Process Management Instead of Operations Management

Through this article, the author emphasizes the importance of a change in mindset from
Operations Management to Process Management. The author feels that it is important for the
Operations Management community to broaden its perspective from a functional one
(Operations Management) to a cross-functional one (Process Management). The author also
states that more stress must be laid on improvement as opposed to optimization. The stand
that the author has taken is not new. However, the author feels that not enough importance
has been given to a process management perspective, given the opportunities that it creates in
the current scenario. The author believes that the process management framework
considerably enhances the opportunities for researchers, students, and practicing managers to
make major impacts on the performance of all types of organisations.
The author defines Process Management as the design, control, improvement and redesign
of processes. A process is defined as a collection of activities that takes one or more kinds
of inputs and creates outputs (or outcomes) that are of value to customers external and
internal to the organisation. The recent major developments in Operations Management
encompass a process perspective. For example, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems
consider the interrelationships between the various processes within a firm, and these
processes are cross-functional. The advent of Information Technology (IT) has enabled new
organizational structures which support cross-functional processesconsequently, a process
viewpoint has become all the more necessary to manage the operations of organisations.
Another area in which a process viewpoint may be of huge importance is that of Supply
Chain Management. The author believes that through integration of processes across
functions within a firm, as well as across boundaries of different organisations, myriad
opportunities for improvement (in cost, quality etc) can be created. Also, a greater amount of
flexibility can be created through better management of processes that deliver goods and
services.
The process perspective creates major opportunities in various fields where technology is
constantly opening new avenues. The author cites various examples to illustrate this. The
management of call centres is a case in point. There are a lot of cross-functional activities
(forecasting aggregate volumes of calls, training staff, designing jobs etc) which can be
integrated through a process viewpoint in order to better manage call centres. The availability
of technology and abundant information also provides an opportunity for process
improvements related to the administration of medical decision makingissues such as
whether to purchase automated equipment or why an emergency department is experiencing

long waiting times can be addressed better. Another example is in managing security issues.
Since security has become of paramount importance due to recent international
developments, as well as technological progress, an interdisciplinary process perspective can
help create high-level cost-effective security.
All the illustrations that the author has provided highlight the single fact that Process
Management is a much better way of approaching a real-life problem. Over the years, the
focus of Operations Management has been mathematical rigour and optimization. However,
the author feels that it is better to develop a reasonable solution to a real problem than to
optimize a mathematical abstraction that is a poor representation of the real problem. It is
here that taking a process viewpoint makes a difference, because it allows us to consider
complex phenomena in their entirety for analysis. Taking a process perspective also leads to
improvement and redesign, while the traditional mathematical model approach is more
focused on optimization. It is necessary to adopt a process viewpoint if one is to arrive at a
creative solution to a problem, as well as identify areas of improvement.
To summarize, the author has presented a strong case for adopting Process Management in
place of Operations Management, as the former creates new opportunities for research and
education in order to enhance the performance of organisations. It may be intellectually
rewarding to develop and optimize an abstract problemand this mindset is a major
stumbling block in the adoption of process management as an area of research. However, the
author believes that using a process management focus to deal with the challenging issues
mentioned above will benefit students, organisations and society as a whole. The process
management approach to understanding and managing complex operational systems is the
way to go.

FIVE DECADES OF OPERATIONS MANAGENT AND THE PROSPECTS

AHEAD
The author with this article tries to focus on the evolution of Operations Management as field
of study and the future of research in this field. Operations Management as we see today has
evolved from classical operations research to a broader body of theory. Throughout this
evolution, the focus was on improving practice through the development of suitable theory
and models. Origins of Operations Management can be found in the Industrial Revolution
era. The initial problems of operations that were encountered during the Industrial
Revolution are also familiar today. During the first half of the 20 th century treatises on
organizing, measuring, and managing production were published by a range of professionals
from business and industry. The time during and after the World War II saw governments and
other organization funding the research in the field. The result was a set of mathematical
models and theories that developed the foundation for problem solving of the then
contemporary issues of efficient resource allocation and control.
Gradually, during the 1960s, researchers in business schools began to study more scientific
and rigorous approaches for decision making. Many operation models outdated soon and
could not keep pace with the fast changing business challenges and practice. Also,
researchers in core functional areas like accounting, finance, and marketing, internalized the
optimization theory and models developed by the initial researchers and were using it as an
integral part of their research. On the other side, industry saw introduction of various
concepts like material requirements planning (MRP) systems, just-in-time (JIT), Toyota
production system (TPS), and total quality
These early successes resulted in the birth of operations research groups at many
corporations, tasked with finding ways of improving performance. Within the academic
community, most of the research in these areas initially took place in engineering
departments. As business schools began to study more scientific and rigorous approaches for
decision making, the application of Operations research became more departmentalized and
functional. Number of issues also cropped up related to the definition of the functions and
boundaries of each of these departments. There were different departments in the early days
like Logistics, Dynamic Programming and Inventory management but later on integration of
them into two departments took place namely Production and Operations Management and
Logistics, Distribution, and Inventory. Ultimately in recent times around 1987, both
departments were again clubbed into one as Supply chain management. It involves
management of all aspects of providing goods to a consumer, from extraction of raw
materials to end-of-life disposal and recycling, including manufacturing, physical logistics,
and after-sale service and warranty issues.

Throughout this history, regardless of its name, the department's core mission has been to
identify, extend, and unify scientific knowledge that contributes to the understanding and
practice of operations management, defined as the design and management of the
transformation processes that create value for society. Todays issues of globalization, vast
opportunities remain to be addressed which involve broader decision scope, more decision
makers, inclusion of risk. As there is no limit to the scope of innovation, in times to come,
operations will become more cross-functional and will require tools and concepts of other
research disciplines.
The research that the author foresees in near future will involve the cross-functional
adaptations and theories of operations management. Some of the aspects that the author
discusses are: OM-Marketing Interface: Marketing involves addressing the value needed by
the customers, prior to product development. Product launches and promotions are covered
in this as well. The research in this interface involves behavioral aspects and providing
opportunities.
OM-Finance Interface: Capital is necessary for any kind of business especially in
manufacturing sector. Decisions involving finances are of utmost importance as they are the
backbone to any organization. Research in this interface will include the application of
Operations models in procurement and management of assets.
OM-Organizations Interface: Efficiency in workforce is the backbone to any organization
and for running an efficient operation. Traditionally these two functional aspects have been
seen as distinct. Research in Operations management has started focusing on applications in
models of motivation, learning, creativity, and other such aspects of human behaviour that
are vital to the success of management policies in practice.
Process Design and Improvements: With the focus shifting towards a process definition the
newer findings and research in OM will focus on the process design and improvement part
rather than addressing the age old optimization problem.
As the research community moves into these new areas and others, the author believes in the
classical tools of trade and the classical objective of applying those tools to help real people
make real decisions. The author also recognizes that the research community needs to
augment these tools to address new challenges as they arise.

Analysis of
Changes in Toyota Operations Management
Background :
In classical sense, Toyota Production System is an integrated set of tools and methods
that focuses on identification and elimination of waste, and hence the improvement of
productivity. The waste could be in the areas of input (raw-material), processes or output
(defects in end products). It recommends designing and controlling the manufacturing
processes such that the required items are produced in the quantity as and when needed
which essentially is pull system of production control.
TPS has gone through continuous evolution over the years within Toyota itself and has
moved from classical TPS model to a broader people based approach with a focus of
not just to cut costs but also to streamline the processes to make them more efficient and
effective with a focus on retention and motivation of employees.
The assembly line of the manufacturing process was more vulnerable to the challenges of
people retention and recruitment especially with changes in economical conditions of
Japan.
The article takes us through the understanding of the changes adopted in the assembly
line processes and the effects of its implementation in 3 factories of Toyota Toyota
Kyushu, Toyota Takaoka and Daihatsu-Ikeda.

Changes :
This people-centric approach in the automobile assembly line focussed on changes in 4
distinct ways :
1. Functional Approach : Historically, assembly lines had been continuous with no
buffers. What it meant was any breakdown at any point in assembly line could result
in stoppage of the whole line. The change was brought about by dividing the line in
number of segments based on different logical functions. Each of these segments or
units called kumi were led by kumi-cho, who enjoyed more freedom to operate its
assembly line with its own quality control function and more flexibility in scheduling
and work allocation. The tasks in each unit were logically grouped based on
functions and were assigned to workers with a focus on allocating responsibility for a
function instead of un-related tasks.
2. Ergonomic Measures : Since the assembly line was most stressful function of the
whole production process, the focus was to implement various ergonomic measures
to give more comforting and healthy environment to workers. Most of the changes
came through suggestions from workers through the kaizen process. A few of such
inventions were raku raku-seats and dolly.
3. Mechanization : Instead of applying complex automation processes, selected tasks
were mechanized to simple and automated process.

4. Continuous Improvement: Continuous Improvement had always been the

philosophy of TPM as part of Kaizen process. But the focus in the past had been
more quantitative rather than qualitative. The process was more of a formality which
made workers focus on meeting the numbers of suggestions. The effectiveness of the
process was questionable and was going against the philosophy of TPS. The change
was made to the approach of receiving and handling the suggestions towards quality.
This led to increased motivation of workers to suggest genuine improvements in
their working areas based on their experience.

Implementation :
Toyota Kyushu had always been the experimenting ground for newer ideas in Toyota
and hence the above changes were implemented to a great extent. Mechanization was
implemented with a focus on simplicity, ease of training and job rotation, and
transparency. Segmentation was more challenging to because of product-mix and hence a
more cohesive approach was developed for workers and machines to co-exist in more
effective manner. The focus was to make workers responsible and flexible to handle
complex operations.
Toyota Takaoka was easier to streamline by clear segregation of responsibilities
between humans and machines. The robots and other machines would be used for heavy
and bulky tasks and workers to focus on complicated ones. This was further improved by
creating sub-assemblies.
Daihatsu, which was an acquisition of Toyota posed more challenges of integration of
two units for the production of Midget II.. Limited awareness of TPS philosophy and
different manufacturing environment gave less opportunity for implementing above
changes. It has to go through a more customized approach with a focus on training to
enhance the skill-level of workers.

Conclusion :
Toyota Production System has always gone through the contradictions and conflicts for
maintaining the balance between it just perceived as a cost-cutting process and more
holistic mechanism to improve the quality of product, process and people. The evolution
of TPS as a philosophy from a narrow view to a broader view has been the key to its
success and the growth of Toyota and increased profitability. Keeping the basic
philosophy in mind, company has focussed on improving its effectiveness through
continuous improvement mechanism. This has also led to adapting this system after
modifications in various production environments other than automobiles. This has led to
better acceptance of the philosophy as part of the work-culture and the responsibility of
improvement lies with every employee in their respective work areas.