Cambridge, MA: Productivity Inc. Published in Japanese in 1978; in

English in 1988.

Porter M E, Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior

Performance. New York: The Free Press, 1985.

The Interim Report of the Aerospace Innovation and Growth Team 2003.

"What is Lean?" Lean Enterprise Institute,

http://www.lean.org/WhatsLean/

Womack J P and Jones D T, Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create

Wealth in Your Corporation. Free Press; New Edition. 2003.

Womack J, Jones D, Roos D, The Machine That Changed the World- How

Lean Production Revolutionized the Global Car Wars. Simon & Schuster

Ltd; New Edition , 2007.

Y. Sugimori, K. Kusunoki, F. Cho, and S. Uchikawa, 'Toyota Production

System and Kanban Systems - Materialization of Just-In-Time and

Respect-for-Human Systems', International Journal of Production

Research 15:6 (1977), 553-64