Upload
l
View
214
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Manufacturing Flexibility Research: A Review of Literatureand Agenda for Future Research
Ruchi Mishra • Ashok K. Pundir • L. Ganapathy
Received: 19 June 2013 / Accepted: 23 December 2013 / Published online: 29 January 2014
� Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management 2014
Abstract Academic and corporate interest on manufac-
turing flexibility has risen sharply in recent years and a
number of papers have been published in this area. This
paper aims to explore this field further by: first, offering a
systematic review of over 100 research papers published in
various academic journals from 1987 to March 2013 in
terms of country, journal, methodology, application areas
and issue coverage, second, suggesting and exploring the
developing trends in the literature and providing some
future research directions. Some of the important obser-
vations found in this paper are: (a) lack of adequate
research on the relationship between manufacturing flexi-
bility and other variables such as environmental uncer-
tainties, business strategies, organizational attributes,
innovation and product types (b) several other dimensions
of performance, such as innovation performance, envi-
ronmental performance and social performance have been
ignored while measuring impact of manufacturing flexi-
bility on performance (c) further attention required on
issues like measurement of overall manufacturing flexibility
level of an organization (d) domination of manufacturing
flexibility research in developed countries. This review is
useful for both practitioners and academicians, as it out-
lines major lines of research in the manufacturing flexi-
bility field.
Keywords Firm performance � Literature review �Manufacturing flexibility � Measurement of flexibility �Management � Implementation
Introduction
In developing economies, consumers are eager to have all
goods and services what other consumers do also have; but
in advanced economies, consumers are willing to follow
differentiated individual products and services that fit their
individual needs (Sumita and Yoshii 2013). These differ-
entiated products and services require a market character-
ized by wide variety, low cost, and customized and short life
cycle products. Thus, in order to cater to the requirements of
such market, an organization needs not only to be efficient
but also to be flexible. In line with this, an organization needs
to balance between continuity and change forces in its
external environment (Sushil 2005). In order to cope up with
continuity and change forces, flexibility has been considered
as one of the most useful and essential elements. In a fast
changing environment, manufacturing flexibility has been
recognized as a major source of competitive advantage. In
the field of operations management, manufacturing flexi-
bility has been recognized as a strategic imperative that
should be given prominent importance along with other
competing criteria (Slack 2005; Ruchi et al. 2011; Pundir
et al. 2013). In particular, manufacturing flexibility has been
defined as an ability to change or react with minimum time,
effort, cost or performance (Upton 1994; Sushil 2001). It is
desirable for an organization to have flexibility at different
levels: strategic, tactical and operational level, with each
level consisting of many different types of flexibility (Boyle
2006). Various types of manufacturing flexibility have been
recognised in the literatures that are required to cope up with
R. Mishra (&) � A. K. Pundir � L. Ganapathy
National Institute of Industrial Engineering (NITIE), Mumbai,
India
e-mail: [email protected]
A. K. Pundir
e-mail: [email protected]
L. Ganapathy
e-mail: [email protected]
123
Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management (June 2014) 15(2):101–112
DOI 10.1007/s40171-013-0057-2
different environmental uncertainties. Further, environment
uncertainty is a multidimensional concept (Gerwin 1987;
Anand and Ward 2004; Kara and Kayis 2004; Mishra et al.
2014) that has been classified into several categories based
on the management perception of possible future events
(Vokurka and O’Leary-Kelly 2000) such as uncertainty
related to market, government, regulations, technology etc.
Each type of uncertainty calls for different types of manu-
facturing flexibilities and different types of enabling tools
and techniques are required to implement that flexibility.
However, it is not easy to determine which aspect of man-
ufacturing flexibility should be improved in order to
improve the overall performance of the organization. In
recent studies, authors have proposed various frameworks
for analysing, implementing and managing manufacturing
flexibility to enhance both operation and financial perfor-
mance of an organization and at the same time relationship
between several variables and manufacturing flexibility
have also been examined.
A growing body of literature is available that defines
different types of manufacturing flexibility, their mea-
surement, their antecedents, their relationship with both
financial and operational performance and in particular
various others factors that significantly affect manufactur-
ing flexibility and performance relationship. Based on the
existing manufacturing flexibility literature, the main aim
of this paper is to classify the existing literature and thereby
provide better insights into development of trends with
respect to nature of research, focus area of research,
application areas, and countries where studies have been
done. Further, by analyzing both conceptual and empirical
literature on manufacturing flexibility, the study tries to
highlight future research scope in this particular area. This
paper begins with brief discussion of review methodology
followed by classification of papers with respect to several
evaluating criteria. In subsequent sections, trends in liter-
ature and scope for future research have been highlighted.
Review Methodology
Due to growing significance of manufacturing flexibility and
increased academic interest on various aspects of
manufacturing flexibility, it was decided to carry out longi-
tudinal analysis in the domain of manufacturing flexibility.
The main objective of study is to address the depth of liter-
ature, understand the trends in literature and to identify the
scope of future research in the area of manufacturing flexi-
bility. This paper reviews over 100 studies published in
various academic journals between 1987 and March 2013.
The papers have been classified into four time periods of
publication in order to help this longitudinal study.
Period I: 1987–1995.
Period II: 1996–2001.
Period III: 2002–2007.
Period IV: 2008–March 2013.
These papers were further analyzed in terms of country
of study, journal of publication, nature of methodology,
application areas (industries) and issues covered in the
study (see Fig. 1).
Distribution of Papers with Respect to Time Period
Classification of studies based on time period is essential to
see the development of manufacturing flexibility literature
over a span of time. The distribution of articles facilitates
understanding of both qualitative and quantitative improve-
ments in the literature in different study phases. This study
includes a total of 106 journal papers, and out of these 106
journal papers only 11 papers were published during the
period 1987–1995. The contribution gradually increased to 24
papers during 1996–2001, 33 papers during 2002–2007 and
38 papers during the period from 2008 to March 2013. The
number of publications shows an emerging significance of
research in the field of manufacturing flexibility in subsequent
years. The classification in Fig. 2 clearly depicts that a number
of studies during the period of 2008–2013 is almost three and
half times than a period of 1987–1995, indicating a thrice fold
increased interest in this area.
Distribution of Papers with Respect to Country
Country wise study is important in order to understand
seriousness and geographical spread of research on this
Country Journal Methodology Application area Issues Coverage
Developed Developing Theoretical Case & Other Variable Measurement PerformanceSurvey
Manufacturing Flexibility Fig. 1 Flow chart for literature
classification
102 Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management (June 2014) 15(2):101–112
123
particular topic. Classification of theoretical papers has
been done based on the countries from where contributions
were received for publication. Similarly, classification of
empirical and case based survey papers has been done
based on the countries from where data were collected. The
study indicates that the USA takes the top position with its
overall contribution of 52 journals (49.06 %), followed by
the UK with 8 journals (7.55 %) and other countries such
as Canada, China, Taiwan, India, Spain, Australia, Singa-
pore etc. India and China contributed total ten journals
(five journals each). Maximum numbers of articles related
to manufacturing flexibility are publication of authors
based in the USA, while minimum numbers of articles are
from other countries such as Brazil, Chile, Greece, Italy,
Japan, Malaysia etc. (as shown in Table 1).
Further, based on International Monetary Fund (2012)
world economic outlook (April, 2012 and Oct, 2012)
classification, a number of journal articles have been
classified into two broad categories: (i) articles that belong
to advanced economies (ii) articles that belong to devel-
oping economies. The findings clearly depict a moving
trend of research articles from advanced economies to
developing economies (see Fig. 3).
Distribution of Papers with Respect to Journal
Journal wise classification was considered essential for the
purpose of understanding the main journals that cover
research studies related to this particular area. A total of
thirty five journals were identified that mainly covers
manufacturing flexibility related research articles (as
shown in Table 2). Out of these thirty five journals maxi-
mum number of articles were found from International
journal of operation and production management (14) fol-
lowed by International journal of production research (13),
Journal of operation management (13), Journal of manu-
facturing technology management (8), Management sci-
ence (6), International journal of flexible manufacturing
system (5), European journal of operational research (4)
and Global journal of flexible systems management (4).
Distribution of Papers with Respect to Methodology
All the published papers were classified broadly into three
broad categories: theoretical paper, case based and survey
paper and other paper—based on their nature of research.
Theoretical papers include literature review, conceptual
papers and viewpoints of authors. Similarly, in this study
all the possible types of case studies such as exploration of
a new concept, and building, testing, extension and
refinement of a theory were included. Survey research
includes studies where either primary or secondary data
were used for generalization. The papers falling under
other category mainly includes simulation modeling,
experimentation or technical papers. out of total 106
papers, majority of papers (59 papers) falls under the cat-
egory of case based and survey papers followed by theo-
retical papers (22 papers) and other papers (25 papers)(see
Table 3).
Fig. 2 Distribution of research studies in terms of time period
Table 1 Country wise classification
Time
interval/
Country
1987–1995 1996–2001 2002–2007 2008–
March
2013
Total
Australia 1 1 1 3
Brazil 1 1
Canada 2 1 1 1 5
Chile 1 1
China 1 4 5
EU Nations 1 1
Greece 1 1 2
India 1 2 3 5
Ireland 1 1 2
Italy 1 0 1
Japan 1 1
Malaysia 1 1
North
America
1 1
Portugal 1 1
Singapore 1 1 2
Spain 1 2 3
Sweden 1 1
Switzerland 1 1
Taiwan 3 1 4
Thailand 1 1
Trinidad 1 1
Turkey 1 2 3
UK 2 3 3 8
USA 7 13 16 12 52
Total 11 23 31 37 106
Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management (June 2014) 15(2):101–112 103
123
Out of 11 papers published in 1987–1995, 3 papers
(27.27 %) belong to theoretical paper, 6 papers (54.55 %)
are from case based and survey category and 2 papers
(18.18 %) are modeling and simulation based papers. Sim-
ilarly, 24 papers published in 1996–2001, out of these 8
papers (33.33 %) are theoretical, 12 papers (50.00 %) are
case based and survey papers and rest 4 papers (16.67 %) are
modeling and simulation based papers. Further during the
period of 2002–2007, 5 papers (15.15 %) papers are theo-
retical, 19 papers (57.58 %) are case based and survey papers
and 9 papers (27.27 %) are modeling and simulation based
Table 2 Journal wise classification
Name of the journal 1987–1995 1996–2001 2002–2007 2008–Mar2013 Total
Accounting, organization and society 1 1
California management review, 1 1
European journal of operational research 1 2 1 4
Flexibility service and manufacturing journal 1 1
Global journal of flexible systems management 1 2 1 4
IEEE explore 1 1
Industrial management & data systems 1 1
Industrial marketing management 1 1 2
International journal of innovation and technology management 1 1
International journal of advance manufacturing technology 1 2 3
International journal of agile system 1 1
International journal of computer integrated manufacturing 1 1
International journal of flexible manufacturing systems 1 3 1 5
International journal of manufacturing system 1 1
International journal of operations & production management 1 2 7 4 14
International journal of physical distribution & logistics management 1 1
International journal of production economics 2 1 3
International journal of production research 1 2 4 6 13
Journal of engineering design 1 1
Journal of intelligent manufacturing 1 1
Journal of managerial issue 2 2
Journal of manufacturing system 1 1
Journal of manufacturing technology management 2 6 8
Journal of operations management 1 6 5 1 13
M&SOM 2 1 3
Management decision 1 1
Management research news 1 1
Management science 4 2 6
Modeling in operation management 1 1
Omega 3 3
Operation research 1 1
Production and operations management 1 1 2
Production planning and control 1 1
Journal of strategic management education 1 1
SSRN 1 1 2
Total 11 23 31 37 106
Fig. 3 Distribution of research studies in terms of country
104 Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management (June 2014) 15(2):101–112
123
papers. From the period 2008 to March 2013, 6 papers
(15.79 %) are theoretical paper, 22 papers (57.89 %) are
case based and survey papers and 10 papers (26.32 %) are
modeling and simulation based papers (as shown in Fig. 4).
Distribution of Papers with Respect to Application
Areas (Industry)
Out of all case based and survey papers, most of the studies
in manufacturing flexibility have been conducted in mul-
tiple industries consisting of a combination of different
industries such as Fabricated metal products, Industrial and
commercial machinery, Electronics and electrical equip-
ment, Transport equipment, Instrument and measurements
equipment, Fish processing, Textile, Plastic and rubber
product, Nonmetallic mineral product, Fabricated metal
products, Food and drink, Pharmaceuticals, Consumer
goods etc. (Table 4).
The empirical elements of papers use both primary and
secondary data from different industries. Primary data are
collected through interviews, questionnaire and focused
interviews whereas authors have also used secondary data
from High performance manufacturing (HPM) projects.
The HPM project is an international study of manufactur-
ing plants, initiated in 1989, involving seven countries.
Distribution of Papers with Respect to Coverage
of Issue
The papers included in the review can be mainly classified
into subgroups according to following themes:
(a) Manufacturing flexibility and their relationship with
other variables.
(b) Measurement, implementation and management of
manufacturing flexibility.
(c) Manufacturing flexibility and Performance
relationship.
Papers having a Direct Focus on Manufacturing
Flexibility and other Variables’ Relationships
The distribution of papers based on variables covered has
also been studied in this study. Variables dealing with
manufacturing flexibility have been broadly classified into
six broad categories (as shown in Table 5).
Environmental uncertainty mainly involves uncertainty
related to marketing and manufacturing functions. Strategy
aspect is related to both business strategy and competitive
strategy of a firm. Similarly, technology implies advance
manufacturing technology such as flexible manufacturing
system, group technology, and use of computer controlled
systems for design and manufacturing etc. Organizational
attributes entails structural, non-technological, behavioral
factors and design characteristics of a firm such as process
scale, technology age, workforce experience, multi skilled
workforce, team building, employee empowerment, size of the
organization, span of control etc. Innovation incorporates
innovation related to product, process, business practices and
Product Type includes products that require incremental or
radical change, also known as incremental or radical products.
A total of 42 papers have been identified in literature that
broadly deals with above variables. In these 42 papers, few
Table 4 Industry wise classification
Time interval/
industry
1990–1995 1996–2001 2002–2007 2008–Mar
2013
Total
Electro-mechanical
systems
1 1
Automobile 3 3
Component 1 1
Consumer durable 1 1
Electronic industry 2 1 2 5
Fine Paper 1 1
Flour mill industry 1 1
Food 1 1
Hospital 1 1
Machine tool and
Machinery
1 1
Motherboard 1 1
Multiple 5 7 14 12 38
Printed circuit
board
1 1 2 4
Total 6 11 20 22 59
Table 3 Methodology wise classification
Time interval/
Type of paper
1987–
1995
1996–
2001
2002–
2007
2008–
Mar 2013
Total
Theoretical paper 3 8 5 6 22
Case based and survey 6 12 19 22 59
Others 2 4 9 10 25
Fig. 4 Distribution of research studies in terms of nature of
methodology
Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management (June 2014) 15(2):101–112 105
123
studies deal with the relationship of manufacturing flexibility
with more than one variable. Out of these forty two papers,
environmental uncertainties were given utmost importance.
The total number of papers that majorly focus on the rela-
tionship between environmental uncertainty and manufactur-
ing flexibility is seventeen followed by organizational
attributes (twelve), technology (eleven) strategy (seven),
innovation (five) and product types (one) (as shown in Fig. 5).
Classification clearly gives the picture that majority of the
research in early nineties focused either on the relationship
between environmental uncertainty and manufacturing flexi-
bility or on the relationship between technology and manu-
facturing flexibility. Number of research studies dealing with
innovation and manufacturing flexibility is very few, espe-
cially initial numbers are negligible. Further, there is a crunch
of studies related to product type aspect of manufacturing
flexibility. Therefore, more research is required related to
innovation and product type aspect of flexibility.
Papers that Focus on Measurement, Implementation
and Management Aspect of Flexibility
Papers categorized in this category broadly deal with various
aspects of measurement, implementation and management
of flexibility. There are total 19 papers identified in the lit-
erature out of 106 reviewed papers that deal with various
aspects of measurement, implementation and management
of flexibility (as shown in Table 6). Papers having direct
focus on measurement of flexibility include paper related to
developing instrument for measuring and analyzing flexi-
bility(Gupta and Somers 1996; Koste et al. 2004), develop-
ing models for measurement (Gupta 1993; Jordan and
Graves 1995), use of entity-relationship models to evaluate
the flexibility(Chowdary et al. 2007), developing goodness
test for operational measure (Gupta and Buzacott 1996) and
proposing a method for measuring flexibility (Kahyaoglu
and Kayaligil 2002; Alexopoulos et al. 2007; Hop and Ru-
engsak 2005; Das and Caprihan 2008; Buzacott and Man-
delbaum 2008; Baykasoglu 2009; Esturilho and Estorilio
2010; Singh et al. 2012). Similarly, papers that focus on
implementation and management aspect of manufacturing
flexibility include theoretical (Boyle 2006), case study
(Upton 1994; Oke 2005; Wilson and Platts 2010; Chang
2011), survey (Suarez et al. 1996; Boyle and Scherrer-Rathje
2009) and simulation and modeling based papers (Alexo-
poulos et al. 2007; Das and Caprihan 2008).
Papers Investigating Manufacturing Flexibility
and Performance Relationships
Papers classified in this group aim at dealing with manufac-
turing flexibility and performance relationship. Authors have
measured either direct relationship between manufacturing
flexibility (Nayak and Ray 2010; Derrick and D’Souza 2006)
or indirect influence of other factors on the relationship
between flexibility and manufacturing flexibility (Ling-yee
andOgunmokun2008; Camiso0n and L’opez 2010; Ruchi et al.
Table 5 Research studies in terms of Variables
Variables Related studies
Environmental uncertainties Gerwin (1987); Swamidass and Newell (1987); Pagell and Krause (1999); Vokurka and O’Leary-Kelly
(2000); Chang et al. (2002); Pagell and Krause (2004); Kara and Kayis (2004); Boyle (2006); Sawhney
(2006); Hutchison and Das (2007); Anand and Ward (2004); Patel (2011); Chang 2011; Singh
et al.(2012); Fernandes et al. (2012); Goyal et al. (2012); Ojha et al. (2013)
Strategy Ettlie and Penner-Hahn (1994); Gupta and Somers (1996); Vokurka and O’Leary-Kelly (2000); Chang
et al. (2003); Hutchison and Das (2007); Ling-yee and Ogunmokun (2008); Fernandes et al.(2012)
Organization attributes Upton( 1995); Suarez et al.(1996); Upton (1997); Boyer et al. (1997); Lau (1999); Vokurka and
O’Leary-Kelly (2000); Chang et al. (2005); Hutchison and Das(2007); Ling-yee and Ogunmokun
(2008); Ling–yee et al. (2008); Skipper and Hanna (2009); Urtasun-Alonsoa et al. (2012)
Manufacturing technology Upton (1995); Suarez et al. (1996); Safizadeh et al. (1996); Upton (1997); Boyer et al. (1997); Lau
(1999); Vokurka and O’Leary-Kelly (2000); Zhang et al. (2006); Hutchison and Das 2007; Theodorou
and Florou (2008); Cordero et al. (2009)
Innovation Menor et al. (2007); Xinhua et al. (2009); Camison and Lopez (2010); Judi and Beach (2010);Oke
(2011)
Product types Larso et al. (2009)
Fig. 5 Distribution of research studies in terms of variables
106 Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management (June 2014) 15(2):101–112
123
2012). In measuring performance, authors have used financial
measures (Das 2001; Chang et al. 2002; Anand and Ward
2004; Llore0ns et al. 2005; Larso et al.2009; Patel 2011),
operational measures (Hutchison and Das 2007; Larso
et al.2009; Hallgren and Olhager 2009; Camiso0n and L’opez
2010) and other measures(Camiso0n and L’opez 2010).
Financial measures mainly imply profitability, sales growth,
return on investment, return on assets etc. whereas operational
measures primarily relate to cost, quality, delivery time etc.
Similarly, other measures of performance includes labor pro-
ductivity, customers’ satisfaction, others stakeholders’ satis-
faction, strength of competitive position etc. In the literature,
majority of the study have focused on the financial and opera-
tional measure of performance and there are limited number of
studies that deal with other measures of performance.
Conclusion and Future Scope
The study has put forward the existing research scenario in
the area of manufacturing flexibility. In spite of a growing
body of literature, there is a plenty of research scope still
left on this topic. Due to complex multidimensional nature
of manufacturing flexibility, it is difficult to generalize
findings from one study to another. The major conclusion
drawn from this study is that the relationship between
manufacturing flexibility and other variables: environ-
mental uncertainty, strategy, organizational attributes,
technology, innovation and product types have been stud-
ied individually and it is difficult to determine the collec-
tive influence of all the variables on manufacturing
flexibility. Most of the studies have focused on the financial
and operational dimensions of firm performance. Further,
many of the articles have dealt only with measuring a
particular dimension of flexibility and thus holistic mea-
surement of flexibility still remains a concern area (Mishra
et al. 2014). Although the majority of the articles relates to
developed countries, there has emerged some focus
towards developing countries in recent years.
Developing Trends in Literature
The review of articles on manufacturing flexibility reveals
the following trends in the literature: First, research is
Table 6 Studies on measurement, implementation and management of flexibility
Gupta and Somers (1992) Instrument development for measuring and analyzing manufacturing flexibility
Gupta (1993) A model for measuring the level of manufacturing flexibility been proposed
Upton (1994) Proposed a framework for managing flexibility, measuring and implanting flexibility has been presented
Jordan and Graves (1995) Developed a measure for the flexibility in a given product-plant configuration.
Gupta and Buzacott (1996) Proposed a goodness test for operational measure of flexibility
Kahyaoglu and Kayaligil
(2002)
A methodology for analyzing manufacturing flexibility has been proposed. Statistical analyses using response
surface methodology are used for measuring flexibility.
Koste et al. (2004) Addressed the issue of manufacturing flexibility measurement. Relationships between flexibility elements have
been established for holistic understanding of the complex concept.
Hop and Ruengsak (2005) Proposed a fuzzy estimation of manufacturing flexibility
Oke (2005) Proposed a framework for analyzing the implementation of flexibility
Boyle (2006) Major management practices for implementing manufacturing flexibility has been identified and synthesized into a
new framework
Chuu (2007) Proposed a Fuzzy group decision-making model with different linguistic term sets for evaluating manufacturing
flexibility.
Alexopoulos et al. (2007) Discussed a method for quantification of flexibility in a manufacturing system using transfer function.
Chowdary et al. (2007) Use of entity-relationship models to evaluate the flexibility options in a manufacturing system. E-R models for
machine and routing flexibilities have been developed
Das and Caprihan (2008) Presented a fuzzy-logic approach for measuring manufacturing flexibility for quantifying relevant factors affecting
commonly utilized flexibility types
Baykasoglu (2009) Based on digraph theory and matrix algebra, a new approach has been proposed to quantify flexibility.
Boyle and Scherrer-Rathje
(2009)
Best practices are identified to improve manufacturing flexibility that are in line with broader organizational and
manufacturing goals
Esturilho and Estorilio
(2010)
Based on this taxonomy and using the principles of quality function deployment, a method has been proposed to
identify the resources required to provide manufacturing flexibility
Wilson and Platts (2010) Using a constructs from coordination theory, a multiple case study methodology has been used to investigate the
applicability of these constructs in the flour milling industry
Singh et al. (2012) Used Analytical hierarchy process (AHP) technique to assess strategic flexibility in manufacturing industry
Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management (June 2014) 15(2):101–112 107
123
showing a sharp movement from understanding complex
multidimensional nature of manufacturing flexibility to
understanding the relationship of manufacturing flexibility
with other variables such as environmental uncertainty,
strategy, organizational attributes, innovation, technology,
product types. Further, authors have started employing both
survey and modeling approach to understand the relation-
ship between manufacturing flexibility and other variables.
Second, manufacturing flexibility research has started
giving increased importance on study of measurement,
implementation and management aspect of different
dimensions of flexibility. In recent years, several theoreti-
cal frameworks, survey based studies and modeling
approaches have been published in this regard.
Third, some of the articles have started focusing on new
dimensions, such as manufacturing flexibility and appli-
cability of organizational learning contingencies relation-
ship (ambidexterity, and absorptive capacity) (Patel et al.
2012), flexibility and use of decision support system
(Chowdary and Kanda 2003), manufacturing flexibility and
product quality relationship, virtual manufacturing cells
and flexibility relationship (Chowdary and Praveen 2005),
manufacturing flexibility and complexity tradeoff (Chrys-
solouris et al. 2013), flexibility and efficiency tradeoff (Tan
and Wang 2010), selection of a flexible machining centre
through a knowledge based expert system (Chowdary and
Muthineni 2012) etc.
Agenda for Future Research
As a consequence of the previous analysis of studies and
developing trends, a number of broad research questions
can be raised. Four broad groups of questions are proposed
in this paper, which have not been raised in earlier
research. The first one pertains to the relationship between
manufacturing flexibility and other variables that affects
manufacturing flexibility and performance relationship.
The second one involves the study of impact of manufac-
turing flexibility on different aspects of firm performance.
The third one is related to measurement thoughts in the
area of manufacturing flexibility. Finally, the fourth one is
dealing with the increasing need of manufacturing flexi-
bility studies in developing countries.
• First, regarding the relationship between manufacturing
flexibility and other variables, many authors have
identified the need to study the complex nature of
relationship between manufacturing flexibility and firm
performance and the role of variables like uncertainty,
technology, strategy, organizational attributes, product
types and innovation in this relationship. In this light,
the relationship between a firm’s manufacturing flex-
ibility and performance should be analyzed only after
capturing and studying the entire gamut of a firm’s
practices. This study of a firm’s practices is essential
before analyzing the relationship of manufacturing
flexibility and performance.
Further, In order to advance knowledge on manufac-
turing flexibility, it will be necessary to specify and assess
different types of interrelationships, trade-offs and syner-
gies prevalent among the variables identified in the litera-
ture so that manufacturing flexibility can be applied in an
organizations by using these interrelationships, trade-offs
and synergies in a most effective manner .
• Second, with respect to the question on performance, it
is obvious that the operational (cost, quality and
delivery) and financial aspect (ROI, ROE sales growth,
and market share etc.) has been addressed widely in the
literature. But, the link between other dimension of
performance such social performance, environmental
performance, human resource performance etc. is
Identification of
Improvement Areas
Periodic review
Identification of required
Manufacturing flexibility
Identify tools, techniques and methods for enabling required Manufacturing
flexibility
Measure actual Manufacturing
flexibility
Implement tools, techniques and methods
for enabling required Manufacturing flexibility
Determine the difference
between actual and required
flexibility level
Uncertainty Analysis
External: Business Requirement(B1,B2,B3,B4…..Bn)
Internal: Manufacturing Requirement
(M1,M2,M3….Mn )
Role of FlexibilityAdaptation, Redefinition, Banking and Reduction
Fig. 6 Proposed framework for manufacturing flexibility measurement
108 Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management (June 2014) 15(2):101–112
123
missing the literature and thus has been emphasized in
this paper.
• Third, a number of articles deal with the measurement,
implementation and management aspects of a particular
type of manufacturing flexibility. However, there is a
need to study the overall manufacturing flexibility level
of an organization. Therefore, measurement of other
dimensions of manufacturing flexibility is necessary to
improve the overall flexibility level of an organization
(see Fig. 6).
• Fourth, Although numerous studies are available in the
area of manufacturing flexibility, future studies are
need to be done in underdeveloped and developing
countries in order to take into account the unique
characteristics of country specific factors.
The classification and positioning of articles as in this
study will help both academicians and practitioners to
develop a comprehensive understanding of research in the
manufacturing flexibility area. Although, a large number of
studies contributed in this area belong to developed coun-
tries, it gives an ample scope to promote research in
developing countries to see the issues and challenges
associated with measurement, implementation and man-
agement of manufacturing flexibility. Also, it would be
interesting to study in detail the similar types of flexibilities
in different industries and to know how the industry spe-
cific factors affect the findings. In the end we can say that
although a plethora of research articles is available in lit-
erature especially in the last decade focusing on different
aspects, a comprehensive analysis can surely provide new
research opportunities in this area.
References
Abernethy, M. A., & Lillis, M. A. (1995). The impact of manufac-
turing flexibility on management control system design.
Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(4), 241–258.
Alexopoulos, K., Papakostasa, N., Mourtzisa, D., Gogosa, P., &
Chryssolourisa, G. (2007). Quantifying the flexibility of a
manufacturing system by applying the transfer function. Inter-
national Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 20(6),
538–547.
Anand, G., & Ward, P. T. (2004). Fit, flexibility and performance in
manufacturing: Coping with dynamic environments. Production
and Operations Management, 13(4), 369–385.
Baykasoglu, (2009). Quantifying machine flexibility. International
Journal of Production Research, 47(15), 4109–4123.
Baykasoglu, A., & Ozbakır, L. (2008). Analyzing the effect of
flexibility on manufacturing systems performance. Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management., 19(2), 172–193.
Beach, R., Muhlemann, A. P., Price, D. H. R., Paterson, A., & Sharp,
J. A. (2000a). Manufacturing operations and strategic flexibility:
Survey and cases. International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, 20(1), 7–30.
Beach, R., Muhlemann, A. P., Price, D. H. R., Paterson, A., & Sharp,
J. A. (2000b). A review of manufacturing flexibility. European
Journal of Operational Research, 122(1), 41–57.
Bernardes, E. S., & Hanna, M. D. (2009). A theoretical review of
flexibility, agility and responsiveness in the operations manage-
ment literature: Toward a conceptual definition of customer
responsiveness. International Journal of Operations & Produc-
tion Management, 29(1), 30–53.
Berry, W. L., & Cooper, M. C. (1999). Manufacturing flexibility:
Methods for measuring the impact of product variety on
performance in process industries. Journal of Operations
Management, 17(2), 163–178.
Boyer, K. K., Leong, G. K., Ward, P. T., & Krajewski, L. J. (1997).
Unlocking the potential of advanced manufacturing technolo-
gies. Journal of Operations Management, 15(4), 331–347.
Boyle, T. A. (2006). Towards best management practices for
implementing manufacturing flexibility. Journal of Manufactur-
ing Technology Management, 17(1), 6–21.
Boyle, T. A., & Scherrer-Rathje, M. (2009). An empirical examina-
tion of the best practices to ensure manufacturing flexibility:
Lean alignment. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Man-
agement, 20(3), 348–366.
Buzacott, J. A., & Mandelbaum, M. (2008). Flexibility in manufac-
turing and services: achievements, insights and challenges.
Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, 20(1–2), 13–58.
Camison, C., & Lopez, A. V. (2010). An examination of the
relationship between manufacturing flexibility and firm perfor-
mance- The mediating role of innovation. International Journal
of Operations & Production Management, 30(8), 853–878.
Cannon, A. R., & John, C. H. (2004). Competitive strategy and plant-
level flexibility. International Journal of Production Research,
42(10), 1987–2007.
Chang, A. Y. (2011). Prioritising the types of manufacturing
flexibility in an uncertain environment. International Journal
of Production Research, 50(8), 2133–2149.
Chang, S. C., Lin, R. J., Chang, F. J., & Chen, R. H. (2007). Achieving
manufacturing flexibility through entrepreneurial orientation. Indus-
trial Management & Data Systems, 107(7), 997–1017.
Chang, S. C., Lin, R. J., Chen, J. H., & Huang, L. H. (2005).
Manufacturing flexibility and manufacturing proactiveness:
Empirical evidence from the motherboard industry. Industrial
Management & Data Systems, 105(8), 1115–1132.
Chang, S. C., Lin, N. P., & Sheu, C. (2002). Aligning manufacturing
flexibility with environmental uncertainty: evidence from high-
technology component manufacturers in Taiwan. International
Journal of Production Research, 40(18), 4765–4780.
Chang, S.-C., Yang, C.-L., Cheng, H.-C., & Sheu, C. (2003).
Manufacturing flexibility and business strategy: an empirical
study of small and medium sized firms. International Journal of
Production Economics, 83(1), 13–26.
Chenhall, R. H. (1996). Strategies of manufacturing flexibility,
manufacturing performance measures and organizational perfor-
mance: an empirical investigation. Integrated Manufacturing
Systems, 7(5), 25–32.
Chou, M. C., Chua, G. A., & Teo, C. P. (2010). On range and
response: Dimensions of process flexibility. European Journal of
Operational Research, 207(2), 711–724.
Chowdary, B. V. (2001). Flexibility and related issues in evaluation
and selection of technological systems. Global Journal of
Flexible Systems Management, 2(2), 11–20.
Chowdary, B. V., & Kanda, A. (2003). A decision support system for
flexibility in manufacturing. Global Journal of Flexible Systems
Management, 4(3), 1–14.
Chowdary, B. V., & Muthineni, S. (2012). Selection of a flexible
machining centre through knowledge based Expert system.
Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 13(1), 3–10.
Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management (June 2014) 15(2):101–112 109
123
Chowdary, B. V., & Praveen, P. (2005). Formation of virtual
manufacturing cells by incorporating flexibility. Global Journal
of Flexible Systems Management, 6(1), 1–8.
Chowdary, B. V., Sushil, Rao K. S. P., & Kanda, A. (2007). A study
on manufacturing flexibilities using entity-relationship model.
International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, 7(4),
569–588.
Chryssolouris, G., Efthymioua, K., Papakostasa, N., Mourtzisa, D.
and Pagoropoulosa, A.(2013). Flexibility and complexity: is it a
trade-off?, International Journal of Production Research, down-
loaded from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0020
7543.2012.761362#.Uqh9c_QW2So (Retrieved on 11th Nov.
2013).
Chuu, S. J. (2007). Evaluating the flexibility in a manufacturing
system using fuzzy multi-attribute group decision-making with
multi-granularity linguistic information. The International Jour-
nal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 32(3–4), 409–421.
Cordero, R., Walsh, S. T., & Kirchhoff, B. A. (2009). Organization
technologies, AMT and competent workers Exploring relation-
ships with manufacturing performance. Journal of Manufactur-
ing Technology Management, 20(3), 298–313.
Cousens, A., Szwejczewski, M., & Sweeney, M. (2009). A process for
managing manufacturing flexibility. International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, 29(4), 357–385.
D’Souza, D. E., & Williams, F. P. (2000). Toward a taxonomy of
manufacturing flexibility dimensions. Journal of Operations
Management, 18(5), 577–593.
Das, A. (2001). Towards theory building in manufacturing flexibility.
International Journal of Production Research, 39(18),
4153–4177.
Das, & Caprihan, (2008). A rule-based fuzzy-logic approach for the
measurement of manufacturing flexibility. The International Journal
of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 38(11-12), 1098–1113.
De Toni, A., & Tonchia, S. (2005). Definitions and linkages between
operational and strategic flexibilities. Omega, 33(6), 525–540.
De Treville, S., Bendahan, S., & Vanderhaeghe, A. (2007). Manu-
facturing flexibility and performance: bridging the gap between
theory and practice. International Journal of Flexible Manufac-
turing Systems, 19(4), 334–357.
D’Souza, D. E. (2002). Toward an understanding of how organiza-
tions create manufacturing flexibility. Journal of Managerial
Issues, 4(4), 470–485.
D’Souza, D. E. (2006). Performance payoff from manufacturing
flexibility: The impact of market driven flexibility. Journal of
Managerial Issues, 18(4), 494–511.
Esturilho, C. G., & Estorilio, C. (2010). The deployment of manufac-
turing flexibility as a function of company strategy. Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management, 21(8), 971–989.
Ettlie, J. E., & Penner-Hahn, J. D. (1994). Flexibility ratios and
manufacturing strategy. Management Science, 40(11),
1444–1454.
Fellenz, M. R. (2008). Flexibility in management theory: Towards
clarification of an elusive concept. Journal of Strategic Man-
agement Education., 4, 65–90.
Fernandes, R., Gouveia, J. B., & Pinho, C. (2012). Product mix
strategy andmanufacturing flexibility. Journal of Manufacturing
Systems, 31(3), 301–311.
Gerwin, D. (1987). An agenda for research on the flexibility of
manufacturing processes. International Journal of Operation
and Production Management, 7, 38–49.
Gerwin, D. (1993). Manufacturing flexibility: A strategic perspective.
Management Science, 39(4), 395–410.
Gerwin, D. (2005). An agenda for research on the flexibility of
manufacturing processes. International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, 25(12), 1171–1182.
Gong, Z., & Hu, S. (2008). An economic evaluation model of product
mix flexibility. Omega, 36(5), 852–864.
Goyal, M., & Netessine, S. (2011). Volume flexibility, product
flexibility, or both: The role of demand correlation and product
substitution. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management,
13(2), 180–193.
Goyal, M., Netessine,S. and Randell,T.(2012). Deployment of
Manufacturing Flexibility: An Empirical Analysis of the North
American Automotive Industry. SSRN, (June 5, 2012). Avail-
able at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2077659 or http://dx.doi.
org/10.2139/ssrn.2077659.
Gupta, D. (1993). On measurement and valuation of manufacturing
flexibility. International Journal of Production Research,
31(12), 2947–2958.
Gupta, D., & Buzacott, J. A. (1996). A ‘‘goodness test’’ for
operational measures of manufacturing flexibility. International
Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems, 8(3), 24–233.
Gupta, Y. P., & Somers, T. M. (1992). Measurement of manufactur-
ing flexibility. European Journal of Operational Research,
60(2), 166–182.
Gupta, Y. P., & Somers, T. M. (1996). Business strategy, manufac-
turing flexibility, and organizational performance relationships: a
path analysis approach. Production and Operations Manage-
ment, 5(3), 204–233.
Hallgren, M., & Olhager, J. (2009). Flexibility configurations:
Empirical analysis of volume and product mix flexibility.
Omega, 37, 746–756.
Hauser, D. P., & Weck, O. L. (2007). Flexibility in component
manufacturing system:evaluation framework and case study.
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 18(3), 421–432.
He, P., Xu, X., & Hua, Z. (2012). A new method for guiding process
flexibility investment: flexibility fit index. International Journal
of Production Research, 50(14), 3718–3737.
Hop, N. V., & Ruengsak, K. (2005). Fuzzy estimation for manufac-
turing flexibility. International Journal of Production Research,
43(17), 2005.
Hutchison, J., & Das, S. R. (2007). Examining a firm’s decisions with a
contingency framework for manufacturing flexibility. International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27(2), 159–180.
International Monetary Fund. (2012). World Economic Outlook:
Coping with High Debt and Sluggish Growth, World Economic
and Financial Survey Oct.2012. Retrived on 11th June 2013
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2012/02/pdf/text.pdf.
International Monetary Fund. (2012). World economic out-
look:Growth resuming dangers remain, World Economic and
Financial Survey, April, 2012 Retrived on 11th June 2013
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2012/01/pdf/text.pdf.
Jack, E. P., & Powers, T. L. (2006). Managerial perceptions on
volume flexible strategies and performance in health care
services. Management Research News, 29(5), 228–241.
Jordan, W. C., & Graves, S. C. (1995). Principles on the benefits of
manufacturing process flexibility. Management Science, 41(4),
577–594.
Joseph, O. A., & Sridharan, R. (2011). Evaluation of routing
flexibility of a flexible manufacturing system using simulation
modelling and analysis. The International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, 56(1–4), 273–289.
Joseph, O. A., & Sridharan, R. (2012). Effects of flexibility and
scheduling decisions on the performance of an FMS: simulation
modelling and analysis. International Journal of Production
Research, 50(7), 2058–2078.
Judi, H. M., & Beach, R. (2010). Achieving manufacturing flexibility:
the role of people, technology, innovation and continuous
improvement. International Journal of Innovation and Technol-
ogy Management, 7(2), 161–181.
110 Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management (June 2014) 15(2):101–112
123
Kahyaoglu, Y., & Kayaligil, S. (2002). Conceptualizing manufactur-
ing flexibility: an operational approach and a comparative
evaluation. International Journal of Production Research,
40(10), 2187–2206.
Kara, S., & Kayis, B. (2004). Manufacturing flexibility and variabil-
ity: an overview. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Man-
agement, 15(6), 466–478.
Koste, L. L., & Malhotra, M. K. (1999). A theoretical framework for
analyzing the dimensions of manufacturing flexibility. Journal of
Operations Management, 18(1), 75–93.
Koste, L. L., Malhotra, M. K., & Sharma, S. (2004). Measuring
dimensions of manufacturing flexibility. Journal of Operations
Management, 22(2), 171–196.
Larso, D., Doolen, T., & Hacker, M. (2009). Development of a
manufacturing flexibility hierarchy through factor and cluster
analysis: The role of new product type on US electronic
manufacturer performance. Journal of Manufacturing Technol-
ogy Management, 20(4), 417–441.
Lau, R. S. M. (1999). Critical factors for achieving manufacturing
flexibility. International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, 19(3), 328–341.
Ling-yee, Li, & Ogunmokun, G. O. (2008). An empirical study of
manufacturing flexibility of exporting firms in China: How do
strategic and organizational contexts matter. Industrial Market-
ing Management, 37(6), 738–751.
Llorens, F. J., Molina, L. M., & Verdu, A. J. (2005). Flexibility of
manufacturing systems, strategic change and performance.
International Journal of Production Economics, 98(3),
273–289.
Lucas, M. T., & Kirillova, O. M. (2010). Reconciling the resource-
based and competitive positioning perspectives on manufactur-
ing flexibility. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Manage-
ment, 22(2), 189–203.
Menor, L. J., Kristal, M. M., & Rosenzweig, E. D. (2007). Examining
the influence of operational intellectual capital on capabilities
and performance. Manufacturing and Service Operation Man-
agement, 9(4), 559–578.
Mishra, R., Pundir, A.K. and Ganpathy, L. (2014). Assessment of
manufacturing flexibility: A review of research and conceptual
framework. Management Research Review. 37(8) (Forthcoming).
Muriel, A., Somasundaram, A., & Zhang, Y. (2006). Impact of partial
manufacturing flexibility on production variability. Manufactur-
ing and Service Operation Management, 8(2), 192–205.
Narasimhan, R., Talluri, S., & Das, A. (2004). Exploring flexibility
and execution competencies of manufacturing firms. Journal of
Operations Management, 22(1), 91–106.
Nayak, N. C., & Ray, P. K. (2010). Flexibility and performance
relationships: evidence from Indian bearing manufacturing firm.
International Journal of Modelling in Operations Management,
1(1), 67–83.
Ojha, D., White, R. E., & Rogers, P. P. (2013). Managing demand
variability using requisite variety for improved workflow and
operational performance: the role of manufacturing flexibility.
International Journal of Production Research, 51(10),
2915–2934.
Oke, A. (2003). Drivers of volume flexibility requirements in
manufacturing plants. International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, 23(12), 1497–1513.
Oke, A. (2005). A framework for analysing manufacturing flexibility.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management,
25(10), 973–996.
Oke, A. (2011). Linking manufacturing flexibility to innovation
performance in manufacturing plants. International Journal of
Production Economics, 143(2), 242–247.
Pagell, M., & Krause, D. (1999). A multiple method study of
environmental uncertainty and manufacturing flexibility. Journal
of Operations Management, 17(3), 307–326.
Pagell, M., & Krause, D. (2004). Re-exploring the relationshipbetween flexibility and the external environment. Journal of
Operations Management, 21(6), 629–649.
Patel, P. C. (2011). Role of manufacturing flexibility in managing
duality of formalization and environmental uncertainty in
emerging firms. Journal of Operations Management, 29,
143–162.
Patel, P. C., Terjesen, S., & Li, D. (2012). Enhancing effects of
manufacturing flexibility through operational absorptive capacity
and operational ambidexterity. Journal of Operations Manage-
ment, 30(3), 201–220.
Pereira, J., & Paulre, B. (2001). Flexibility in manufacturing systems:
A relational and a dynamic approach. European Journal of
Operational Research, 130(1), 70–82.
Pundir, A. K., Mishra, R., & Ganpathy, L. (2013). An exploration of
firm level competitiveness through choices in Manufacturing
Strategy: The case of Indian four wheeler passenger vehicle
companies. EuroEconomica, 32(2), 49–61.
Ruchi,K., Pundir, A.K., Ganapathy, L. (2011). Aligning manu-
facturing flexibility with competitive strategy of the organi-
zation. Paper presented in Eleventh Global Conference on
Flexible System Management, organized at IIM Kozhikode,
Dec 9th -12th, 2011.
Ruchi,K., Pundir, A.K., Ganapathy, L. (2012). Manufacturing flex-
ibility and firm performance: Literature review, paper accepted
for Twelfth global conference on flexible system management,
Organized at University of Vienna, Austria, July30- Aug1 2012.
Safizadeh, H. M., Ritzman, L. P., Sharma, D., & Wood, C. (1996). An
empirical analysis of the product-process matrix. Management
Science, 42(11), 1576–1591.
Saleh, J. H., Mark, G., & Jordan, N. C. (2009). Flexibility: a multi-
disciplinary literature review and a research agenda for design-
ing flexible engineering systems. Journal of Engineering Design,
20(3), 307–323.
Sawhney, R. (2006). Interplay between uncertainty and flexibility
across the value-chain: Towards a transformation model of
manufacturing flexibility. Journal of Operations Management,
24(5), 476–493.
Schmenner, R. W., & Tatikonda, M. V. (2005). Manufacturing
process flexibility revisited. International Journal of Operations
& Production Management, 25(12), 1183–1189.
Sethi, A. K., & Sethi, S. P. (1990). Flexibility in manufacturing: a
survey. The International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing
Systems, 2(4), 289–328.
Shewchuk, J. P., & Moodie, C. L. (1998). Definition and classification
of manufacturing flexibility types and measures. International
Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems, 10(4), 325–349.
Singh, D., Oberoi, J. S., & Ahuja, I. S. (2012). Assessing strategic
flexibility of manufacturing organisations using AHP. Interna-
tional Journal of Agile Systems and Management., 5(4),
319–329.
Skipper, J. B., & Hanna, J. B. (2009). Minimizing supply chain
disruption risk through enhanced flexibility. International Jour-
nal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 39(5),
404–427.
Slack, N. (2005). The changing nature of operations flexibility.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management,
25(12), 1201–1210.
Suarez, F. F., Cusumano, M. A., & Fine, C. H. (1996). An empirical
study of manufacturing flexibility in printed circuit board
assembly. Operation Research, 44(1), 223–240.
Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management (June 2014) 15(2):101–112 111
123
Sumita, U. and Yoshii,J.(2013). Strategic flexibility in exploiting
economies of scope on 70-30 Principle: A case study of Japanese
electronics industry. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Man-
agement, ISSN: 0972-2696 (Print) 0974-0198 (Online) Retrieved
on 12th June 2013 http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/
s40171-013-0030-0.
Sushil. (2001). Demythifying flexibility. Management Decision,
39(10), 860–865.
Sushil, (2005). A flexible strategy framework for managing continuity
and change. International Journal of Global Business and
Competitiveness, 1(1), 22–32.
Swamidass, P. M., & Newell, W. T. (1987). Manufacturing strategy,
environmental uncertainty and performance: a path analytic
model. Management Science, 33(4), 509–524.
Tan, J., & Wang, L. (2010). Flexibility–efficiency tradeoff and
performance implications among Chinese SOEs. Journal of
Business Research., 63(4), 356–362.
Theodorou, P., & Florou, G. (2008). Manufacturing strategies and
financial performance—The effect of advanced information
technology: CAD/CAM systems. Omega, 36, 107–121.
Tsubone, H., & Horikawa, M. (1999). A comparison between
machine flexibility and routing flexibility. International Journal
of Flexible Manufacturing Systems, 11(1), 83–101.
Upton, D. M. (1994). The Management of Manufacturing Flexibility.
California Management Review, 36(2), 72–89.
Upton, D. M. (1995). Flexibility as process mobility: The manage-
ment of plant capabilities for quick response manufacturing.
Journal of Operations Management, 12(3–4), 205–224.
Upton, D. M. (1997). Process range in manufacturing: An empirical
study of flexibility. Management Science, 43(8), 1079–1092.
Urtasun-Alonsoa, A., Larraza-Kintanaa, M., Garcıa-Olaverrib, C. &
Huerta-Arribasa, E. (2012). Manufacturing flexibility and
advanced human resource management practices. Production
Planning & Control: The Management of Operations,1–15.
Downloaded from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/
09537287.2012.690198.
Vokurka, R. J., & O’Leary-Kelly, S. W. (2000). A review of empirical
research on manufacturing flexibility. Journal of Operations
Management, 18, 485–501.
Ward, P. T., & Duray, R. (2000). Manufacturing strategy in context:
environment, competitive strategy and manufacturing strategy.
Journal of Operations Management, 18(2), 123–138.
Wilson, S., & Platts, K. (2010). How do company achieve mix
flexibility. International Journal of Operation and Production
Management, 30(9), 978–1003.
Xinhua, B., Taibo, C., Baojun, Y. & Cuiling,Y. (2009). manufactur-
ing flexibility and rapid product innovation: Two key manufac-
turing decision issues in turbulent business environment. IEEE
explore, Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC
2009), 4963- 4967. Downloaded from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/
stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5194921.
Zhang, Q., Vonderembse, M. A., & Cao, M. (2006). Achieving
flexible manufacturing competence the roles of advanced
manufacturing technology and operations improvement prac-
tices. International Journal of Operations & Production Man-
agement, 26(6), 580–599.
Zhang, Q., Vonderembse, M. A., & Lim, J. S. (2003). Manufacturing
flexibility: Defining and analyzing relationships among compe-
tence, capability, and customer satisfaction. Journal of Opera-
tions Management, 21(2), 173–191.
Zukin, M., & Dalcol, P. R. T. (2000). Manufacturing flexibility:
Assessing managerial perception and utilization. International
Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems, 12(1), 5–23.
Key Questions
1. What is the current state of manufacturing flexibility research
in terms of country, journal, methodology, application area
and issue coverage?
2. What are the developing trends in manufacturing flexibility
literature?
3. What are the possible unexploited areas in manufacturing
flexibility research?
Ruchi Mishra is currently pursuing Fellow
(Doctoral) program in the area of Manufacturing
Flexibility at National Institute of Industrial
Engineering (NITIE), Mumbai. She has over 4
years of research and academic experience in the
area of Business Policy (Strategic Management) at
Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad. Her
major interests are in the areas of manufacturing
flexibility, manufacturing strategy and competitiveness.
Ashok K. Pundir is Professor of Operations
Management and Dean (Student Affairs & Place-
ment) at National Institute of Industrial Engi-
neering (NITIE), Mumbai, India. He has over 16
years of industrial experience in the area of
Industrial Engineering and Project Management at
The Premier Automobiles Ltd., Mumbai. He has
over 15 years of teaching experience and his major
interests are in the areas of project management, manufacturing
management and work systems design. He is a Life Member of GIFT,
Fellow of Indian Institution of Industrial Engineering and Fellow of
Institution of Engineers (India).
L. Ganapathy is a Professor of Operations Man-
agement at National Institute of Industrial Engi-
neering (NITIE), Mumbai, India. He has over 27
years of teaching experience and his major inter-
ests are in the areas of project management and
operations research. He is a member of IEEE, IIIE,
ORSI.
112 Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management (June 2014) 15(2):101–112
123