Journal of Quality in Maintenance EngineeringA case study of total productive maintenance implementation at precision tube millsI.P.S. Ahuja Pankaj Kumar

Article information:To cite this document:I.P.S. Ahuja Pankaj Kumar, (2009),"A case study of total productive maintenance implementation atprecision tube mills", Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 15 Iss 3 pp. 241 - 258Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552510910983198

Downloaded on: 10 May 2015, At: 06:29 (PT)References: this document contains references to 44 other documents.To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.comThe fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1994 times since 2009*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:C.J. Bamber, J.M. Sharp, M.T. Hides, (1999),"Factors affecting successful implementation of totalproductive maintenance: A UK manufacturing case study perspective", Journal of Quality in MaintenanceEngineering, Vol. 5 Iss 3 pp. 162-181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552519910282601F. Ireland, B.G. Dale, (2001),"A study of total productive maintenance implementation", Journal of Quality inMaintenance Engineering, Vol. 7 Iss 3 pp. 183-192 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552510110404495Panagiotis Tsarouhas, (2007),"Implementation of total productive maintenance in food industry:a case study", Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 13 Iss 1 pp. 5-18 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552510710735087

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 477643 []

For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald forAuthors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelinesare available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The companymanages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well asproviding an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committeeon Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archivepreservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

REVIEWS AND CASE STUDIES

A case study of total productivemaintenance implementation at

precision tube millsI.P.S. Ahuja

University College of Engineering, Punjabi University, Patiala, India, and

Pankaj KumarTotal Quality Management Initiatives, Tata Steel, Jamshedpur, India

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the contributions of successful total productivemaintenance (TPM) initiatives to competitive manufacturing. It also seeks to critically examine theimplications of strategic TPM implementation initiatives in an Indian manufacturing organisation.

Design/methodology/approach – The study is carried out at a precision tube mill that hassuccessfully implemented TPM and has reaped significant benefits as a result of TPMimplementation, to study the TPM implementation issues and achievements realised as a result ofstrategic TPM implementation. The approach is directed towards the justification of TPMimplementation for its support to competitive manufacturing in Indian industries.

Findings – The study reveals the exploits of Indian entrepreneurs with TPM practices andhighlights the contributions of TPM in realising the overall organisational goals and objectives. Thestudy reveals that strategic TPM initiatives can significantly contribute towards the improvement ofmanufacturing performance in the organisation, leading to the realisation of core competencies formeeting global challenges.

Research limitations/implications – The study is conducted to develop an understanding ofcontributions of TPM initiatives towards building manufacturing competencies in Indianmanufacturing industry. The present study endeavours to investigate the effect of an aggressiveTPM implementation plan for strategically meeting global challenges and competition.

Practical implications – The study highlights the contributions of strategic TPM initiatives toorganisational performance and highlights the need for the successful management of TPMprogrammes for establishing sustained maintenance improvement initiatives.

Originality/value – The study highlights the contributions made by holistic TPM implementationat a precision tube mills in an Indian manufacturing enterprise.

Keywords Productive maintenance, Manufacturing systems, Industrial performance,Competitive advantage, India

Paper type Case study

IntroductionRecent competitive trends have prompted top management of manufacturing enterprisesto look at the performance of each and every business function, including manufacturingor maintenance, for achieving competitive advantage (Ben-Daya and Duffuaa, 1995;Pintelon et al., 2006). With increased global competition, attention has been shifted fromincreasing efficiency by means of economies of scale and internal specialisation tomeeting market conditions in terms of flexibility, delivery performance and quality

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1355-2511.htm

Total productivemaintenance

implementation

241

Journal of Quality in MaintenanceEngineering

Vol. 15 No. 3, 2009pp. 241-258

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited1355-2511

DOI 10.1108/13552510910983198

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

(Yamashina, 1995; Karuppuswamy et al., 2007). In today’s dynamic environment, areliable production system must be seen as a critical factor for competitiveness (Brah andChong, 2004). Poor organisational competencies in managing the maintenance functioneffectively can severely affect competitiveness by reducing throughput, increasinginventory, and leading to poor due-date performance (Patterson et al., 1996, Ashayeri,2007). The traditional misconception about maintenance being viewed as an operationalexpense to be minimised and not as an investment in increased process reliability has tobe done away with in realising manufacturing performance excellence. Equipmenttechnology and development capabilities have become major factors that demonstratethe strength of an organisation and set it apart from others (Schuman and Brent, 2005;Braglia et al., 2006). Maintenance has now become a strategic tool to increasecompetitiveness rather than simply an overhead expense that must be controlled(Waeyenbergh and Pintelon, 2007). Investment in maintenance, one of the basic functionsof a firm, returns improved quality, safety, dependability, flexibility and lead times(Teresko, 1992). Over the past decade there has been increased recognition that inworld-class manufacturing (WCM), maintenance is not a separate, isolated function thatmakes repairs and performs assorted activities as needed. Rather, maintenance is a fullpartner, striving together with the other functions to achieve the firm’s strategic goals(Etienne-Hamilton, 1994). Thus, maintenance has become a strategic issue formanufacturers across the world. Ever-increasing business pressures have beenputting the maintenance function under the spotlight as never before (Garg andDeshmukh, 2006).

Modern manufacturing requires that organisations that wish to be successful and toachieve world-class manufacturing must posses both effective and efficient maintenance.One approach to improve the performance of maintenance activities is to implement atotal productive maintenance (TPM) system. TPM is considered to be an effectivestrategic improvement initiative for improving quality in maintenance engineeringactivities (Ollila and Malmipuro, 1999; Pramod et al., 2007). TPM is all of the strategiesneeded to sustain a healthy maintenance log (Steinbacher and Steinbacher, 1993). TPM isthe general movement on the part of businesses to try to do more with less (Lawrence,1999). TPM has been widely recognised as a strategic weapon for improvingmanufacturing performance by enhancing the effectiveness of production facilities(Dwyer, 1999; Dossenbach, 2006). TPM represents a shift in the way progressiveworld-class companies think about maintenance. It is a radical departure from thetraditional view of breakdown maintenance. TPM is a methodology and philosophy ofstrategic equipment management focused on the goal of building product quality bymaximising equipment effectiveness. Originally introduced as a set of practices andmethodologies focused on manufacturing equipment performance improvement, TPMhas matured into a comprehensive equipment-centric effort to optimise manufacturingproductivity. It embraces the concept of continuous improvement and total participationby all employees and by all departments (Society of Manufacturing Engineers, 1995).The ultimate goal of TPM is to implement “perfect manufacturing” (Shirose, 1992).

Total productive maintenanceTPM is a maintenance program that involves a newly defined concept for maintainingplants and equipment. TPM had its genesis in the Japanese car industry in the 1970s. Itevolved at Nippondenso, a major supplier of the Toyota Car Company, as a necessary

JQME15,3

242

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

element of the newly developed Toyota Production System. The origin of TPM can betraced back to 1951, when preventive maintenance was introduced in Japan. TPM bringsmaintenance into focus as a necessary and vitally important part of the business. TPM isa innovative Japanese concept. TPM initiatives help in streamlining the manufacturingand other business functions and in garnering sustained profits (Ahuja and Khamba,2007). TPM is an operations improvement process (machine efficiency and reliability)involving all affected employees with a view to getting as close to zero breakdowns andzero defects as possible. TPM is a production-driven improvement methodology that isdesigned to optimise equipment reliability and ensure the efficient management of plantassets (Robinson and Ginder, 1995). TPM provides a comprehensive, life-cycle approachto equipment management that minimises equipment failures, production defects, andaccidents. It involves everyone in the organisation, from top-level management toproduction mechanics, and production support groups to outside suppliers (Ahuja andKhamba, 2008a). It encompasses all departments including maintenance, operations,facilities, design engineering, project engineering, construction engineering, inventory andstores, purchasing, accounting and finance, and plant and site management (Wireman,1990). Total productive maintenance is based on teamwork and provides a method for theachievement of world-class levels of overall equipment effectiveness through people andnot through technology or systems alone (Willmott, 1994). TPM is intended to bring bothfunctions (production and maintenance) together by a combination of good workingpractices, team working, and continuous improvement (Cooke, 2000).

TPM is a structured equipment-centric continuous improvement process thatstrives to optimise production effectiveness by identifying and eliminating equipmentand production efficiency losses throughout the production system life-cycle throughactive team-based participation of employees across all levels of the operationalhierarchy. The goal of the TPM program is to markedly increase production while atthe same time increasing employee morale and job satisfaction. TPM has emerged as apotent means to improve overall company performance. Strategic TPM programs havedemonstrated a major impact on bottom-line results, along with substantiallyimproving capacity while significantly reducing not only maintenance costs but alsooverall operational costs. Successful implementation of TPM programs has resulted inthe creation of much safer and more environmentally sound workplaces. Anotherstrategic outcome of TPM implementations is the reduced occurrence of unexpectedmachine breakdowns that disrupt production and lead to losses, which can exceedmillions of dollars annually (Gosavi, 2006). TPM employs OEE as the core quantitativemetric for measuring the performance of a productive system (Shirose, 1989; Jeong andPhillips, 2001; Huang, 1991). OEE has been used as an impartial daily snapshot of theequipment and promotes openness in information sharing and a no-blame approach inhandling equipment-related issues. The basic practices of TPM are often called the“pillars” or “elements” of TPM. The entire edifice of TPM is built and stands on eightpillars (Sangameshwran and Jagannathan, 2002). TPM paves the way for excellentplanning, organising, monitoring and controlling practices through its uniqueeight-pillar methodology involving:

(1) autonomous maintenance;

(2) focused improvement;

(3) planned maintenance;

Total productivemaintenance

implementation

243

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

(4) quality maintenance;

(5) education and training;

(6) safety, health and environment;

(7) office TPM; and

(8) development management (Ireland and Dale, 2001; Rodrigues and Hatakeyama,2006).

The eight-pillar model of TPM implementation is depicted in Figure 1.Companies practising TPM invariably achieve startling results, particularly in

reducing equipment breakdowns, minimising idling and minor stops (indispensable inunmanned plants), lessening quality defects and claims, boosting productivity,trimming labour and costs, shrinking inventory, cutting accidents, and promotingemployee involvement (as shown by the submission of improvement suggestions)(Suzuki, 1994). Strategic TPM implementation programs have revealed a significantrealisation of manufacturing performance achievements leading to improved corecompetitiveness of organisations (Ahuja and Khamba, 2008a, b). TPM has tangible andmeasurable effects on production, quality, and profits: improving quality, reducingcost, increasing equipment uptime, cutting inventory, cutting delivery time, practisingemployee participation and experiencing a cleaner working environment. The actualtargets of TPM are fixed more concretely in terms of productivity, quality, cost,delivery, safety and morale (PQCDSM) (Tajiri and Gotoh, 1992). Total workforceengagement using TPM methods is a very valuable way to reduce loss and improve

Figure 1.Eight-pillar approach forTPM implementation

JQME15,3

244

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

profits (Gardner, 2000). Moreover, successful TPM implementation leads to significantintangible benefits such as continuous improvement of workforce skills andknowledge, fostering employee motivation through adequate empowerment,clarification of roles and responsibilities for employees, a system for continuouslymaintaining and controlling equipment, enhanced quality of work life, reducedabsenteeism and enhanced communication in the workplace (Carannante, 1995).Greater job satisfaction translates into higher productivity and quality and ultimatelycontributes to lower manufacturing costs, since TPM envisions organisations toconsider the human aspect of TPM in combination with technical and financial impacts(Hamrick, 1994).

TPM in the Indian contextAs organisations across the globe have faced stiff, cut-throat competition in the lastthree decades, Indian industry too has not escaped the brunt of globalisation. Indianmanufacturing industry has also witnessed irrepressible competition in recent times,predominantly in the wake of liberalisation, since the early 1990s. Intense competitionhas been witnessed in terms of low costs, improved quality and diverse products withsuperior performance (Chandra and Sastry, 1998). Moreover, shorter lead times,innovation times and reduced inventories have led to increasing demands onorganisations’ preparedness, adaptability and versatility. An insight into thecontemporary manufacturing scenario has revealed that maintenance and humanfactors have remained neglected areas for a long time in Indian manufacturingorganisations (Ahuja and Khamba, 2008c). Traditionally, maintenance has beentreated as a necessary evil and seen as an uncontrollable black box in operations.Maintenance efforts have usually been directed towards maintaining the basicequipment conditions of manufacturing systems, with reasonable success, andmaintenance has often been a disregarded issue in manufacturing organisations. In theIndian context, maintenance has been viewed as a reactive, problem-fixing strategyand an operating expense to be minimised (Seth and Tripathi, 2005). Due to the callousattitude of Indian entrepreneurs towards maintenance in the past, they have found itextremely hard to compete effectively with their Western counterparts in the wake ofthe liberalisation of economy in the early 1990s.

Manufacturing organisations in India have been forced to look for proactivestrategic maintenance improvement initiatives to harness their manufacturingcompetencies to meet global competition. Indian entrepreneurs have understood thesignificance of improving maintenance performance in the organisations and haverealised the need to adopt effective maintenance improvement programs and initiativesthat are capable of delivering improved manufacturing performance, boostingproductivity, reducing costs, improving plant profitability, minimising unnecessarydowntime and assuring better utilisation of resources.

With regard to TPM implementation, leading Indian manufacturing organisationshave in the recent past taken a lead in breaking the shackles and have demonstratedtheir sincere intent to imbibe proactive maintenance improvement initiatives throughTPM adaptations, with reasonable success. While implementing effective TPMprograms, Indian manufacturing organisations have often been plagued with teethingproblems and challenges like difficulties in understanding business economics, thereluctance to imbibe changing practices, vague worker apprehensions, and the

Total productivemaintenance

implementation

245

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

inability to realise the same level of benefits as reaped by developed countries byimitating the TPM implementation procedures and practices adopted abroad.

Indian manufacturing organisations need to shed their sluggish character and moveforward aggressively to develop and adapt proactive processes and practices toovercome the inherent deficiencies in manufacturing systems to harness their distinctcompetencies in comparison with their global competitors. According to theConfederation of Indian Industries (CII) – TPM Club India, nearly 350 organisationsacross the country have shown interest in adapting TPM programs and have initiatedstrategic proactive initiatives towards implementing TPM practices. It has beenobserved through a detailed survey that to date only approximately 120-125organisations have shown highly satisfactory results by reaping excellent resultsthrough holistic TPM implementation. In their pursuit of TPM implementation, manyIndian organisations have been honoured to receive the Award for Excellence inConsistent TPM Commitment – Second Category, the Award for Excellence inConsistent TPM Commitment – First Category, and the Award for TPM Excellencefrom the Japan Institute of Plant Maintenance (JIPM). Although a reasonable number ofIndian entrepreneurs have experienced organisational success and transformationthrough TPM implementations, very few studies have been reported highlighting theachievements of Indian entrepreneurs through TPM initiatives. Thus, there is anearnest need to evaluate the contributions of TPM in the Indian manufacturingenvironment. The present study endeavours to investigate the effect of an aggressiveTPM implementation plan for strategically meeting global challenges and competition.

Research methodologyThe study was carried out in a large-scale manufacturing organisation in India thathas successfully implemented TPM and has reaped significant benefits as a result ofTPM implementation, to study TPM implementation issues and the achievementsrealised as a result of strategic TPM implementation. In this study, a precision tubemill situated in Eastern India was critically scrutinised to ascertain the contributionsmade by TPM initiatives in an Indian manufacturing organisation towards therealisation of manufacturing competencies. The approach was directed towards thejustification of TPM implementation for its support to competitive manufacturing inIndian industries. The methodology employed in the present study is depicted inFigure 2.

To conduct the survey effectively, the exploits of the manufacturing organisationregarding strategic TPM initiatives were explored through extensive plant visits,interviews/discussions with TPM practitioners, investigation of the TPM initiativesdeployed over a period of time, and close analysis of the achievements made thoughTPM initiatives. The study reveals the exploits of Indian entrepreneurs with TPMpractices and highlights the contributions of TPM in realising overall organisationalgoals and objectives.

Case studyThe study highlights the contributions of TPM initiatives in a manufacturingenterprise, in a developing country like India, to realising enhanced manufacturingperformance. The study reveals that strategic TPM initiatives can contribute

JQME15,3

246

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

significantly towards improvement in manufacturing performance in the organisationleading to the realisation of core competencies for meeting global challenges.

The Tata Steel Tubes Strategic Business Unit (SBU), the largest domesticmanufacturer of steel tubes, was formed after the merger of the erstwhile Indian TubeCompany with Tata Steel in October 1985. It has been an independent strategicbusiness unit of Tata Steel since August 1993, headed by the Executive in Charge(Tubes). TTD has a gross turnover of Rs 557 crores (as of financial year 2003), whichforms 7 per cent of Tata Steel’s turnover, and a net profit of Rs 16 crores. The TubesSBU employs 1,676 personnel (as of 30 September 2003), and this is 5 per cent of TataSteel’s total workforce. The SBU produces welded tubes. There are two distinctbusinesses:

(1) the “Commercial Tubes Business”, served by the “Standard Tube Plant”; and

(2) the “Precision Tube Business” served the “CR-ERW Plant”, particularly for theboiler and auto segments.

The Tubes SBU is the first tube company in the country to obtain ISO-14001certification in environmental management systems. It has been ISO-9001 certified,which addresses in-process inspection/tests/performance audits and corrective andpreventive actions to ensure product and service quality.

Precision welded tubes are manufactured by the high frequency induction weldingprocess, which is commonly known as the ERW process for historical reasons. Atpresent, the precision plant has two mills i.e. a three-inch mill and two-inch mill. Thethree-inch mill was commissioned in 1957 and produces tubes with an outside diameter(OD) ranging from 31.75 to 76.20 mm. In August 1993, a new two-inch precision tubemill facility was created; with the commissioning of this mill, precision-welded tubes of

Figure 2.Methodology adopted

for study

Total productivemaintenance

implementation

247

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

OD as low as 15.88 mm and with thickness of 0.9 mm could be produced. Both two-inchand three-inch mills together produce tubes having outside diameters ranging from15.88 to 76.20 mm. The precision tube mills manufacture the auto and boiler categoriesof tube. The mills have an annual capacity of 33,000 MT. Auto tubes are furthersegmented as:

. welded;

. normalised; and

. cold drawn.

Slit coils of both boiler and auto tubes are rolled in the two-inch and three-inch mills.This production capacity is sensitive to product mix as the auto and boiler categorytubes pass through different product routings. Tata Tubes is ranked second in theboiler tube business, fourth in auto tubes and third in the overall precision tubesbusiness in the domestic market. The total annual market demand for precision tubesin India is around 280,000 MT, of which the boiler and auto segments constitute150,000 MT and 130,000 MT respectively. Tata Tubes has maintained its position ofranking third (11 per cent market share) in the precision tubes business over the years.

In order to become a world-class manufacturer and supplier of precision tubes, TPMwas introduced in October 2000 to improve the overall effectiveness of equipment andall-round business excellence. The reasons behind TPM implementation in theorganisation included several external factors (tough competition from competitors, theneed to expedite new product development, increased raw material costs and highcustomer expectations regarding quality and delivery) and internal factors (unsafeworkplaces, low productivity, high defects, poor equipment conditions, frequentequipment breakdowns, dirty and oily floors, long search times for tools and materials,low worker skills and motivation). The formal TPM kick-off took place in September 2001.

The Tubes Division has business objectives in place to achieve growth and costleadership that includes:

. being a dominant player in the tubes business with a turnover of Rs. 1,500 croreand a net profit of Rs. 100 crore in the financial year 2008 by incorporatingworld-class technology;

. delivering superior products and services to our customers and upholding Tatavalues of good governace and ethical business practices in our SBU; and

. continuing to improve the quality of life of our employees and the communitieswe serve.

In line with the division’s objectives, TPM policy has been framed as follows: strivingrelentlessly to become a world-class manufacturer and supplier of precision tubes byintegrating and adapting all business excellence initiatives with total productivemaintenance as the working philosophy. The goals framed by the organisation toachieve the objectives include:

. maximising overall equipment effectiveness;

. achieving 100 per cent delivery compliance;

. reducing cycle time in all processes; and

. attaining industry leadership on cost and quality.

JQME15,3

248

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

The inter-relationship between company objectives and TPM policy is shown inTable I. The organisational structure for TPM implementation at PT Mills is shown inFigure 3.

Employees were provided with extensive training to improve their competenciesrelated to their jobs and visits were also arranged to different TPM industries to acquaintemployees and managers with best TPM practices available in the country and globally.Managers and supervisors were also encouraged to attend TPM-related training coursesand TPM conferences. A skill gap matrix was prepared for all employees and supervisorson the basis of the desired and present skill levels of the workforce. Appropriate trainingprograms were then developed and deployed for employees throughout the organisation.The training and eduction strategy adopted by the organisation is shown in Figure 4. Themanager model machines at PT Mills were picked up in October 2000. The contribution of

Element of company’s objectives Element of TPM policy

Financial Improve shareholder value Maximise overall equipment effectivenessReduce cycle time in all processes

Customer Enhance customer relationships byimplementing retail value management

Achieve 100 per cent delivery complianceContinuous improvement of quality tomaximise customer satisfaction

People 100 per cent employee involvement ininitiatives

Total employee involvement through smallgroup activities and kaizen to attain theconcept of zero lossesCreate a healthy and safe environmentthrough total elimination of accidents andpollution

Table I.Inter-relationship

between company’sobjectives and TPM

policy

Figure 3.Organisational structurefor TPM implementation

Total productivemaintenance

implementation

249

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

TPM initiatives on the model machines was demonstrated with the help of JIPMconsultants. The TPM kick-off was organised by the MD of Tata Steel in September 2001.In the beginning, six TPM circles were formed at the PT Mills as a horizontal deploymentin September 2001. Four pillar heads were appointed (Jishu Hozen, Kobetsu Kaizen,Planned Maintenance, and Education and Training) in September 2001, while the Safety,Health and Environment pillar head was appointed in April 2002, the QualityMaintenance pillar head was appointed in September 2002, and the Office TPM pillarhead was appointed in September 2003. The performance of TPM circles and pillar headswas reviewed by Engineer-in-Charge (Tubes) once in a month, while pillar head reviewwas done by the Head of the PT Mill once a week. Central group review was done for boththe TPM circles and the pillar heads once a week.

JIPM consultants reviewed the progress on TPM once every two months. TPM quizcompetitions were also organised from time to time, and a best circle kaizencompetition was organised every month.

The analysis of the results of TPM implementation reveal that the organisation hasreaped significant benefits as a result of strategic TPM implementation program. Theresults reveal that the organisational manufacturing performance improvementsrealised as a result of strategic TPM implemntation included:

. a 78 per cent improvement in productivity (tonnes/month);

. a 92 per cent improvement in Productivity (tonnes/man/year);

. a 59 per cent improvement in overall equipment effectiveness;

. a 63 per cent reduction in equipment breakdowns and failures;

. an 85 per cent reduction in customer complaints;

. a 22 per cent improvement in delivery compliance;

. 140 times enhancement in operating profits;

. an 80-90 per cent reduction in rejections;

Figure 4.Training and educationstrategy

JQME15,3

250

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

Figure 5.Results of TPMimplementation

Total productivemaintenance

implementation

251

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

Figure 5.

JQME15,3

252

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

Figure 5.

Total productivemaintenance

implementation

253

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

Figure 5.

JQME15,3

254

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

. the realisation of zero major accidents;

. an 80 per cent reduction in minor accidents;

. a 10 per cent improvement in plant yield;

. a 43 per cent reduction in variable costs;

. a 34 per cent reduction in work-in-process inventory; and

. significant improvements in employee suggestions and contributions.

The results of TPM implementation at PT Mills are shown in Figure 5. Further, TPMimplementation has also resulted in the realisation of several intangible benefits, suchas:

. a clean and safe workplace;

. a change in management thinking (before TPM management was thinking ofclosing the plant, but after introducing TPM management is in the process ofmodernising the plant); and

. high workforce morale.

ConclusionsA manufacturing facility has been studied and analysed to study TPM implementationissues, the roadmap followed and the key benefits achieved as a result of TPMimplementation. The research highlights the contributions of various TPMimplementation initiatives in Indian industry to accruing strategic benefits to meetthe challenges posed by global competition. The study reveals that the TPM initiativesare far more influential in affecting manufacturing performance improvements ascompared to traditional maintenance practices. This validates the extremely highpotential of TPM initiatives in realising overall organisational competencies. Thestudy reveals that TPM initiatives have significantly marshalled the organisationtowards building teh capability for sustained competitiveness. The study shows thatsystematic TPM interventions in the organisation have significantly contributed toimproving the manufacturing system’s productivity, quality and safety and the moraleof the workforce, and have also ensured the cost effectiveness of the manufacturingfunctions within the organisation. The findings suggest that effective TPM initiativescan significantly contribute towards the realisation of strategic manufacturingperformance improvements for competing in the highly dynamic global marketplace.

References

Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S. (2007), “An evaluation of TPM implementation initiatives in anIndian manufacturing enterprise”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 13No. 4, pp. 338-52.

Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S. (2008a), “Total productive maintenance – literature review anddirections”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 25 No. 7,pp. 709-56.

Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S. (2008b), “An evaluation of TPM initiatives in Indian industry forenhanced manufacturing performance”, International Journal of Quality & ReliabilityManagement, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 147-72.

Total productivemaintenance

implementation

255

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S. (2008c), “Justification of total productive maintenance initiativesin Indian manufacturing industry for achieving core competitiveness”, Journal ofManufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 645-69.

Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S. (2008d), “An assessment of maintenance management initiativesin Indian manufacturing industry”, International Journal of Technology, Policy andManagement, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 250-78.

Ashayeri, J. (2007), “Development of computer-aided maintenance resources planning (CAMRP):a case of multiple CNC machining centers”, Robotics and Computer-IntegratedManufacturing, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 614-23.

Ben-Daya, M. and Duffuaa, S.O. (1995), “Maintenance and quality: the missing link”, Journal ofQuality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 20-6.

Braglia, M., Carmignani, G., Frosolini, M. and Grassi, A. (2006), “AHP-based evaluation of CMMSsoftware”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 585-602.

Brah, S.A. and Chong, W.K. (2004), “Relationship between total productive maintenance andperformance”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 42 No. 12, pp. 2383-401.

Carannante, T. (1995), “TPM implementation – UK foundry industry”, The FoundrymanSupplement, Vol. 88 No. 11, pp. 1-34.

Chandra, P. and Sastry, T. (1998), “Competitiveness of Indian manufacturing: finding of the 1997Manufacturing Futures Survey”, Vikalpa, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 15-25.

Cooke, F.L. (2000), “Implementing TPM in plant maintenance: some organisational barriers”,International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 9, pp. 1003-16.

Dossenbach, T. (2006), “Implementing total productive maintenance: a successful TPM programwill help you eliminate defects, machine breakdowns and accidents”, Wood and WoodProducts, Vol. 111 No. 2, pp. 29-32.

Dwyer, J. (1999), “More than a maintenance technique”, Works Management, Vol. 52 No. 9,pp. 15-16.

Etienne-Hamilton, E.C. (1994), “Managing maintenance for zero breakdowns”, OperationsStrategies for Competitive Advantage, Dryden Press, Orlando, FL, pp. 378-421.

Gardner, L. (2000), “Continuous improvement through 100% workforce engagement”,Proceedings of the 11th Annual Total Productive Maintenance Conference andExposition, Productivity, Dallas, TX.

Garg, A. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2006), “Maintenance management: literature review anddirections”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 205-38.

Gosavi, A. (2006), “A risk-sensitive approach to total productive maintenance”, Automatica,Vol. 42 No. 8, pp. 1321-30.

Hamrick, J. (1994), “Eastward with TPM and CMMS”, Industrial Engineering, Vol. 26 No. 10,pp. 17-18.

Huang, P. (1991), “World class manufacturing in 1990s: integrating JIT, TQC, FA and TPM withworker participation”, in Frandel, G. and Zapfel, G. (Eds), Modern Production Concepts:Theory and Applications, Springer, New York, NY, pp. 491-507.

Ireland, F. and Dale, B.G. (2001), “A study of total productive maintenance implementation”,Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 183-92.

Jeong, K.Y. and Phillips, D.T. (2001), “Operational efficiency and effectiveness measurement”,International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21 No. 11,pp. 1404-16.

JQME15,3

256

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

Karuppuswamy, P., Sundararaj, G. and Elangovan, D. (2007), “Application of computerisedmaintenance management system coupled with risk management techniques forperformance improvement of manufacturing systems”, International Journal of BusinessPerformance Management, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 7-21.

Lawrence, J.L. (1999), “Use mathematical modeling to give your TPM implementation effort anextra boost”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 62-9.

Ollila, A. and Malmipuro, M. (1999), “Maintenance has a role in quality”, The TQM Magazine,Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 17-21.

Patterson, J.W., Fredendall, D.L., Kennedy, W.J. and McGee, A. (1996), “Adapting totalproductive maintenance to Asten, Inc.”, Production and Inventory Management Journal,Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 32-7.

Pintelon, L., Pinjala, S.K. and Vereecke, A. (2006), “Evaluating the effectiveness of maintenancestrategies”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 7-20.

Pramod, V.R., Devadasan, S.R. and Jagathy Raj, V.P. (2007), “Receptivity analysis of TPM amonginternal customers”, International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, Vol. 7No. 1, pp. 75-88.

Robinson, C.J. and Ginder, A.P. (1995), Implementing TPM: The North American Experience,Productivity Press, Portland, OR.

Rodrigues, M. and Hatakeyama, K. (2006), “Analysis of the fall of TPM in companies”, Journal ofMaterials Processing Technology, Vol. 179 Nos 1-3, pp. 276-9.

Sangameshwran, P. and Jagannathan, R. (2002), “Eight pillars of TPM”, Indian Management,Vol. 11, pp. 36-7.

Schuman, C.A. and Brent, A.C. (2005), “Asset life cycle management: towards improvingphysical asset performance in the process industry”, International Journal of Operationsand Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 566-79.

Seth, D. and Tripathi, D. (2005), “Relationship between TQM and TPM implementation factorsand business performance of manufacturing industry in Indian context”, InternationalJournal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 22 Nos 2/3, pp. 256-77.

Shirose, K. (1989), Equipment Effectiveness, Chronic Losses and Other TPM ImprovementConcepts in TPM Development Program: Implementing Total Productive Maintenance,Productivity Press, Portland, OR.

Shirose, K. (1992), TPM for Operator, Productivity Press, Portland, OR.

Society of Manufacturing Engineers (1995), Total Productive Maintenance in America, Society ofManufacturing Engineers, Dearborn, MI.

Steinbacher, H.R. and Steinbacher, N.L. (1993), TPM for America: What It Is and Why You NeedIt, Productivity Press, Cambridge, MA.

Suzuki, T. (Ed.) (1994), TPM in Process Industries, Productivity Press, Portland, OR.

Tajiri, M. and Gotoh, F. (1992), TPM Implementation: A Japanese Approach, McGraw-Hill, NewYork, NY.

Teresko, J. (1992), “Time bomb or profit center?”, Industry Week, Vol. 241 No. 3, pp. 52-7.

Waeyenbergh, G. and Pintelon, L. (2007), “CIBOCOF: a framework for industrial maintenanceconcept development”, International Journal of Production Economics, corrected proofavailable online 1 March.

Willmott, P. (1994), Total Productive Maintenance: The Western Way, Butterworth-Heinemann,Oxford.

Total productivemaintenance

implementation

257

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

Wireman, T. (1990), Total Productive Maintenance: An American Approach, Industrial Press,New York, NY.

Yamashina, H. (1995), “Japanese manufacturing strategy and the role of total productivemaintenance”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 27-38.

About the authorsI.P.S. Ahuja holds a bachelor’s degree in Mechanical Engineering, a master’s in IndustrialEngineering from the Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology, Patiala, and a PhD inTotal Productive Maintenance from Punjabi University, Patiala, Punjab, India. Currently he isworking as Reader in Mechanical Engineering at the University College of Engineering, PunjabiUniversity, Patiala, Punjab (India). He has number of publications in refereed journals andconferences. His main research area is total productive maintenance. I.P.S. Ahuja is thecorresponding author and can be contacted at: ahujaips@yahoo.co.in

Pankaj Kumar is Head of Total Quality Management initiatives at Tata Steel, Jamshedpur,India. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Mechanical Engineering from MNREC Allahabad and amaster’s in Industrial Engineering from IIT Delhi. He is a TPM Instructor certified by JIPMJapan and is also a Lead Assessor for ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and OHSAS 18001. He has facilitatedTPM implementation at all the 64 units of Tata Steel. He has been instrumental in developing thein-house TPM award system known as the “Tata Steel ASPIRE TPM Excellence Award” forvarious units of Tata Steel by customising the JIPM TPM award guidelines to the company’srequirements.

JQME15,3

258

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)

This article has been cited by:

1. Kym Fraser, Hans-Henrik Hvolby, Tzu-Liang (Bill) Tseng. 2015. Maintenance management models:a study of the published literature to identify empirical evidence. A greater practical focus is needed.International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 32:6. . [Abstract] [PDF]

2. Abhishek Jain, Rajbir S. Bhatti, Harwinder Singh. 2015. OEE enhancement in SMEs through mobilemaintenance: a TPM concept. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 32:5, 503-516.[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

3. Monica Rolfsen. 2014. A blueprint paradox. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 20:4, 402-414.[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

4. Hani Shafeek. 2014. Continuous improvement of maintenance process for the cement industry – a casestudy. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 20:4, 333-376. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

5. Monica Rolfsen, Stine Skaufel Kilskar, Nina Valle. 2014. “We are at day one of a new life”: translationof a management concept from headquarter to a production team. Team Performance Management: AnInternational Journal 20:7/8, 343-356. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

6. Abhishek Jain, Rajbir Bhatti, Harwinder Singh. 2014. Total productive maintenance (TPM)implementation practice. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma 5:3, 293-323. [Abstract] [Full Text][PDF]

7. Rajesh Attri, Sandeep Grover, Nikhil Dev. 2014. A graph theoretic approach to evaluate the intensity ofbarriers in the implementation of total productive maintenance (TPM). International Journal of ProductionResearch 52, 3032-3051. [CrossRef]

8. Teonas Bartz, Julio Cezar Mairesse Siluk, Ana Paula Barth Bartz. 2014. Improvement of industrialperformance with TPM implementation. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 20:1, 2-19.[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

9. Rajesh Attri, Sandeep Grover, Nikhil Dev, Deepak Kumar. 2013. Analysis of barriers of total productivemaintenance (TPM). International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management 4, 365-377.[CrossRef]

10. Elaine Aspinwall, Maged Elgharib. 2013. TPM implementation in large and medium size organisations.Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 24:5, 688-710. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

11. Jyoti Prakas Majumdar, B. Murali Manohar. 2012. Implementing TPM programme as a TQM tool inIndian manufacturing industries. Asian Journal on Quality 13:2, 185-198. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

12. Mustafa Graisa, Amin Al‐Habaibeh. 2011. An investigation into current production challenges facingthe Libyan cement industry and the need for innovative total productive maintenance (TPM) strategy.Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 22:4, 541-558. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsity

of

Cap

e T

own

At 0

6:29

10

May

201

5 (P

T)