丰田生产方式和艺术让高度定制的丰田有创意的产品外文翻译.doc

丰田生产方式和艺术让高度定制的丰田有创意的产品外文翻译 外文翻译原文The Toyota Production System and art: making highly customized and creative products the Toyota wayMaterial Source: International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 45, No. 16, 15 August 2007, 3681?3698Author: E. LANDER*y and J. K. LIKERz The Toyota Production System has led to a movement of lean production focused on taking waste out of value streams.Most applications have been to high volume,and relatively standardized products.Under this system work becomes highly standardized specifying to the second what the operator should do.Buffers are precisely sized and controlled through various types of pull signals.When possible, use of one-piece flow cells result in a completely balanced production line. The performance benefits of these lean systems are often remarkable,greatly improving quality,cost,and delivery. But what of companies that are not making standardized products at high volume? What can they learn from lean? In this paper we argue there is a fundamental misunderstanding of TPS, viewing it as a specific tool kit technically implemented in a formulaic way to achieve pre-specified results. In fact, TPS is a philosophy that can be better described as a set of general principles of organizing and managing an enterprise which can help any organization get on a path of positive learning and improvement Keywords: Toyota way;TPS; Learning organization; Lean manufacturing;Custom manufacturing; High variability manufacturing1Is TPS universally applicable After the first oil crisis in the early 1970s Toyota began to draw attention as people noticed that it suffered less during the downturn and recovered much faster than its competitors. The key to its success was the Toyota Production System TPS, which was described by four Toyota managers, in the first paper on the topic in this journal, as being based on two basic concepts: Cost reduction through the elimination of waste, and Full utilization of workers capabilities Sugimori et al. 1977. They further explain that, cost reduction is achieved through the use of just-in-time production comprised of pull systems, one-piece flow, levelling and jidoka, the main components of what is today recognized as the TPS house Japan Management Association and Lu 1989, Shook 2002, Liker 2004. Fully utilizing workers capabilities requires a system of respect for people based on minimizing wasted movements of workers,ensuring their safety, and giving them greater responsibility by allowing them to participate in running and improving their jobs. Thirteen years later, The Machine that Changed the World introduced the term lean as the next paradigm of manufacturing beyond mass production Womack et al. 1991. The Toyota Production System was the best-known example of lean and the model on which the books description was based. Since then lean has taken on a life of its own and has been applied by many organizations throughout the world, including manufacturing and service firms. Most success stories however, come from the Toyota group or from firms operating under similar market and product technology conditions to those for which Toyota has already developed lean solutions. These conditions include a limited product offering with little to no customization other than cosmetic, production in high volume resulting in repetitive manufacturing, and a relatively stable or predictable demand Many companies deciding to go lean have struggled to figure out what that means in their type of business. They may build to order or have highly engineered products or be in a pure service organization like healthcare or banking and desire a vision for what lean looks like in their business. One approach to getting a vision is to go and see. But when they go and see a Toyota plant they find it difficult to relate. They see a highly repetitive and standardized process and cannot imagine how they can replicate what they see. We believe the problem is in the way companies are looking at TPS and how they are trying to approach implementation. In practice, TPS is most often viewed as a set of tools to remove waste from processes. Individual tools have been explained exhaustively Shingo 1985, 1986, Japan Management Association and Lu 1989, Hirano 1995, Rother and Shook 1999, Smalley 2004 and yet companies often struggle when attempting to apply lean to novel circumstances. This is particularly true for the firms operating in high variability, low volume environments where the general belief is that lean is not very helpful the research that led to this paper focused on such firms. We are different is a commonly heard refrain. Of course the answer is that every company is in fact different. But that is not the problem. Difficulties arise from trying to apply tools in a formulaic way when they were never intended to be used as a cookie cutter template. In fact, the perspective of lean as a toolkit in which to reach to grab the most applicable or handy tool represents a fundamental misconception of TPS. The next level of understanding comes when the tools are seen as an integral part of a wider system Suzaki 1987, Shingo and Dillon 1989, Monden 1993. This perspective, although still mostly focusing on the technical aspect, usually leads to better results but still allows for little adaptation to conditions different from those for which the TPS tools were developed Adaptation to new environments starts to become possible when the purpose of particular tools and of TPS in general is understood. At this level it is possible to define rules about the behaviour of the system Spear and Bowen 1999 and methods Womack and Jones 1996 that can guide the development of Toyota-style systems in different environments. For example, Womack and Jones 1996 advise us to: define customer value, identify the value stream, to make it flow, pull, and strive for perfection. Although procedures like this are powerful for their simplicity, these approaches remain formulaic and leave out important features of Toyotas system. On the opposite end of the spectrum from the tool-based perspective, Toyotas system can be seen as a set of principles Liker 2004 that define the thinking that led to the development of the TPS tools. It is interesting to note that even though Ohno is credited with developing most of the tools that enabled the ideas behind TPS to be implemented in practice, his books Ohno 1988, b, Ohno and Mito 1988 remain at a philosophical level and provide only superficial descriptions of the tools. Instead of providing a solution, his intention seems to be to help the reader develop the mental models that will enable her to devise her own countermeasures. Perhaps then, the critical features of TPS are the ideas it supports, while the tools that comprise its current form should be adapted as needed for the particular conditions the organizations operates in.In this article we argue that the only way to develop true Toyota-style systems in environments vastly different from those for which the lean solution has already been developed, is to apply the same principles that people in Toyota have used to shape what is recognized today as TPS. Applying the same thought process to a novel environment will result in a Toyota-style system customized for the particular conditions the firm faces. This is not to say that the other perspectives described above are wrong or useless. On the contrary, a thorough understanding of how the tools work, their purpose, and how they fit together to form an integral system is what will enable us to develop Toyota-style systems in less than the 70 years it took Toyota We will illustrate this perspective by looking at a firm that is very different from a Toyota assembly plant. The case study is based on a custom artistic process rather than mass production of standardized products. If the approach had been to simply imitate Toyotas solutions in this environment it would have been an exercise in frustration.In contrast, by understanding the actual situation in great detail and then flexibly applying the principles that define Toyotas thinking, it was possible to fundamentally transform this craft-based company making it far more productive and profitable. The principles of flow and pull and levelling and team associate involvement in problem solving were all used, but the way they were implemented was customized to fit the environment and the peculiarities of the organization.The case illustrates that lean is a way of thinking about people and processes aimed at creating a high-performance learning organization2. True Toyota-style systems result from applying the principles behind Toyotas thinking and lead to the development of learning organizations The tendency when a tools approach is taken is to define problems in technical terms. If the intention is to improve productivity, isolated processes can be transformed into one-piece flow cells building to takt time. Then if the process is a natural batch one, or if there is so much variability in demand that it is difficult to calculate a stable takt time, or if products differ so much that it is not possible to balance the workload, it becomes frustrating and we hear the common mantra lean does not apply because we are different.A principle-based approach provides an understanding of why things are being done and a basis for judging whether the progress made is consistent with the principle. That enables the creative adaptation of the tools to meet the requirements of the environment, as long as their application is consistent with the principle.To illustrate this point, let us look at one of the 14 principles defined in The Toyota Way Liker 2004: Principle 2: Create continuous flow to bring problems to the surface?Create flow to move materials and information fast as well as to link processes and people together so that problems surface right away Note that this principle does not say to make a cell or how to make a cell. The principle is to move material and information faster while linking processes and people. Thus, when studying the current situation the idea is to look for areas where people and processes are disconnected and material stagnates. Then, find creative ways to increase the flow and connect processes better. That could be a cell or could be a first-in, first-out lane or could be reducing inventory or improving communication between two steps in the process. Furthermore, this is being done to surface problems. So even if inventory is reduced and material is flowing more quickly, but problems are not being surfaced and solved not specifically stated in this principle the solution is not being true to the principle. Simply eliminating inventory is not sufficient to satisfy the principle Furthermore, compliance with the principles necessarily leads to the implementation of technical solutions the tools of TPS as well as the development of the social system necessary to make them effective. Therefore, understanding lean as a wider socio-technical system Trist and Bamforth 1951, Cherns 1976 is a more accurate view than the predominant tools-based view that focuses mostly on the technical aspect alone Ohno always emphasized understanding the true purpose of the system, implicitly highlighting the need to understand the principles guiding the changes being implemented. He focused on the core transformation process of converting inputs to outputs distinguishing value-added from non-value-added steps and developing technical solutions to eliminate the latter and facilitate the former. And yet, he also had a clear vision for the human role as problem solver and enabler of further progress. The Sugimori paper Sugimori et al. 1977 emphasizes this socio-technical perspective by describing TPS as based on two concepts, one technical that includes JIT and jidoka , and the other one focusing on the social aspect of fully utilizing workers capabilities. Ohnos approach was never to implement a particular tool, but to build appropriate social and technical capabilities to fit the circumstances Based on this systems concept of fit we would not expect a one-size fits all set of solutions to all manufacturing problems. We would expect to flexibly use tools based on a set of principles to accomplish the intended purpose. We would also expect that people involved in doing the work should be engaged in controlling variances in their process. We would expect ownership by those inside the system to be a necessary precondition for high performance. And we would expect that understanding and adapting to dynamic external environments is a prerequisite for success Another perspective that fits this need for adaptability and is compatible with TPS as a socio-technical system, is that of a learning organization Senge 1990.The concept of kaisen at Toyota requires learning at an organizational level, which is ensured by establishing known standards, preferably visible ones Liker and Meier 2006. If there is no agreed upon standard a new way of doing a job is simply one more version by some individual?it is individual learning. Most companies have smart individuals who come up with clever ways of doing things but they are poor at capturing that knowledge into a reusable standard ODell and Grayson 1998. But if we agree on a standard and then find a new and better way of doing a job that we all follow then the organization has learned. This change in work routines and the corresponding improvement in performance is the true hallmark of organizational learning Fujimoto 1999 Going back to Ohno and his passion for reducing the time line by eliminating waste we find that lead-time reduction was not his only goal. He often used the analogy of water as inventory and rocks as problems and said that when he reduced the water level inventory he was exposing the rocks problems. This forced the organization to respond with real problem solving or the process would constantly be shut down. What Ohno discovered was quite profound. An organization with processes that are disconnected by big inventory buffers tends not to improve or learn. When processes are tightly connected problems surface quickly and must be dealt with, thereby driving the organization to learn. Similarly, reducing waste and learning go hand in hand. This suggests that it is the learning process itself, not a particular tool or technique, which is at the centre of TPS This view is supported by Spear and Bowen who found that the core feature of TPS is the prevalent use of the scientific method. By engaging people in problem solving where they view any potential improvement as a testable hypothesis Toyota promotes experimentation. The resulting learning is what sets it apart from other organizations Spear et al. 1999 译文丰田生产方式和艺术:让高度定制的丰田有创意的产品资料来源:生产研究.2007 16 3681-3685作者:兰德和里克摘要 丰田生产方式引导的精益生产活动集中在减少价值链中的浪费,其应用过去大多集中在高产量或者标准化产品上。在这种方式下,高度标准化工作变成了经营者第二应该做的事。生产过程中拉动零件信号都要进行精确控制。可能的话,使用单件流生产使生产线处于完全平衡。精益生产方式在提高质量、降低成本、提前交货期等方面绩效卓越。但是如果一家公司并不大量生产标准化产品呢?他们从精益生产方式中能学到什么?在本文我们认为将丰田生产方式视为一个达到预期目标的特殊工具并将其刻板应用于生产过程中是一个根本性的误解。事实上,丰田管理方式可以描述为是一个帮助企业或组织设定更好的积极的学习和进步的组织与管理方式的哲学。 关键词:丰田模式;丰田生产方式;精益组织;精益制造;定制生产;灵活制造 丰田生产方式是否放之四海皆准? 在1970S的第一次石油危机后丰田在经济低迷时期比竞争对手受损更少并且以更快的速度恢复过来。其成功的关键就是由四位丰田公司的经理提出的丰田生产方式,在本书开头已经陈述了丰田生产方式的两个基本概念:通过减少浪费降低成本和提高工人生产效率杉森,1977,他们进一步具体解释是通过准时制生产和自动化来降低成本,也被认为是现在丰田生产方式的主要组成部分。提高工人工作效率要求一个能够做到充分利用人力资源,确保工人的安全的系统以及允许工人参与生产运行和提高他们的工作来给予他们更多的责任。 十三年后,机器改变世界把精益生产叫做超过大量生产的生产组织形式。丰田生产方式是这本书介绍精益生产的基础与模型。从那开始精益生产作为一个独立的生产方式应用于制造企业与服务公司。虽然有很多来自丰田团体或者与其相似的市场和产品技术条件企业的成功故事,丰田却已经开始升级精益生产。这些情况有几个条件就是大量重复生产产品(化妆品除外)和相对稳定的需求。 很多公司选择要去精益却难以弄明白他们自己的贸易类型。他们或许需要制造出高度定制产品或者是一个纯粹的服务机构像是医疗机构或者银行,想要有一个看起来适合他们的业务。获得成功的一个方法是去看一看,但是当他们看了丰田车工厂之后却发现两者很难联系起来。他们看到的是一个高度重复和标准化的生产过程以及他们难以想象的如何复制的场景。我们认为问题在于这些公司如何看待丰田生产方式的以及他们实施的方法。 在实践中,丰田生产方式最常被认为的是一套去除浪费的工具,是一个详尽的独特工具,并且很多公司努力试图在一个新的环境中应用精益生产方式。对于很多在多变的环境下经营的公司来说,精益生产方式的确是不怎么有用的(这个结果导致了本文着重研究这些公司)。我们是不同的是经常听到的论调。当然实际上每个公司都是不同的,不过这不是问题。困难源自他们试图刻板的应用工具而从不是像运用饼干切割模板一样。实际上,认为精益生产方式是一种达到目标的最适合的或者便利的工具的想法是