Business Management Dynamics

Double Blind Peer Reviewed - Open Access Jounal

Home  |   Contact Us


ISSN: 2047-7031

bmd Business and Management Dynamics bmd
ISSN: 2047-7031  
Volume  2   Issue 11  2013  
Article Abstract
Measures of Flexibility and Advanced Manufacturing Technologies: About the Significant Correlations and the Logic of the Measurements
Keywords:  Advanced Manufacturing Technology; Flexibility Metrics; Flexibility Costs.
Cosmo Severiano Filho , Walter Fernando Ara├║jo De Moraes and Adriano David Monteiro Barros
The central issue examined in this article is related to measures of flexibility adopted by industrial companies that use AMT's in their production systems. It has as objective to describe costs components associated with evaluation metrics of flexibility, its significant correlations with the technologies used, as well as the contributions that derive from the survey conducted among the 500 largest companies in the Brazilian industrial sector. Among this population, 21 companies that participated in the random sample responded to an electronic form of the survey. For these metrics, the inferential analysis indicated negative correlations of moderate significance, strong and very high with 12 types of AMT's. The negative correlations of moderate significance were between the IA and the CAE, CIM, CAM, FMC, FMS, PFA and TPM technologies; between TO and CIM, EAV and EDI technologies; between TS and the CAD, CAE and CAM technologies; between TP and ABC, PFA and TQC technologies; between IR and CAM and PFA technologies; and between TF and CAE, CAM and PFA technologies. Considering that the significant correlations for these measures are of a negative nature (moderate), has been the confirmation of the hypothesis that many components of flexibility have no validity or use with the AMT's plants investigated. The cost components used in the preparation of flexibility metrics are considered unconventional and are used to measure the production system flexibility in different dimensions 04: (i) product flexibility, as measured by the costs of absenteeism and set-up; (ii) process flexibility, designated by shutdowns costs and lead time; (iii) flexibility of the machine, determined by idleness and under-utilization costs; and (iv) flexibility in demand, measured by stock rotation costs. Research conclusions point to the inference that a system of flexibility measures must be configured by metrics that are bound to the dimensions of flexibility it is intended to measure and assess, because the scope is a function of the measurement flexibility measures required for the production system. Both partial measurements as the metrics of aggregate nature should be promoted by pre-established assessment criteria provided the measure of flexibility as part of the evaluation of organizational performance.
07-19   |  View PDF