12
ORIGINAL ARTICLE Manufacturing Flexibility Research: A Review of Literature and Agenda for Future Research Ruchi Mishra Ashok K. Pundir L. Ganapathy Received: 19 June 2013 / Accepted: 23 December 2013 / Published online: 29 January 2014 Ó 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

Manufacturing Flexibility Research: A Review of Literature and Agenda for Future Research

  • 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