1、外文翻译 原文 The Toyota Production System and art: making highly customized and creative products the Toyota way aterial Source: International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 45, No. 16, 15 August 2007, 36813698 Author: E. LANDER*y and J. K. LIKERz The Toyota Production System has led to a movement
2、of lean production focused on taking waste out of value streams.Most applications have been to high volume,and relatively standardized products.Under this system work becomes highly standardized specifying to the second what the operator should do.Buffers are precisely sized and controlled through v
3、arious types of pull signals.When possible, use of one-piece flow cells result in a completely balanced production line. The performance benefits of these lean systems are often remarkable,greatly improving quality,cost,and delivery. But what of companies that are not making standardized products at
4、 high volume? What can they learn from lean? In this paper we argue there is a fundamental misunderstanding of TPS, viewing it as a specific tool kit technically implemented in a formulaic way to achieve pre-specified results. In fact, TPS is a philosophy that can be better described as a set of gen
5、eral principles of organizing and managing an enterprise which can help any organization get on a path of positive learning and improvement. Keywords: Toyota way;TPS; Learning organization; Lean manufacturing;Custom manufacturing; High variability manufacturing 1. Is TPS universally applicable? Afte
6、r the first oil crisis in the early 1970s Toyota began to draw attention as people noticed that it suffered less during the downturn and recovered much faster than its competitors. The key to its success was the Toyota Production System (TPS), which was described by four Toyota managers, in the firs
7、t paper on the topic in this journal, as being based on two basic concepts: Cost reduction through the elimination of waste, and Full utilization of workers capabilities (Sugimori et al. 1977). They further explain that, cost reduction is achieved through the use of just-in-time production (comprise
8、d of pull systems, one-piece flow, levelling) and jidoka, the main components of what is today recognized as the TPS house (Japan Management Association and Lu 1989, Shook 2002, Liker 2004). Fully utilizing workers capabilities requires a system of respect for people based on minimizing wasted movem
9、ents of workers,ensuring their safety, and giving them greater responsibility by allowing them to participate in running and improving their jobs. Thirteen years later, The Machine that Changed the World introduced the term lean as the next paradigm of manufacturing beyond mass production (Womack et
10、 al. 1991). The Toyota Production System was the best-known example of lean and the model on which the books description was based. Since then lean has taken on a life of its own and has been applied by many organizations throughout the world, including manufacturing and service firms. Most success
11、stories however, come from the Toyota group or from firms operating under similar market and product technology conditions to those for which Toyota has already developed lean solutions. These conditions include a limited product offering with little to no customization (other than cosmetic), produc
12、tion in high volume resulting in repetitive manufacturing, and a relatively stable (or predictable) demand. Many companies deciding to go lean have struggled to figure out what that means in their type of business. They may build to order or have highly engineered products or be in a pure service or
13、ganization like healthcare or banking and desire a vision for what lean looks like in their business. One approach to getting a vision is to go and see. But when they go and see a Toyota plant they find it difficult to relate. They see a highly repetitive and standardized process and cannot imagine
14、how they can replicate what they see. We believe the problem is in the way companies are looking at TPS and how they are trying to approach implementation. In practice, TPS is most often viewed as a set of tools to remove waste from processes. Individual tools have been explained exhaustively (Shing
15、o 1985, 1986, Japan Management Association and Lu 1989, Hirano 1995, Rother and Shook 1999, Smalley 2004) and yet companies often struggle when attempting to apply lean to novel circumstances. This is particularly true for the firms operating in high variability, low volume environments where the ge
16、neral belief is that lean is not very helpful (the research that led to this paper focused on such firms). We are different is a commonly heard refrain. Of course the answer is that every company is in fact different. But that is not the problem. Difficulties arise from trying to apply tools in a fo
17、rmulaic way when they were never intended to be used as a cookie cutter template. In fact, the perspective of lean as a toolkit in which to reach to grab the most applicable or handy tool represents a fundamental misconception of TPS. The next level of understanding comes when the tools are seen as
18、an integral part of a wider system (Suzaki 1987, Shingo and Dillon 1989, Monden 1993). This perspective, although still mostly focusing on the technical aspect, usually leads to better results but still allows for little adaptation to conditions different from those for which the TPS tools were deve
19、loped. Adaptation to new environments starts to become possible when the purpose of particular tools and of TPS in general is understood. At this level it is possible to define rules about the behaviour of the system (Spear and Bowen 1999) and methods (Womack and Jones 1996) that can guide the devel
20、opment of Toyota-style systems in different environments. For example, Womack and Jones (1996) advise us to: define customer value, identify the value stream, to make it flow, pull, and strive for perfection. Although procedures like this are powerful for their simplicity, these approaches remain fo
21、rmulaic and leave out important features of Toyotas system. On the opposite end of the spectrum from the tool-based perspective, Toyotas system can be seen as a set of principles (Liker 2004) that define the thinking that led to the development of the TPS tools. It is interesting to note that even t
22、hough Ohno is credited with developing most of the tools that enabled the ideas behind TPS to be implemented in practice, his books (Ohno 1988, b, Ohno and Mito 1988) remain at a philosophical level and provide only superficial descriptions of the tools. Instead of providing a solution, his intentio
23、n seems to be to help the reader develop the mental models that will enable her to devise her own countermeasures. Perhaps then, the critical features of TPS are the ideas it supports, while the tools that comprise its current form should be adapted as needed for the particular conditions the organi
24、zations operates in. In this article we argue that the only way to develop true Toyota-style systems in environments vastly different from those for which the lean solution has already been developed, is to apply the same principles that people in Toyota have used to shape what is recognized today a
25、s TPS. Applying the same thought process to a novel environment will result in a Toyota-style system customized for the particular conditions the firm faces. This is not to say that the other perspectives described above are wrong or useless. On the contrary, a thorough understanding of how the tool
26、s work, their purpose, and how they fit together to form an integral system is what will enable us to develop Toyota-style systems in less than the 70 years it took Toyota. We will illustrate this perspective by looking at a firm that is very different from a Toyota assembly plant. The case study is
27、 based on a custom artistic process rather than mass production of standardized products. If the approach had been to simply imitate Toyotas solutions in this environment it would have been an exercise in frustration.In contrast, by understanding the actual situation in great detail and then flexibl
28、y applying the principles that define Toyotas thinking, it was possible to fundamentally transform this craft-based company making it far more productive and profitable. The principles of flow and pull and levelling and team associate involvement in problem solving were all used, but the way they we
29、re implemented was customized to fit the environment and the peculiarities of the organization.The case illustrates that lean is a way of thinking about people and processes aimed at creating a high-performance learning organization. 2. True Toyota-style systems result from applying the principles b
30、ehind Toyotas thinking and lead to the development of learning organizations The tendency when a tools approach is taken is to define problems in technical terms. If the intention is to improve productivity, isolated processes can be transformed into one-piece flow cells building to takt time. Then
31、if the process is a natural batch one, or if there is so much variability in demand that it is difficult to calculate a stable takt time, or if products differ so much that it is not possible to balance the workload, it becomes frustrating and we hear the common mantra lean does not apply because we
32、 are different. A principle-based approach provides an understanding of why things are being done and a basis for judging whether the progress made is consistent with the principle. That enables the creative adaptation of the tools to meet the requirements of the environment, as long as their applic
33、ation is consistent with the principle.To illustrate this point, let us look at one of the 14 principles defined in The Toyota Way (Liker 2004): Principle 2: Create continuous flow to bring problems to the surfaceCreate flow to move materials and information fast as well as to link processes and peo
34、ple together so that problems surface right away. Note that this principle does not say to make a cell or how to make a cell. The principle is to move material and information faster while linking processes and people. Thus, when studying the current situation the idea is to look for areas where peo
35、ple and processes are disconnected and material stagnates. Then, find creative ways to increase the flow and connect processes better. That could be a cell or could be a first-in, first-out lane or could be reducing inventory or improving communication between two steps in the process. Furthermore,
36、this is being done to surface problems. So even if inventory is reduced and material is flowing more quickly, but problems are not being surfaced and solved (not specifically stated in this principle) the solution is not being true to the principle. Simply eliminating inventory is not sufficient to
37、satisfy the principle. Furthermore, compliance with the principles necessarily leads to the implementation of technical solutions (the tools of TPS) as well as the development of the social system necessary to make them effective. Therefore, understanding lean as a wider socio-technical system (Tris
38、t and Bamforth 1951, Cherns 1976) is a more accurate view than the predominant tools-based view that focuses mostly on the technical aspect alone. Ohno always emphasized understanding the true purpose of the system, implicitly highlighting the need to understand the principles guiding the changes be
39、ing implemented. He focused on the core transformation process of converting inputs to outputs distinguishing value-added from non-value-added steps and developing technical solutions to eliminate the latter and facilitate the former. And yet, he also had a clear vision for the human role as problem
40、 solver and enabler of further progress. The Sugimori paper (Sugimori et al. 1977) emphasizes this socio-technical perspective by describing TPS as based on two concepts, one technical that includes JIT and jidoka , and the other one focusing on the social aspect of fully utilizing workers capabilit
41、ies. Ohnos approach was never to implement a particular tool, but to build appropriate social and technical capabilities to fit the circumstances. Based on this systems concept of fit we would not expect a one-size fits all set of solutions to all manufacturing problems. We would expect to flexibly
42、use tools based on a set of principles to accomplish the intended purpose. We would also expect that people involved in doing the work should be engaged in controlling variances in their process. We would expect ownership by those inside the system to be a necessary precondition for high performance
43、. And we would expect that understanding and adapting to dynamic external environments is a prerequisite for success. Another perspective that fits this need for adaptability and is compatible with TPS as a socio-technical system, is that of a learning organization (Senge 1990).The concept of kaisen
44、 at Toyota requires learning at an organizational level, which is ensured by establishing known standards, preferably visible ones (Liker and Meier 2006). If there is no agreed upon standard a new way of doing a job is simply one more version by some individualit is individual learning. Most compani
45、es have smart individuals who come up with clever ways of doing things but they are poor at capturing that knowledge into a reusable standard (ODell and Grayson 1998). But if we agree on a standard and then find a new and better way of doing a job that we all follow then the organization has learned
46、. This change in work routines (and the corresponding improvement in performance) is the true hallmark of organizational learning (Fujimoto 1999). Going back to Ohno and his passion for reducing the time line by eliminating waste we find that lead-time reduction was not his only goal. He often used
47、the analogy of water as inventory and rocks as problems and said that when he reduced the water level (inventory) he was exposing the rocks (problems). This forced the organization to respond with real problem solving or the process would constantly be shut down. What Ohno discovered was quite profo
48、und. An organization with processes that are disconnected by big inventory buffers tends not to improve or learn. When processes are tightly connected problems surface quickly and must be dealt with, thereby driving the organization to learn. Similarly, reducing waste and learning go hand in hand. T
49、his suggests that it is the learning process itself, not a particular tool or technique, which is at the centre of TPS. This view is supported by Spear and Bowen who found that the core feature of TPS is the prevalent use of the scientific method. By engaging people in problem solving where they view any potential improvement as a testable hypothesis Toyota promotes experimentation. The resulting learning is what sets it apart from other organizations (Spear et al. 1999). 译文 丰田生产方式和艺术 :让高度定制的丰田有创意的产品 资料来源：生产研究 .2007 (16) 3681-3685
