Technical Practices and Human Factors

7/30/2019 Technical Practices and Human Factors

1/15

The Implementation of Technical Practices and HumanFactors of the Toyota Production System in DifferentIndustries

Ching-Chow Yang,

1

Tsu-Ming Yeh,

2

and King-Jang Yang

3

1 Department of Industrial and System Engineering, Chung-Yuan Christian University, Chungli, Taiwan2 Department of Industrial Engineering and Technology Management, Da-Yeh University, Changhua, Taiwan3 Department of Applied Statistics, Chung-Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan

Abstract

The Toyota Production System (TPS) can result in huge benefits for companies and has been widelyimplemented around the world. Nevertheless, most adopters emphasize only the technical practices of

the TPS, but neglect the critical role of human factors in the implementation of the TPS. Therefore,this study aims at developing an integrated TPS model that fully integrates the technical elements andhuman elements of the TPS with Total Quality Management (TQM) practices. An empirical studywas conducted to confirm the causal relationships among these constructs. In the empirical study,questionnaires were mailed and e-mailed to 620 companies that had implemented the TPS, and 151of the completed questionnaires were valid. These 151 respondents were divided into eight categories.The results revealed that the implementation level of each construct was significantly different in eachindustry. The automobile and motorcycle industries have put a great deal of effort into the applicationof Humanity, Human Resource Management (HRM), and TQM practices and obtained good results.Other industries, however, ignored the implementation of HRMpractices. The results also revealed thatthe early adopters enjoyed significant benefits from the implementation of the TPS, which led high-techcompanies to start adopting TPS practices and become lean enterprises. C 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Keywords: TPS; TQM; Lean; Autonomation

1. INTRODUCTION

The Toyota Production System (TPS) received a greatdeal of attention when the Massachusetts Instituteof Technologys International Motor Vehicle Pro-gram (IMVP) published its findings about the system(Genaidy & Karwowski, 2003; Holweg, 2007). The ob-

jective of the IMVP is to investigate the productivity

Correspondence to: Tsu-Ming Yeh, Department of IndustrialEngineering and Technology Management, Da-Yeh University,Changhua, Taiwan No.168, University Rd., Dacun, Changhua51591, Taiwan. Phone: +881-4-8511888 #2228; e-mail:[email protected]

Received: 21 November 2010; revised 14 January 2011;accepted 14 January 2011

View this article online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/hfm

DOI: 10.1002/hfm.20296

and quality of car manufacture and assembly methodsused by car manufacturers around the world, espe-cially Japanese car companies. The IMVP showed thatJapanese car manufacturers, especially Toyota, wereleading the industry in terms of productivity, qual-ity, and inventory minimization (Krafcik, 1998; Paezet al., 2004; Womack, Jones, & Roos, 1990). Womackand Jones (1994) redefined the TPS as a lean produc-tion system and extended the potential scope of leanproduction systems within all types of organizations.

Lean production has been regarded as either an evo-lution of, or an alternative to, previous productionmodels, especiallymassproduction (Bartezzaghi,1999;Paez et al., 2004). Womack and Jones (1994) explainedthat companies could dramatically improve their per-formances by embracing the lean production ap-proach. They asserted that, by eliminating unnecessary

Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries22

(6) 541555 (2012) c 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.541


2/15

Technical Practices and Human Factors of the TPS Yang, Yeh, and Yang

steps, aligning all steps into a continuous flow, re-combining labor into cross-functional teams dedicatedto the activity, and continually striving for improve-ment, companies could develop, produce, and dis-tribute products and services with half, or even lessthan half, of the human effort, space, tools, time, and

overall expense that was previously required; thus, suc-cessfully implementing the TPS would result in dra-matic increases in operational efficiency, quality, andprofits (Watanabe, 2007).

Today, the lean production model is preferred tomany other conventional production models, includ-ing the mass production model, because of its abilityto produce high-quality and diverse products to meetthe needs of various customers (Genaidy & Karwowski,2003). Lean production has now been applied aroundthe world in many industries (Melton, 2005). In addi-

tion to the benefits and advantages that the TPS hasfor manufacturers, service enterprises can also bene-fit from lean management (Arbos, 2002). The princi-ples and practices of lean production emerged fromthe automobile industry in the beginning of the 1990sand then were adopted in other industries (Lee, 2010;Seppala & Klemola, 2004).

Many companies in various industries would liketo abandon their traditional production models, in-cluding the mass production model, and adopt thelean production model, but there are many obstaclesto the introduction and implementation of the TPS.

The largest obstacles arise from the fact that the holis-tic logic and management system of the TPS contrastsstarkly with the traditional mass production approach(Holweg, 2007;Melton, 2005), and companiesoverem-phasize the technical aspects of the TPS but ignore thehuman aspects and humanity management. Paez et al.(2004) asserted that western manufacturers often re-viewed the techniques of the system, but failed to con-sider the capabilities of the workforce. Indeed, man-agers commonly misunderstand the concepts, princi-ples, and practices that guide the TPS (Dahlgaard &

Dahlgaard-Park, 2006).If industries focus only on the technical elements ofthe TPS, such as the kanban system, quick changeover,waste elimination, preventive maintenance, autono-mation, the pull system, without integrating qualitymanagement and human-driven activities, the imple-mentation of the TPS will not result in better per-formance. Therefore, this study aims at developing anintegrated TPS model that fully integrates the technicalelements and human elements of the TPS with Total

Quality Management (TQM) practices. Based on theprevious literature and the authors abundant experi-ence in related academic studies, in-depth interviewswere conducted with managers in the companies thathave successfully implemented the TPS and industryconsultants.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW OF TPSESSENTIALS

Many researchers are investigating the TPSs concepts,principles, practices, and systems, the essentials ofwhich are valuable to this research. The related lit-erature is reviewed as follows.

2.1. Concepts and Principles of the TPS

Lean production emphasizes customer needs,the reduction of the activities and costs thatdo not produce value for customers, and elim-ination of all kinds of waste in all phases ofthe order-delivery process (Seppala & Klemela,2004).

Lean production requires that employees areactive, innovative, multiskilled, and continu-ously motivated to suggest improvements tothe process and production methods (Seppala& Klemola, 2004).

Lean production involves a new philosophy of

manufacturing focusing on customer satisfac-tion and continuous improvement (Paez et al.,2004).

WomackandJones(1996)proposedthefollow-ing principles of lean production: 1) specifyingvalue, 2) identifying the value stream, 3) creat-ing the value stream flow, 4) pulling value fromcustomers, and 5) pursuing perfection.

Delbridge (2003) outlined the following prin-ciples of lean manufacturing: 1) teamwork andgroup problem solving, 2) Just-In-Time (JIT)

and total management systems, 3) continuousimprovement, 4) relationships with suppliers,and 5) relationships with customers.

James-Moore and Gibbons (1997) identifiedthe following core principles of lean produc-tion: 1) flow, 2) defect prevention, 3) pull, 4)teamwork, and 5) problem solving.

Liker (2004) proposed the following 14 princi-ples of the TPS in his bookThe Toyota Way: 1)decisions based on the lorry-term philosophy,

542Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries DOI: 10.1002/hfm


3/15

Yang, Yeh, and Yang Technical Practices and Human Factors of the TPS

2) creating a continuous process flow, 3) usinga pull system, 4) leveling out the workload, 5)building a culture based on achieving qualitythe first time, 6) standardized tasks (processes),7) using visual controls, 8) using reliable andthoroughly tested technology, 9) developingin-

ternal leaders, 10) developing exceptional em-ployees and teams, 11) respecting partners andsuppliers, 12) solving root problems based ona thorough understanding of the situation, 13)making decisions slowly by consensus, and 14)becoming a learning organization.

Several of these principles are indeed TPS practices,such as using a pull system, using visual controls, andusing standardized tasks.

2.2. Features of the TPS

Monden (1983) asserted that the TPS includesfour basic elements: JIT, autonomation, a flex-ible workforce, and creative thinking.

Womack identified TPSs three main featuresas

1. a new philosophy of manufacturing,focusing on customer satisfaction andcontinuous improvement;

2. new organizational techniques tomanage product development, sup-ply chain relations, production oper-ations, and coordination; and

3. using techniques such as JIT, simulta-neous engineering, and inventory sys-tems (Paez et al., 2004).

2.3. Tools, Methods, and Practicesof the TPS

Melton (2005)identified the keytoolsand tech-niques of the TPS as

1. kanban a visual signal tosupport flow

by pulling a product,2. 5Ss a visual housekeeping technique,3. visual control a method ofmeasuring

performance at the shop floor,4. poke yoke an error-proofing tech-

nique, and5. single minute exchange of dies a

changeover reduction technique. Monden (1983) identified eight methods used

to implement the TPS as

1. functional management system,2. autonomous control,3. kanban system,4. standard operations,5. production smoothening,6. multifunctional layout design,

7. reduction of setup activities, and8. improvement activities.

Paezetal.(2004)identifiedthreecoreTPStech-niques as

1. the kanban system,2. production smoothening, and3. autonomation.

2.4. Integration of Technical Elementsand Human Elements

From the previous section, it is easy to see that manyresearchers have discussed the content of the TPSand lean production from different aspects, but it isdifficult to discriminate the principles, tools, meth-ods, and practices. Therefore, in this study, the var-ious aspects of the TPS are categorized into ele-ments, which include tools, methods, and practices.Several researchers divided TPS elements into twocategories: technical elements and human elements.Paez et al. (2004) asserted that western manufactur-ers overemphasized the technical elements and ne-

glected the human elements. Thus, they examinedseveral studies and divided the elements discussedin those studies into technical elements and humanelements.

TheelementsfromPaezet al.s (2004)study, as well asseveral other studies, such as Monden (1983), Fang andKleiner (2003), Seppala and Klemola (2004), and Liker(2004), were examined. A complete list of elementswas compiled and is presented in Table 1. Technicalelements were divided into four categories: autonoma-tion, JIT, lean manufacturing, and waste elimination.Human elements was divided into five categories: uti-

lization of people, flexibility, human resource manage-ment (HRM) practices, creative thinking, and respectfor people.

3. BUILT-IN QUALITY IN THE TPS

Without understanding the human elements, it isimpossible to successfully implement the technicalpractices of the TPS. This doesnt mean, however,

Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries DOI: 10.1002/hfm543


4/15


TABLE 1. Comparison of the Technical Elements and Human Elements in the TPS

Technical Elements Human Elements

Autonomation Autonomous Control

Automation Built-in Quality Control Preventive Maintenance

(Defect Prevention) Poke Yoke

(Error-Proofing)

JIT Kanban System

(Visual Control) Standard Operations Production Smoothing

(Production Leveling) Quick Setup Times

(Quick Changeover Techniques) Lot Size Reduction Continuous Flow Production Taking Time Cycle Time Reduction Supplier Partnership Using Few Suppliers Pull System (Customer Demand Pull) Lowest Inventories

Lean Manufacturing U-type Manufacturing Cellular Manufacturing Multifunctional Layout Design

Single Minute Exchange of Dies Multifunctional Teams Simultaneous Engineering Vertical Information Systems Effective R & D

Waste Elimination Focus on Problem Solving Group Improvement Activity 5Ss Lowest Inventories 5 Whys

Utilization of People Teamwork (Cross-functional)

Optimized Capability High Involvement Multimachine Handling Collaboration

Flexibility Multiskilled Workers Direct Authority Empowerment Enlarged Responsibility Decision Making at the Lowest Appropriate Level

Practices of HRM Employee Education and Training Motivation

Promotion of Leaders Internally Development of Lean Leadership at All Levels Relationships of Mutual Trust and Commitment Job Satisfaction Autonomous Decision Making Work Enrichment Ongoing Development of People Decentralized Responsibilities

Creative Thinking Creating Value Capitalizing on Employees Ideas and Suggestions Maintaining Challenges to Existing Processes Pursuing Perfection

Innovative Activities Respect for People Lifetime Employment Pay Graded Steeply by Seniority Treatment of Employees as Family Employees have Decision-making Power Sharing the Companys Success

that the other critical drivers of the TPS, which arequality-related activities, should be neglected. Monden(1983) presented an overview of his research project atthe Toyota corporation in his book, Toyota ProductionSystem. He said that the goal of the TPS was long-termimprovement, which translates into cost reduction,quality assurance, and respect for humanity. Takeuchi,Osono, & Shimizu (2008) asserted that Toyotas values,which were developed by several top managers such

as Sakichi Toyoda, Kiichiro Toyota, Tuiichi Ohno, EijiToyota, include the mindset of continuous improve-ment (kaizen), respect for people and their capabil-ities, teamwork, humility, putting the customer first,and the importance of seeing things firsthand. Toyotahas refined Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA), a continu-ous improvement process used throughout the busi-ness world, in the Toyota business practice process(Takeuchi et al., 2008).



5/15


Watanabe (2007) emphasized that Toyota had tokeep growing as it built a stronger foundation for thefuture. There are three keys to building a stronger foun-dation, including improving product quality, continu-ally reducing costs, and developing human resources.He also emphasized that becoming number one was

not about being the world leader in terms of the num-ber of automobiles sold, but about being the best inthe world in terms of quality (Watanabe, 2007). For-mer Toyota president Katsuaki Watanabe also assertedthat the Toyota Way had been, and would continue tobe,the standard foreveryonewho worked forToyotaallover the world (Watanabe, 2007). The Toyota Way hastwo main pillars: continuous improvement and respectfor people (Watanabe, 2007).

Toyota practiced the philosophy and principles ofTotal Quality Control (TQC) as early as the late 1950s,

and developed the quality control circles in the early1960s (Dahlgaard & Dahlgaard-Park, 2006; Lillrank,1995). The Japanese version of TQC was the mainreference for TQM, which was created in the 1980s(Dahlgaard & Dahlgaard-Park, 2006). Several re-searchers also asserted that the TPS (or lean produc-tion) actually was based on JIT, TQC (later TQM),team-based work, and flexible programming (Appel-baum & Batt, 1994; Landsbergis, Cahill, & Schnall,1999; Seppala & Klemola, 2004; Taira, 1996). There-fore, Liker (2004) proposed several TPS quality man-agement principles and practices, such as

using allthe modernquality assurance methodsavailable,

quality for customers driving the firms valueproposition,

getting quality right the first time, setting up built-in quality, building into the equipment the ability to de-

tect problems and stop itself, continuous improvement based on standard-

ization, and focusing on the customer and generating value

for the customer.

4. BUILDING TQM AND HRMPRACTICES INTO THE JIT ANDAUTONOMATION

JIT and Jidoka (Autonomation) are the two pillars ofthe TPS (Holweg, 2007; Liker, 2004; Ohno, 1988). JITmeans that the parts required for assembly reach the

assembly line in the amount needed at the time theyare needed (Genaidy & Karwowski, 2003). To success-fully perform JIT there cannot be any defects in theproduction process. It requires a total quality systemin the production process. During the implementationof Autonomation, quality should be built in. There-

fore, a method to detect defects when they occur andautomatically stop production so an employee can fixthe problem before the defect continues downstream isneeded (Liker, 2004). Furthermore, when workers finddefects, the workers must have the power to stop theassembly line (usually by pushing the andon cord),solve problems, and improve their work (Genaidy &Karwowski, 2003). Employees are continuously mo-tivated to suggest improvements in the process andproduction methods. Every team member is respon-sible for controlling quality and preventing defects in

the process. Based on these TQM and HRM practicesinherent in JIT and Autonomation systems, the inte-grationof TQM andHRM practices withthe JITsystemis displayed in Figure 1, and the integration of TQMand HRM practices with the autorotation system inFigure 2.

Nonetheless, the successful implementation of TQMand HRM practices is based on an appreciation of hu-man activities, such as

respect for people, lifetime employment and job security,

pay graded steeply by seniority, job satisfaction, direct authority, empowerment, pursuit of perfection, and sharing company success.

Most of these activities are related to the higherorders of Maslows hierarchy of needs and includeboth the hygiene factors and motivational factors fromHerzberg theory (Liker, 2004). Therefore, the appre-ciation of human activities has resulted in significant

effects on the implementation of the TPS. As a result,huge implementation performances will be reached.The frameworks are integrated in Figures 1 and 2 asthe holistic TPS, which also refers to the model consid-ered by Liker (2004) (see Figure 3).

5. THE EMPIRICAL STUDY

The holistic TPS imposes the causal relationshipsamong the constructs like humanity-activities, TQM,



6/15


Figure 1 Integrate TQM and HRM practices with JIT system.

Practices

Multi-machinesHandling

TQM Customer-focused

TPM Implementation Autonomous

Quality Culture Incoming Quality

Quality Assurance

Prevention Concept

Measurement System

Kaizen

Basis Principles Man-machine Smooth

Layout Design with

Lower Labors

Build-in Quality Control

Zero Defect

Autonomation

HRM Education and Training

Problem Solving Skills

Multi-skilled Collaboration

Work Enrichment

Employee Motivation

Autonomous Decision

Innovative Activities

U-typeManufacturing

Detect DefectsAutomatically

Stop MachineAutomatically

MinutesExchange of Dies

Multi-functional Layout

Poke Yoke(Error-proofing)

PreventiveMaintenance

Figure 2 Integrate TQM and HRM practices with Autonomation system.



7/15


Customer Satisfaction Best Quality Product and Service

Lowest Cost Shortest Delivery Greatest Security

Lean Process Make Value Stream Flow

Reduce the Variability on

Process

Eliminate the Rigid Hierarchies

Pursue Perfection

Continuous Improvement

Eliminate Waste

Visual Waste

Problem Awareness

5 Whys

Problem Solving

Improvement Methods Statistic Tools

Just In time(Right Parts, Right

Number, Right

Time)

Pull System

Production

Leveling

Kanban System

Quick

Changeover

Zero Defect

Lowest

Inventories

Take Time

Standard

Operations

Autonomation

(Build In Quality)

Detect Defects

Stop Machine

Man-machine

Smooth

Poke Yoke

Preventive

Maintenance

Multi-functional

Layout

Quick Exchange

of Dies

HRM

Multi-skilled, Empowerment

Education & Training, Suggestions

Motivation & Incentive

TQM

Customer-focused, Quality System,

Total Standardization, Zero Defect

Quality Culture

Humanity Activities

Job Security, Respect for People, Direct Authority, Culture, Innovative

Perfermance

Hard-

Side

Soft-

Side

Toyota Way, Lean Thinking

Figure 3 The holistic TPS by referring to the model considered by Liker (2004).

HRM, Continuous Improvement, JIT, Autonomation,Lean Process, and Performance. Therefore, the empir-ical study is conducted to confirm the causal relation-ships among these constructions. In the holistic TPS(Figure3),eachconstructioncontainsseveralpractices.Therefore, the related practices for each construct aredisplayed in Table 2. The objectives of this empiricalstudy are therefore

to investigate implementation time for differ-ent industries,

to determine the implementation levels of theconstructs and practices, and

to analyze and compare the implementationlevels of the constructs for different industries,and for different implementation years.

The data-gathering tool used in this empirical studywas a questionnaire survey. The questions on the ques-tionnaire covered

the implementation maturity of each practicefrom the eight constructions, and

the basic respondent data (companies) includ-ingindustrycategoryandnumberofyearssinceimplementation.

The questionnaire used a five-point Likert scale from 1 (not implemented at all) to5 (completelyimple-mented) to evaluate the implementation level of eachconstruct practice. In the first stage of research, severalexperts and managers who had specialized knowledge

about, and experience with, the TPS were interviewedto consider the appropriateness of these constructsand their implementation status. Their insights alsohelped to confirm the effectiveness of the questionnairedesign.

In this empirical study, the participants who hadimplemented the TPS with lean production wereneeded. Because it was difficult to find suitable par-ticipants, several industrial associations and two im-portant nonprofitorganizations, including the Chinese



8/15


TABLE 2. Constructs and Related Practices

Construct Practice

Humanity Job SecurityRespect for PeopleDirect AuthoritySpecified CultureInnovative Work Environment

HRM Multiskilled EmployeesEmpowermentEducation and TrainingInnovative SuggestionsMotivation and Incentive

TQM Focus on CustomersQuality SystemTotal Standard OperationsPursuit of Zero DefectsQuality Culture

Continuous InnovationImprovement

Waste EliminationQuality ImprovementProblem SolvingElimination of Steps Without ValueElimination of Bottlenecks

JIT Pull SystemKanban SystemProduction LevelingMinimum InventoriesMixed Production Line

Autonomation Total Prevention MaintenanceAutomatically Detect and StopBuilt-in Quality ControlPoke Joke (error-proofing)

Lean Process Value Stream FlowElimination of Rigid HierarchiesReduction of Process VariationsPursuit of Perfection

Performance Best Quality ProductShortest Delivery TimeHigh Customer LoyaltyImproved Service QualityDecreased Labor EffortIncreased ProductivityIncreased Profits

Productivity Center and Corporate Synergy Develop-ment Center, were contacted. The two organizations,which were supported by government funds, helpedindustries to introduce and implement the TPS. In theend, the data of 620 companies that had implementedthe TPS were obtained.

TABLE 3. Distribution of Respondents by Industry

Number of PercentageIndustry Participants (%)

Automobile and Motorcycle 55 34.42

Bicycle 10 6.62Information Technology and 14 9.27Network Communication

Semiconductor 13 8.61Electronic Components 20 13.25Photonics 18 11.92Machinery 12 7.95Others 9 5.96

The questionnaires were sent or e-mailed to the

620 companies, and 169 responses were received, 151of which were valid. The 151 respondents can be di-videdintoeightcategories,whicharepresentedinTable3. The reliability of the questionnaires was evaluatedusing the most widely used statistical method, Cron-bachs alpha (Koufteros, 1999). The eight constructshad Cronbachs alpha values from 0.919 to 0.968, wellabove the 0.75 that is considered to be satisfactory forbasic research (Churchill, 1991; Cronbach, Schone-mann, & Mekie, 1965; Litwin, 1995). Thus, thesestatistical results confirm that the questionnaire hadsignificantly high consistency. The validity analyses in-

cluded content validity and construct validity. Becausethe questionnaire design was discussed with the inter-viewed experts and managers, it was possible to con-firm the content validity. The construct validity wasassessed by factor loading analysis. The factor load-ing statistics ranged from 0.510 to 0.920, and werehigher than the satisfactory level of 0.4 proposed byNunnally and Berstein (1994). Therefore, the con-tent validity and construct validity were found to betrustworthy.

The automobile and motorcycle industries imple-

mented the TPS earlier than others. Approximately 45percent of companies in these industries have used theTPS for more than ten years. Half of the companies inthe bicycle industry have used the TPS for more thanfive years, but more than 60 percent of companies inthe semiconductor, electronic components, photon-ics, and machinery industries have implemented theTPS in the past three years, as shown in Table 4. Theautomobile and motorcycle industries implementedthe TPS earliest. Most car companies and motorcycle



9/15


companies cooperate with Japanese companies; there-fore the brand names of most cars and motorcyclessold in are Japanese. This analysis addresses informa-tion about high-tech companies that have only recentlystarted to implement the TPS with lean production.

6. ANALYSES OF IMPLEMENTATIONLEVELS

Next, the implementation levels of the constructs andthe related practices are discussed. The TQM and Con-tinuous Improvement practices had the highest levelsof implementation (means of 3.756 and 3.639, respec-tively). The major reason is that TQM and ContinuousImprovement (actually Continuous Improvement is acritical practice in TQM) have been widely used inTaiwan since the beginning of 1990, and have resulted

in significant improvements in performance. The im-plementation of TQM and Continuous Improvementis the foundation for the adoption of the TPS. Themean of the performance practice was 3.635, givingit an implementation level of 3, as can be seen inTable 5. The value of 3.635 means that implementa-tion of the TPS will result in significant improvementin performance.The Lean process practice had the low-est implementation level (a mean of 3.399) because theTPS had not been adopted for long enough in severalindustries. The implementation level of HRM was also

low, with a mean of 3.481, putting this construct thesecond to the last in order. HRM practices are criticalfor implementing TPS. Thus, companies need to takesteps to increase their HRM practices implementationlevels.

The following are the top five practices in terms ofimplementation levels:

Focus on Customers, Pull System, Quality System,

Waste Elimination, and Total Standard Operations.

The first, third, and fifth item are included in TQM,the second is included in JIT, and the fifth is includedin Continuous Improvement, as can be seen in Table 6.In addition to these practices, the following practicesalso had high implementation levels:

Job Security and Innovative Work Environment TA

BLE4.

YearsSinceTPSIm

plementationDistributionforDiffere

ntIndustries

Industry,

Frequency/

Percentage,

Yearssince

Automobile&

Inform

ation&

Electro

nic

TPSImplementation

Motorcycle

Bicycle

Network

Semiconductor

Compon

ents

Photonics

Machinery

O

thers

Total

lessthan1year

35.5

%

00%

17.1

%

538.5

%

630.0%

738.9

%

216.7

%

222.2

%

26

17.2

%

1year

lessthan3years

59.1

%

440.0

%

642.9

%

538.5

%

630.0%

527.8

%

650.0

%

222.2

%

39

25.8

%

3years

lessthan5years

712.7

%

110.0

%

428.6

%

17.7

%

420.2%

422.2

%

216.7

%

111.1

%

24

15.9

%

5years

lessthan7years

916.4

%

440.0

%

321.4

%

00%

15.0%

15.6

%

18.3

%

111.1

%

20

13.2

%

7years

lessthan10years

610.9

%

00%

00%

17.7

%

210.0%

15.6

%

00%

111.1

%

11

7.3

%

Morethan10years

25

45.5

%

110.0

%

00%

17.7

%

15.0%

00%

18.3

%

222.2

%

31

20.5

%

Total

55

100%

10

100%

1

4

100%

13

100%

20100%

18

100%

12

100%

9100%

151

100%

KruskalWallistest

Chi-square=

75.1

05,pvalue=00

0

Note.

p

Documents

Technical Practices and Human Factors