Total Productive Maintenance Essay Example

This strategy originated in Japan with a planned approach to preventive maintenance. Nakajima established a research group dedicated to preventive maintenance, consisting of twenty Japanese companies in 1953. In 1969, the Japan Institute of Plant Engineers was founded after a mission to the United States in 1952 to study equipment maintenance.

The Japan Institute of Plant Engineers was closely involved with Nippondenso, an automotive component manufacturer, in 1969 to address preventive maintenance concerns. Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) was born when the company opted to assign routine maintenance tasks to operators and change their roles. Hence, the concept of TPM originated in Japan in 1969. However, the introduction of TPM did not receive widespread acceptance, with only a few companies choosing to adopt and implement it (Willmott & McCarthy, 2001).

The implementation of total productive maintenance was accelerated by the severe and disturbing economic difficulties in the early 1970s, with support from the program introduced by Tokai Rubber Industries. This program consisted of seven steps. Interest in total productive maintenance from Western organizations grew during the early 1990s.

They implemented this approach based on their interventions in total quality management, but there is limited empirical research and analysis on this topic. Most scholarly articles do not emphasize the empirical study and analysis of this subject, instead focusing on the correlation between the implementation of the total productive maintenance strategy and other productivity initiatives.

This case study provided information on the implementation of total productivity maintenance in three different companies, including the processes used, the roles of total productive maintenance coordinators, and the goals of each company in implementing this strategy.

Key Elements of the

Case Study

The key elements of the study can be understood by examining how each of the three companies applied the total productive maintenance strategy to their operations. The first company is a United Kingdom plant that was established in 1968 with the aim of increasing production of various rubber products. This company has approximately thirty-eight thousand employees.

With sales amounting to five billion Euros, the company successfully covered a wide range of products, despite the impact of the global economic recession in the early 1990s on the rubber markets. In order to achieve success, the company recognized the importance of positioning itself as a world-class entity and took various measures accordingly. A comprehensive market research revealed the constant growth rate of a high-performance product segment, as well as the demand for modern products with shorter life cycles, improved quality for original equipment and replacements, and a focus on environmental concerns. This analysis revealed a disparity between the company's goals and its current activities (Leflar, 2001).

The company faced various difficulties such as a lack of skilled labor, low employee participation, and insufficient improvement mechanisms. This prompted the company to seek a solution, leading to the implementation of total productive maintenance. In the early 1990s, the company introduced the seven pillars of total productive maintenance, including individual improvements, autonomous maintenance, TPM in offices, education and training, early equipment management, safety, and quality maintenance. Within two years, the company received the Japanese Institute of Preventive Maintenance award (Ireland ; Dale, 2001). The implementation involved creating a steering committee chaired by the site director, with members from maintenance, human resources, production, continuous improvement managers, and trade

union representation.

The company had specific goals for the implementation of total productive implementation. These goals included eliminating losses from accidents, defects, and failures while maximizing efficiency in production, development, and administration sectors. The implementation would involve all employees, ranging from senior management to operators and clerical staff.

One of the objectives of the company was to establish a small team that would make a positive impact on society. In order to accomplish this objective, the company assessed its expenses and drawbacks. This evaluation would help in pinpointing areas for enhancement and establishing goals to minimize losses.

This text discusses how the company identified and categorized different types of operations, such as value added, semi-value added, and non-value added. The company focused on minimizing semi-value added operations and eliminating non-value added operations. To achieve this, the company implemented the total productive maintenance process, which allowed them to explore changes to their organizational culture and competencies. The company followed all seven steps of autonomous maintenance, with the first two steps taking effect within the first two years of implementation. These steps were followed systematically throughout the implementation period (Roberts, 2011). In order to prioritize improvement activities, the company adopted the ABC classification system.

Out of 329 machines, the company conducted total productive maintenance (TPM) on only the top 10 machines. This process included detailed breakdown analysis and corrective measures. The next step involved a program to restore machines, focusing on implementing measures to improve cleaning, inspection, optimization of output, and quality assurance for operators. The introduction of autonomous maintenance gradually shifted the maintenance approach from reactive (breakdown) maintenance to proactive (planned, predictive, and preventive) maintenance.

The implementation of total productive maintenance

resulted in consequential changes to the organization and operation of the maintenance function. All managers in the company received training to prepare them for participating in and supporting the implementation process. From top-level managers to junior managers in company shops, everyone was involved in the support of total productive maintenance. However, the company decided to remove its suggestions as they were seen as an obstacle to the progress of total productive maintenance. The implementation of this strategy was driven by the company's objectives.

The objective was to standardize organizational models and output globally, empowering all levels of the organization to enhance company success. This included promoting teamwork and utilizing the strengths of all members, regardless of their position. Additionally, the goal was to improve flexibility and promptly respond to customer needs.

Last but not least, Company B has a distinctive method for implementing total productive maintenance (TPM) in the packaging industry. The company has a global presence in thirty countries spanning America, Africa, Europe, and Asia.

The company has employed over 30,000 workers distributed across 160 factories. This prompted the need to find strategies to combat the risk of shutting down in 1990. Consequently, in 1991, the company decided to adopt total quality maintenance.

This strategy prevented the company from shutting down, but it did not lead to an improvement in services that would generate the desired profits. As a result, the company opted to adopt total productive maintenance in 1994. This approach involved analyzing the company's operations. By 1996, sixteen projects had been successfully completed thanks to the implementation of total productive maintenance.

The company management made a decision to speed up improvements within the company. They aimed to

attain excellence in total productive maintenance by the year 1998, specifically through the Japan institute of plant maintenance (Willmott & McCarthy, 2001). Similar to company A, company B also implemented the seven pillars of total productive maintenance. Each pillar consisted of seven systematic steps, which led to positive results and were well-documented in the company's profile.

The company experienced a significant increase in workforce involvement, from ten to eighty-five percent. This resulted in a reduction of customer complaints by twenty percent, a forty percent increase in production, and a forty percent decrease in both overtime costs and absenteeism. Additionally, each worker contributed to the company's success by forty-six percent. To achieve these positive outcomes, the company implemented the total productive maintenance strategy through a specified process. This was accompanied by the establishment of an organizational structure known as world-class performance promotion, which divided the factory into three modules.

Each module had a module leader. Company A, on the other hand, lacked total productive maintenance facilitators and coordinators. Instead, the company had a world-class performance manager who collaborated with module leaders and their teams. Gopalakrishnan (2003) states that the company conducted a cost and volume analysis to identify areas for improvement and the required techniques. Additionally, the company implemented the seven steps of autonomous maintenance, resulting in planned maintenance.

The company utilized quality maintenance to eliminate flaws in its products by establishing and managing equipment conditions. This was achieved by identifying the correlation between product characteristics and the production process. To rectify any defects, the company found the optimal operating conditions for the equipment. They followed Nakajima's early equipment approach when acquiring or creating new products.

The company utilized its

product and process manufacturing experience to develop a new product. As part of the implementation of total productive maintenance, the company established specific objectives. These objectives included creating a safe work environment, adhering to legal regulations, and reducing costs by minimizing accidents. The strategic objectives set by the company aimed to improve various aspects. These included increasing employee involvement, decreasing customer complaints, boosting production volume, reducing overtime expenses and absenteeism, and enhancing individual employee productivity.

In order to achieve these goals, the company needed to extend its successful breakdown strategies to other departments, provide ongoing support for autonomous maintenance, enhance the development of computerized systems, maintain reductions in stock levels, and expand zone systems maintenance to other machines. Additionally, the company had to establish communication with suppliers for other systems, continue developing systems for budget control, and evaluate maintenance costs (Ireland & Dale, 2001). Company C effectively employed total productive maintenance to improve its operations and services. This motor vehicle manufacturing company received a majority stake of sixty percent from a Japanese firm in the mid-1980s.

In the 1990s, the Japanese company increased its shares to 99%. They introduced the total productive maintenance process, ensuring stability and offering job security for three years to employees. During that time, the company implemented three pillars of total productive maintenance: OEE and motivation. These pillars aimed to minimize losses in quality, cost, and delivery.

Over a two-year period from 1992 to 1994, the company introduced an integrated approach to improve productivity that encompassed offices, autonomous and planned maintenance. As a result, in 1994, the company received the prestigious Japanese Institute of Plant Maintenance award. With the goal of reaching level two

of the Japanese Institute of Plant Maintenance by 2001, the company dedicated itself to implementing total productive maintenance. To aid in this process, a team of twelve facilitators and coordinators was assembled and reported directly to the factory president. Cost deployment was utilized by the team to identify areas in need of improvement.

The purpose of implementing total productive maintenance (TPM) was to improve productivity, reduce workspace, and increase market share (Kunio & Et.al, 2004). This led to a boost in the company's productivity rate. For instance, back in 1989, it used to take the company thirty-five days to manufacture a motorcycle, whereas now it only takes seven days. The company focused on achieving optimal line balancing and implementing one-piece flow operations. Similar to companies A and B, this company also utilizes Nakajima's seven steps of autonomous maintenance.

Company C prioritized employee training and invested a significant amount of money in it. They recognized that having highly skilled operators would eliminate the need for setters or inspectors, resulting in a reduced maintenance staff and fostering teamwork. Additionally, the company made efforts to flatten its organizational structure.

Currently, the company's organizational structure is comprised of four layers: operators, team leaders, factory director, and improvement assistants and engineers (Roberts, 2011). The company's goal was to achieve level two certification from the Japanese Institute of Plant Maintenance by 2001. This objective necessitated improving all sectors of the company and increasing market share for all products.

General Analysis

Studying three global companies provides insight into the implementation of total productive maintenance. To successfully implement total productive maintenance, companies must develop strategies that address their respective organizational challenges.

The study of three companies reveals common problems

experienced by international firms, including economic failures, production issues, employee challenges, training difficulties, and cost problems. Total productive maintenance offers a framework for addressing these problems. To implement total productive maintenance strategies effectively, companies should establish goals and objectives. The seven pillars of total productive maintenance and the seven steps of autonomous maintenance provide solutions to these problems. It is important for companies to involve their employees in the implementation process and work as a team to achieve the set goals and objectives (Leflar, 2001).

Organizations must adhere to the correct process when implementing total productive maintenance strategies to achieve their objectives. This entails applying the seven pillars of TPM and the seven steps of autonomous maintenance in a systematic and hierarchical manner to ensure optimal functioning of each component.

Actions For Enhancing Results

If given the opportunity to act as a decision maker, I would adopt an inclusive and teamwork approach. This approach involves involving all employees in the company and recognizing their contributions. I would establish TPM organizational structures to ensure that each individual has a role in implementing TPM. By increasing employee awareness of their importance in improving the company, I would empower all company employees.

The concept of inclusivity involves integrating teamwork and TPM to enhance productivity. Each pillar and step contributes to elevating the company's production capabilities. The integration of TPM, JIPM, autonomous maintenance, and qualitative maintenance is essential in all processes and functions of the company. Total productive maintenance has demonstrated its ability to assist companies in establishing their operations by establishing attainable goals, structures, and guidelines.

Using TPM (Total Productive Maintenance) helps companies boost production, enhance market

share, and achieve high performance with minimal costs. TPM has been proven to lead to significant performance growth for companies that have adopted it.