Session 11 ic2011 yu
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
227
On Slideshare
227
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Implementation of Advanced 65th FPS Int. Con. Manufacturing Technology in the June 2011 Wood products Industry: Exploring role and potential of personnel in China’s furniture industry Na Yu and Siegfried LewarkInstitute of Forest Utilization and Work Science, University of FreiburgCollege of Furniture and Industrial Design, Nanjing Forestry University
  • 2. Introduction20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 2
  • 3. Introduction (continue) Asking about innovation for next 1 or 2 years ~ (n=26) 23% Yes No Not sure 12% 65% International Furniture Fair of IMM Cologne 200920/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 3
  • 4. M-T-O model Elements of a working system (after Strohm 1997, transl. S. Lewark) - qualifications - interests and needs man primary task border regulation border regulation border regulation input variations and transformation process variations and output disturbances disturbances secondary tasks technology organisation problems - machinery - working processes - working tools - distribution of work - space conditions - structures of decision - structures of communication20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 4
  • 5. Research questions What are drivers and barriers to the implementation 1 of AMT in China’s furniture industry? 2 What are impacts of implementing AMT on employees? What can be done in the implementation of AMT regarding potential of personnel?20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 5
  • 6. Research methods Case study method (Yin, 2002) . Face to face interviews with open-ended questions Questionnaire survey ( Job Diagnostic Survey [JDS], Hackman and Oldham1974) ?20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 6
  • 7. Cases selection20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 7
  • 8. Cases description Category Firm A Firm B Firm C Firm D Location Jiangsu Guangdong Shenzhen Zhejiang Size Medium Medium Large Large Population of Employees 500-1000 500-1000 2000 2000 Kitchen and Kitchen and Type of Product home furniture home furniture Home furniture Office furniture Sino-foreign joint Sino-foreign Ownership venture Private Public joint venture Process Innovation CIM/MC CIM/MC CIM CIM/LP Start of Innovation 2009.4/2003 2006.9/2006.9 2009.5 2009.4/2008.7 CIM: computer integrated manufacturing; MC: mass customization; LP: lean production.20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 8
  • 9. Research procedure Study period (One year) The process of implementing AMT The first field work The second field work & data collection & data collection (May-Aug. 2009) (May-Aug. 2010) Keeping in touch by phone with production managers20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 9
  • 10. Research procedure (cont.) First survey Second survey 2009.5-8 Questionnaire survey 2010.5-8 Questionnaire survey Interviews Interviews The AMT implementation processes Firm A Firm A Firm B Firm B Firm C Firm C Firm D Firm D20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 10
  • 11. Interviews (cont.) 1 Description of respondentsCode Firm A Firm B Firm C Firm D A-1 B-1 B-2 C-1 C-2 D-1 D-2 D-3Position Production Production Human Production Supervisor Production Human AMT manager manager resource manager in manager resource Project manager production management specialist specialistSex Male Male Male Male Male Female Female FemaleAge (y) 30–39 30–39 30–39 30–39 30–39 30–39 25–30 25–30Education Master Bachelor Master College College Secondary Bachelor Secondary school schoolWorking 4 3 1 5 2 3.5 1.5 2experience(y) 20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 11
  • 12. Interviews (cont.) 2 Interview questions • What were key drivers of introducing new AMT in the firm? • What were main barriers in the process of implementing AMT? • How long did it take the workers to accept the new working system? • Were the employees willing to accept the new working system? • How did you motivate the employees in the process of implementing AMT?20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 12
  • 13. Interviews (cont.) 3 Data collection and analysis Simultaneously recorded by a digital recorder & handnotes Translated by the author from Chinese into English. A bilingual person proofread and corrected the translations Qualitative data analysis (Miles and Huberman,1994) : reducing the data exploring and describing the data deepening and explaining the data making sense of the data and concluding the analysis20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 13
  • 14. Results – Key drivers Firm A Firm B Firm C Firm DProduction ·The need to improve ·The need to improve ·The need to improve ·The need to improveprocess productivity and product productivity and productivity and productivity and quality product quality product quality product quality ·The need to improve land ·Requirement of productivity (referring to the changes in production limitation of land resources) process to meet wide range of products ·The need to reduce human ·The need to reduce error in production human error in productionHuman side ·Difficulties in recruitment ·The need to reduce ·Difficulties in ·The need to reduce caused by shortage of skilled dependence on the recruitment caused by dependence on the workers work skills of shortage of skilled work skills of employees workers employees ·Increased labor costs ·The need to reduce dependency on the work skills of employees ·Increased labor costsOthers ·Introducing new production ·Facing bankruptcy ·Requirement of ·Decision of top line changes in manager were management Influenced by visiting a successful firm in process innovation
  • 15. Results – Main barriers Firm A Firm B Firm C Firm DPreparation ·Difficulties for middle ·Difficulties for middle ·Difficulties for middle ·Difficulties for middle phase managers and managers and managers and managers and supervisors to supervisors to supervisors to supervisors to understand the new understand the new understand the new understand the new production concept production concept production concept production concept ·Difficulties for first line ·Lack of confidence in ·Difficulties for first line workers to understand the new working workers to understand the new production system of middle the new production concept managers and concept supervisors ·Unwilling to accept ·Unwilling to accept the the new working new working system system for skilled for skilled workers workersApplication ·Difficulties in ·Difficulties in process ·Shortage of qualified ·Difficulties in phase Communication improvement and staff and workers Communication between management optimization between management and worker levels and worker levels ·Shortage of qualified ·Shortage of of ·Insufficient ·Insufficient staff and workers qualified staff and understanding and understanding and workers cooperation from other cooperation from other departments departments ·Ill-matched ·Unsatisfied organizational structure Organization environment
  • 16. Questionnaire survey 1 Questionnaire Design Functionally designed based on the JDS. 9 sections and 18 indicators. The JDS provides measures of a number of personal, affective reactions or feelings a person obtains from performing the job. 2 Target group Employees who were participating the implementation of AMT in the case-study firms. 3 Data collection 4 Data analysis20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 16
  • 17. IndicatorsN. Abb. Indicator N. Abb. Indicator Skill variety 10 Knowledge of results Task identity 11 General satisfaction Task significance 12 Internal work motivation Autonomy 13 Pay satisfaction Feedback from the job itself 14 Security satisfaction Feedback from Agents 15 Social satisfaction Dealing with others 16 Supervisory satisfaction Experienced meaningfulness 17 Growth satisfaction of the work Experienced responsibility for 18 Motivation potential score the work  SV + TI + TS  MPS =    × Au × FJ  3  20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 17
  • 18. Data collection First survey (T1) Second survey (T2) Frequency Valid Percent Frequency Valid Percent Firm A 68 29.7% 101 18.1% Firm B 59 25.8% 182 32.7% Firm C 24 10.5% 85 15.3% Firm D 78 34.1% 189 33.9% Valid Total 229 100.0% 557 100.0%20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 18
  • 19. Data analysis Correlation among indicators of the questionnaire survey (n=229) SV TI TS Au FJ FA DO EMW ERW KR GeS IWM PaS SeS SoS SuS GrS MPSSV 1.00 Feedback Feedback Dealing Experienced Knowledge General Payment Social Supervisory Growth from the from with meaningfulness of results satisfaction satisfaction satisfaction satisfaction satisfactionTI ,251** 1.00 job itself Agents others of the workTS ,172** ,197** 1.00Au ,354** ,322** ,271* * 1.00FJ ,193** ,264** ,256* * ,329** 1.00 **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) ;FA 0.12 ,368** ,252* * ,316** ,449** 1.00 * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed);DO ,213** ,171** ,340* * 0.13 ,180** ,215* * 1.00 Listwise N=229EMW ,239** ,300** ,233* * ,274** ,235** ,361* * ,136* 1.00ERW ,159* ,212** ,230* * ,228** ,196** ,277* * ,143* ,382** 1.00KR ,153* ,272** ,173* * ,253** ,411** ,332* * 0.06 ,369** ,336** 1.00GeS ,155* ,187** ,225* * ,281** ,211** ,326* * ,131* ,604** ,370** ,282* * 1.00IWM 0.08 0.07 0.10 ,141* ,221** ,197* * ,261** 0.08 ,247** ,152* ,177** 1.00PaS -0.13 0.05 0.08 ,170* ,166* ,218* * ,245** ,215** ,217** 0.11 ,424** ,185* * 1.00SeS ,225** 0.12 ,204* * ,345** ,343** ,187* * ,153* ,327** ,249** ,254* * ,442** ,173* * ,337* * 1.00SoS 0.08 ,246** ,160* ,244** ,270** ,196* * ,177** ,232** ,304** ,216* * ,363** ,180* * ,221* * ,324* * 1.00SuS 0.11 ,269** ,160* ,302** ,328** ,421* * ,163* ,313** ,331** ,354* * ,429** ,197* * ,440* * ,441* * ,433* * 1.00GrS ,265** ,245** ,239* * ,523** ,345** ,344* * ,190** ,375** ,329** ,262* * ,464** ,177* * ,346* * ,397* * ,474* * ,479* * 1.00MPS ,501** ,513** ,480* * ,792** ,710** ,478* * ,270** ,383** ,308** ,396* * ,319** ,212* * ,189* * ,432* * ,337* * ,384* * ,544* * 1.00 20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 19
  • 20. Data collection (Cont.) Factors Levels Factors Levels Sex Female / / Male Age Under 30 Occupation Manager 30-40 White-collar worker Above 40 Blue-collar worker Primary school and juniorEducational level middle school Work experience Less 2 years High school and vocational school 2 - 5 years College and University Over 5 years20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 20
  • 21. Results (occupation) Mean df Square F Sig. Occupation 2 50979.39 16.47 .00** Phase 1 290.6 0.09 .76 Occupatio *Phase 2 19106.07 6.17 .00** ** P<.00120/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 21
  • 22. Results (cont.) N Mean SD F Sig. SV M 78 4.95 1.01 12.46 .00** 7.00 W 122 4.3 1.26 6.50 B 357 4.21 1.19 TI M 78 5.09 1.13 14.65 .00** 6.00 W 122 4.67 1.29 5.50 B 357 4.33 1.15 5.00 TS M 78 5.81 1.1 19.5 .00** W 122 5.61 1.12 4.50 B 357 5.03 1.25 4.00 Au M 78 5.16 0.94 22.8 .00** 3.50 W 122 4.6 1.07 B 357 4.24 1.19 3.00 FJ M SV TI TS Au FJ FA DO EMWERW KR GeS IWM PaS SeS 15.42 SuS .00** 78 5.3 1.04 SoS GrS W 122 5.16 1.1 Managers B 357 Blue-collar workers 4.68 White-collar workers 1.11 ** P<.001 The JDS indicators of employees in different occupational groups in the second phase (T2)20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 22
  • 23. Results (cont.) Psychological barriers of blue-collar workers Occupation Emerging role of female employees Sex Different psychological barriers for younger and older employees Age Significant differences between employees Education with and without higher education background Work experience is a positive factor for the AMT implenentation Work experience20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 23
  • 24. Conclusions Technological and nontechnological issues should both be considered during process innovation. Work redesign and motivating employees according to the results of the assessment to eliminate people’s psychological barriers is necessary for successful process innovation. Integrating Human to advanced manufacturing system !20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 24
  • 25. Acknowledgment: The Elisabeth und Barbara Grammel-Studienstiftung Graduate School Environment, Society and Global Change20/6/11 56th FPS convention Portland, OR, USA N. Yu and S. Lewark 25