Cheshire Henbury's website is structured around several sub-sites to accommodate the large amount of content. Please pick a topic of interest from the above menu and begin to explore and learn. Or use the Google Search box to the left.
Paul T Kidd's Agility Pages
Agile Enterprise Strategy: A Next Generation Manufacturing Concept
AGILE ENTERPRISE STRATEGY: A NEXT GENERATION MANUFACTURING CONCEPT
Paul T. Kidd
Unfortunately it became apparent very quickly that the report had failed to make a clear distinction between "1991 best practices" and issues relevant to a longer term focus on developing a new and radically different manufacturing business model. The net result was great confusion, which still continues to this day, with agility being used as a catch-all-phrase to describe all the various changes and ideas being promoted such as lean production, business process re-engineering, time compression, extended (or virtual) enterprises, and so on.
This problem with mixing up current and future best practices is also evident in other publications such as the Next Generation Manufacturing Project reports (US Agility Forum 1997) and UK's Technology Foresight report Manufacturing, Production and Business Processes (Office of Science and Technology 1995). The Iacocca Institute report and these other two publications all claim to look ahead fifteen to twenty years and to examine drivers and future needs and likely developments. However, all these reports in actual fact tend to focus on near term issues within the five year time frame, often describing developments and ideas that many companies have already implemented. In other words they tend to be based on current practices and understandings and shorter term matters, not on long term strategic drivers and future issues.
Clearly, looking out over a longer time frame of fifteen to twenty years is a challenging task. It is however one that is becoming increasingly important.
Agility in the Context of Next Generation Manufacturing
Such a view of agility is firmly set in the context of the longer term time scale, looking ahead 15 to 20 years at next generation manufacturing. This view involves defining agility as a focused concept and not some vague catch-all idea that conveniently embraces everything.
Such a focused understanding does however, build on the past, for it has been evident since the 1970s that mass production economies have been in crisis. Since 1970 observers and thinkers have been describing the emergence of a post-mass production economy and the associated characteristics of a post-mass production enterprise (e.g. see Davis 1987; Dertouzos et al. 1989; Toffler 1970, 1980, 1985; Poire & Sable 1984). With the collapse of mass/lean production oriented competitive conditions a need has arisen to develop new types of enterprises capable of dealing with and thriving in a complex and ever changing business environment ? enterprises that can continually reinvent themselves. The strategic vision is therefore the development of enterprises totally committed to embracing the emerging business environment. This involves creating a strategy that moves enterprises forward in three interrelated areas:
1. The niche enterprise: develop and exploit capabilities to thrive and prosper in the face of increasing diversity arising from individual customers, markets and to deal with wider issues of a fragmenting and diverse world;
2. The knowledge-based enterprise: develop and exploit capabilities to use knowledge and information for sustainable competitive advantage (in effect acknowledging information and knowledge as a source of wealth);
3. The agile (or adaptive) enterprise: develop and exploit capabilities to thrive and prosper in a changing, nonlinear, uncertain and unpredictable business environment.
Agile manufacturing takes its name from the last of these three interrelated areas. However, agility is just one component of a 21st century manufacturing enterprise strategy ? the issues of knowledge-based and niche enterprise need also to be considered and most importantly, the interrelationships between the three elements addressed.
The key points to understand are:
1. Agile manufacturing is a strategy aimed at developing capabilities (the enterprise platform) to prosper in the 21st century. In this respect it is similar to a manufacturing strategy in that it should support business and marketing strategies. However, these strategies also need to be modified to take advantage of agile manufacturing capabilities.
2. As a strategy, agile manufacturing is concerned with objectives, structures, processes and resources and not with individual point solutions, particular technologies, methods, etc. considered in isolation.
3. The emphasis is on designing the enterprise as a whole so that certain characteristics are achieved and not on the piecemeal adoption of quick fixes, prescriptions and panaceas.
4. Agile manufacturing may require some current best practices, lean production concepts, technologies and taken-for-granted assumptions to be re-evaluated, modified or even abandoned.
5. In the same way that mass-production marginalised many craft-based firms, agile manufacturing is likely to marginalise many mass production firms, even those with lean production enhancements.
6. One of the biggest problems to overcome is the misunderstandings that lean and agile are synonymous. They are not, although most of what is portrayed as agile is in fact lean.
Agility viewed as change competency
However, developing change competency is not easy. The difficulty is illustrated by the following five questions:
1. How quickly could business strategies and products be modified and the required changes to technologies, organisation, people, etc. be implemented?
2. What would be the cost of such changes?
3. How well would the reconfigured enterprise work in the immediate post-implementation period?
4. What is the scope of the changes that could be realistically accommodated?
5. How soon after the reconfiguration could a similar major change exercise be mounted?
Few companies today would score well on any one of these questions. Probably none would score well on all. Yet it is precisely this sort of capability that is implied by change competency.
Example - Rapid Prototyping Technologies in the Context of Next Generation Manufacturing
A consequence of this increase in product variety and customization has been the development of techniques for controlling the costs traditionally associated with customization and a large number of different product options. These methods include: late configuration centres; assembly-based variety; and product configurators.
These techniques are now well-known ways of accommodating increased variety without resulting cost penalties. However, they essentially all exploit the basic principle of achieving variety through assembly-based operations. Achieving fabrication-based variety is usually much more difficult and costly.
Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing systems can make a significant contribution towards achieving fabrication-based variety. However, rapid prototyping and tooling technologies, and especially the capability that they provide to generate cost-effective one-off tooling, offer an important means of moving forward the frontiers of product variety, enabling possibilities for increased product differentiation and more customization.
The above is essentially an aspect of a niche production strategy. It is however, not enough just to consider this issue. Rapid prototyping technologies are in a state of flux, which means that new developments are continuously appearing. This in turn means that enterprises need to continually search for these new developments, assess them, and if appropriate apply them. Implied in this is an ability to continuously adjust and reconfigure strategies, technologies, organisation, etc. (Kidd 1997b).
In affect therefore two additional requirements are placed on the enterprise. One is the need to develop agile or adaptive capabilities (change competency) so that new developments in these technologies can be applied quickly and at low cost. The other relates to knowledge management. In this case knowledge of customers, technology and processes need to be continually acquired and applied so that these new developments in technology are identified and used to produce customization that customers value.
None of this however happens by accident. It takes a strategic plan which addresses niche production, agile enterprise and knowledge-based enterprise issues to create the processes and structure that will allow firms to move quickly and effectively to exploit and to create opportunities.
These strategic issues are discussed in greater detail in Kidd (1997b).
Agility as a subject is still a developing area. Companies are starting to move towards agile behaviour, often not in a planned way, more usually they "fall into it" and as a result it tends to be operational and lacks strategic direction.
As a first step, companies need to understand the basic ideas and become intelligent respondents to the concepts. Agility is a long term issue for businesses ? achieving agility is a journey, not an objective to be attained before moving on to something else.
Although embryonic examples of agility can now be found in industry (e.g. see Dove et al. 1996), the implementation of agility is still very much a frontier activity, involving radically new concepts concerning strategies, organisation, people and technologies. It takes businesses into a domain where fundamental and taken for granted assumptions are challenged. Agility is a paradigm shift and before one can move forwards one has to understand the existing paradigm and to face up to the often painful task of accepting that current practices and beliefs are no longer appropriate or relevant. This in itself, is a major change exercise, but one that is vital to the successful development of agile capabilities.
Much has been written about agility. Most of the literature, however, is concerned with defining and discussing agility in terms of current best practices, which is not entirely correct. Most understandings of agility look at what companies have been doing, in some cases over the past 10 to 20 years and assume that this is a new paradigm which defines what companies will be doing in the future. This is the fundamental and fatal flaw in the bulk of the definitions of agility. The central point behind agility is to develop capabilities that today are not very well developed in firms and this is why it is important to challenge taken for granted assumptions (Kidd 1994).
Change, uncertainty and unpredictability in the business environment is rendering invalid many of these assumptions as well as elements of current practices. A new and different sort of enterprise is needed for agility, but such enterprises will not begin to emerge until people really understand what agility is actually about.
In 20 years time people will look back and see all this as obvious and will be puzzled why so many people today could not see the obvious. Agility is a paradigm shift which implies that old ideas, including some lean production concepts, need to be re-evaluated, modified and in some cases abandoned.
Davis, S., 1987, Future Perfect (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA)
Please pick an item from the menu below:
Related Home Pages
Some of Paul T Kidd's Books
Legal Notice: The information posted on the web site is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in the web site. The information is believed to be correct at the time of publication. Cheshire Henbury cannot however accept any responsibility for the completeness, accuracy and relevance of the information. Information is published with the understanding that publication does not represent the rendering of advice, consulting or other professional services. Specific application in a particular organisation is the sole responsibility of the representatives of that organisation. If expert advice is needed, the services of a competent person should be sought. Please read our terms and conditions (opens in a new window) for use of this web site.
Address and Phone Details (opens in new window)
Email: Contact form (opens in a new window)
Web address: www.cheshirehenbury.com