The Lean Enterprise In Aerospace Marketing Essay

For assignment help please contact at help@hndassignmenthelp.co.uk or hndassignmenthelp@gmail.com 

Today most people identify lean with reducing waste, which is to take a very narrow view of this exciting idea. Reduction of waste isn't the sole focus of lean. In lean, waste reduction and value creation are two parallel concepts which must be executed simultaneously to meet the demands of the end customer.

Womack, Jones and Roos argue in their book, The Machine That Changed the World- How Lean Production Revolutionized the Global Car Wars, that while lean thinking can be applied by any company anywhere in the world, its fullest potential is only realized when it is applied across the spectrum of the enterprise. And they called such an enterprise as Lean Enterprise.

'Lean Enterprise is an integrated entity that efficiently creates value for its multiple stakeholders by employing lean principles and practices.' (Murman et al, 2002)

Lean enterprise is a firm that embraces lean principles. The organizational structure of a lean enterprise is intolerant of waste and every member of the organization proactively seeks improvement in the existing processes. Lean enterprise prioritizes customer value and every activity within the organization aligns itself to achieve that goal. Another trait of a lean enterprise is its outreach. As Womack et al points out in their work, Toyota reached out to its suppliers and not only involved them in the design process but also encouraged them to come up with their own innovations. They encouraged their big suppliers to consolidate the smaller suppliers to cope with the high demand from emerging markets. Toyota itself holds an equity stake in its major suppliers.

The Toyota success story points out the importance of cooperation and co-ordination between the firm and its various suppliers. In increasingly complex world of Aerospace, most of the aircraft manufacturers are acting as system integrators and rely on their first tier suppliers for manufacturing individual parts of an aircraft and these lessons from Toyota story are invaluable to the aerospace industry to understand the firm and supplier relationship.

In this context, lean enterprise's definition needs to be extended to include the phenomenon of outreach. Therefore, lean enterprise can be defined as a collective group of organizations working together to achieve a set of common goals. This collective group formulates a common strategy to manage the value streams extending from one organization to another, share gains and profit, manage targets for improvement, and eliminate waste.

Murman et al in their book, Lean Enterprise Value, identify five principles of Lean Enterprise Value. They fuse together the words lean and value to emphasize the importance of simultaneously eliminating waste and creating value in a lean enterprise. Enterprise represents a firm centric approach rather than factory floor approach. An organization can truly become lean only when the principles of eliminating waste and value creation are applied across the spectrum of the firm. Five principles of Lean Enterprise Value are,

Principle 1: Create Lean value by doing the job right and by doing the right job.

This argues for a dynamic approach where exists a constructive relationship between doing the job right and doing the right job.

Principle 2: Deliver value only after identifying stakeholder value and constructing robust value propositions.

Value delivery is facilitated by a well structure value proposition and of course, a solid value proposition can't be structure around poorly identified value.

Principle 3: Fully realize lean value only by adopting an enterprise perspective.

It is very important that lean is implemented at the enterprise level otherwise overall net gain would be limited. A study conducted by Cook and Graser for RAND Corporation suggests that all aerospace manufacturers in the United States have adopted lean to a certain degree. The problem is that these adoptions tend to be localized and as a consequence there benefits. This creates isolated success stories of 'lean projects.' Murman et al call these success stories as 'islands of success.'

Principle 4: Address the interdependencies across enterprise levels to increase lean value.

There are different levels of enterprise and they are all interdependent. Detail discussion of the various levels of enterprises follows.

Principle 5: People, not just processes, effectuate lean value.

In order to eliminate waste and create value, knowledge and capability must exist at three distinct levels of enterprise, value identification, value proposition and value delivery. For this to happen, people working an enterprise to understand and facilitate lean principles. Talking about Toyota Production Systems, Sugimori et al highlight the central role of people.

"…'respect for human' systems where the workers are allowed to display in full their capabilities through active participation in running and improving their own workshops." (Sugimori et al, 1977)

Value Stream

Second step in formulation of research question is to define value stream.

Value Stream is broadening of Porter's concept of value chain. Porter defines value chain as a basic tool for conducting a systemic analysis of all of the activities (and their interactions) that a firm performs, in order to understand the sources of competitive advantage.

Womack and Jones in their book Lean Thinking define value stream as the set of all specific end-to-end and linked actions and processes and functions necessary in transforming raw materials into a finished product delivered to the customer, and then in providing post-sales customer support. They argue that when value stream is mapped it gives a very clear indication of processes and activities that a) create value, b) create no value but are unavoidable and c) create no value and are avoidable. This process of mapping the value stream facilitates the elimination of waste and helps in implementation of lean principles.

Evolution of value stream is result of progress made in the sphere of technology. In response to increasing technological complexity in recent times, corporations have begun to concentrate all their efforts on their core competency while outsourcing activities in the external periphery of their value adding activities. While this approach creates a specialist organization, it also results in loss of breadth of expertise. Johns, Crute, and Graves (2006) argue that as a consequence, we find customers seeking broad systemic offerings while suppliers are moving in opposite direction of specialisation in narrow band of core competence. This creates a vacuum which can be filled by organisations that can forge strong supplier relationships and bring together a wide array of specialists to develop a systemic offering and create value streams in the process. . Aerospace Innovation and Growth Team (AIGT), a UK government agency, reported in 2003:

"The nature of UK Aerospace Industries 2022 will have changed considerably, driven primarily by globalisation. The business model of the future will be value chain competing against value chain, not just single company versus single company as we witness predominantly today. Supply chains will have evolved to include the end-user or consumer in value creation and through this will have become known as value chains."

While AIGT uses the phrase 'value chain', in author's opinion it corresponds more closely with Womack and Jones' 'value stream' than Porter's value chain! Johns, Crute and Graves' also comment on value stream in their paper on lean supply,

"…to realise the full advantages, Lean practitioners in UK aerospace must move beyond the current primary focus on manufacturing techniques and optimising only their own company's part in the supply chain as an isolated process, toward embracing a Value Stream perspective."

This is not only true for UK but the entire industry as a whole. One instance of failure on part of a manufacturer to involve suppliers in the development and decision making process would be Boeing's attempt to increase production of the 737 and 747 jumbo jets in 1997. Neither its factories nor its suppliers could cope up with the production target and Boeing had to shut down the production of the concerned aircrafts for a month. This, in parts was responsible for the first net loss recorded by Boeing in more than 50 years! Today when both big player in aerospace, Boeing and Airbus are targeting an ambitious 40% increase in production of single and twin aisle passenger aircraft by 2015, principles of lean enterprise and value streams are more relevant and crucial to the success of the industry than ever.

Lean Enterprise in Aerospace

Discussion of lean principle in context of aerospace presents its own challenges. Lean philosophy, as discussed earlier, was developed by Toyota in post-World War II Japan with focus on creating maximum value with least investment of the resources whereas the rest of aerospace industry, particularly the United States which 'was' also the unchallenged leader in the field, had Cold War priorities. Implementing a new business philosophy, which worked in the very dynamic market of automobiles, in aerospace industries with its higher degree of complexity and lower volumes is nothing short of introducing a new paradigm.

To continue the discussion further one must understand the evolution of lean. Lean is a way of thinking and not a set of theoretical steps. Lean philosophy was observed to work in practice and only then it was codified into theory. This evolutionary curve provides lean it's 'legitimacy'.

Murman et al in their book, Lean Enterprise Value: Insights from MIT's Lean Advancement Initiative put forward implications of lean thinking for the aerospace industries. They point out the peculiar nature of aerospace; industries are highly interdependent with a very wide supplier base. They are both a source and importer of technological innovation, and have a rich intellectual capital base and highly skilled workforce. Also, failure is not an option in aerospace, the products and systems must operate with zero failures! Another aspect of aerospace industries which is poles apart from automobile is the lifecycle of products. Aerospace systems and platforms have life cycles spanning over decades with continuous evolution of the subsystems and components. For instance, Boeing B-52 Stratofortress, a long range strategic bomber first manufactured by Boeing in 1950s, is still in service with the United States Air Force!

Murman et al argue for a broader and more holistic view of lean thinking, centred on the enterprise, to be implemented in aerospace. Most of the value addition in aerospace lies in upstream design and development phase, which can last for years as oppose to months in case of automobiles, and in downstream sustainment operations which typically last for decades. These particular traits demand that lean enterprise should be focus of the efforts of aerospace industries in implementing lean thinking. Johns et al argue for the proliferation of value streams in aerospace and that is another essential step in transforming aerospace industries into 'lean enterprise'. Aerospace thrives on technological innovation and lean's philosophy of Kaizen or continuous improvement sits well with that trait. One can conclude on the basis of arguments laid that lean thinking offers lots of incentives for aerospace.

Vision 2016

'People working together as a global enterprise for aerospace leadership'

Boeing - Forever New Frontiers

Values

Leadership

Integrity

Quality

Customer Satisfaction

People working together

A diverse and involved team

Good corporate citizenship

Enhancing shareholder value

Core Competencies

Detailed customer knowledge and focus

We will seek to understand, anticipate and be responsive to our customers' needs.

Large-scale systems integration

We will continuously develop, advance and protect the technical excellence that allows us to integrate effectively the systems we design and produce.

Lean Enterprise

Our entire enterprise will be a Lean operation, characterized by the efficient use of assets, high inventory turns, excellent supplier management, short cycle times, high quality and low transaction costs.

Figure 1 Boeing's Vision 2016 (Source: The Boeing Company)

Members of MIT's Lean Advancement Initiative consortium developed generic process architecture for lean enterprise.

Lifecycle Processes

Business Acquisition and Program Management

Requirement Definition

Product/Process Development

Supply Chain Management

Production

Distribution and Support

Enabling Infrastructure Processes

Finance

Information Technology

Human Resources

Quality Assurance

Facilities and Services

Environment, Health, and Safety

Enterprise Leadership Processes

Strategic Planning

Business Models

Managing Business Growth

Strategic Partnering

Organizational Structure and Integration

Transformation Management

Figure 2 Enterprise Process Architecture

Processes under the label 'Lifecycle Processes' comprises of value stream activities which directly contribute towards revenue generation through creation of products, systems and services for the customer. The next set of processes, 'Enabling Infrastructure Processes' provide support for 'Lifecycle Processes'. 'Enterprise Leadership Processes' deal with the human aspect of the lean enterprise and plays a critical role in the transformation to lean.

At Toyota, manufacturing and supply chain operations were main focus of the transformation to lean (Womack et al, 2007). But in aerospace, manufacturing contributes a much smaller proportion to the value associated with a product. The challenge, therefore is, how to apply lessons from automobile industry to aerospace with its greater product and technological complexity, much lower production volumes, very different (and small) customer base and business practices which directly contradict principles of continuous improvement?

In 1995, Lean Advancement Initiative at MIT developed a Lean Enterprise Model (LEM) to better understand these challenges.

"The LEM is a synthesis of principles and practices, a hypothetical model of a generic lean enterprise." (Murman et al, 2002)

Principles

Overarching Practices

Enabling Practices

Supporting Practices

Figure 3 Lean Enterprise Model Architecture (Source: Murman et al, 2002)

Figure 3 represents the architecture of the Lean Enterprise Model developed by MIT researchers and LAI consortium members. First in this hierarchy are principles of a lean enterprise.

Waste Minimization

Responsiveness to change

Right thing at right place, at right time, and in right quantity

Effective relationships within the value stream

Continuous improvement

Quality from the beginning

Figure 4 Principle of a lean enterprise (Source: Murman et al, 2002)

First principle of lean enterprise is at the very core of lean thinking. Eliminate waste, completely eradicate non-value adding activities. Second guiding rule for lean enterprise is its agility in responding to changing market demand and in case of aerospace, the evolving challenges to national defence. Third principle of lean enterprise has its roots in 'Just-in Time' (JIT) theory. JIT corresponds to a single piece flow at factory floor where a part is delivered at its point of need without creating inventory or shortage. This approach should be implemented across the spectrum of enterprise, from human resources to finance to sales. Effective relationships within the value stream highlight the importance of honest communication and mutual respect within various stakeholders in a lean enterprise. Continuous improvement, like first principle, is part of the core structure of lean. Pursue perfection, always strive for something better. The last principle again reflects one of the fundamental aspects of lean thinking, reduce rework, and build the best you can from the very outset. Quality should be already built into the product.

Some of the overarching practices of lean enterprise which support the principle of lean enterprise are listed in figure 5.

Human-Oriented Practices

Promote Lean Leadership at all Levels: Align and involve all stakeholders to achieve the enterprise's lean vision.

Relationships Based on Mutual Trust and Commitment: Establish stable and on-going relationships within the extended enterprise encompassing both customers and suppliers.

Make Decisions at Lowest Possible Level: Design the organizational structure and management systems to accelerate and enhance decision making at the point of knowledge, application and need.

Optimize Capability and Utilization of People: Ensure that properly trained people are available when needed.

Continuous Focus on the Customer: Proactively understand and respond to the needs of the internal and external customers.

Nurture a learning environment: Provide for development and growth of both organizations' and individuals' support of attaining lean enterprise goals.

Process-Oriented Practices

Identify and Optimize Enterprise Flow: Optimize the flow of products and services either affecting or within the process from concept design through point of use.

Assure Seamless Information Flow: Provide processes for seamless and timely transfer of and access to pertinent information.

Implement integrated product and process development (IPPD): Create products through an integrated team effort of people and organizations that knowledgeable of and responsible for all phases of the product's life cycle from concept definition through development, production, deployment, operations and support.

Ensure process capability and maturation: Establish and maintain processes capable of consistently designing and producing the key characteristics of the product or service.

Maintain Challenges of Existing Processes: Ensure a culture and systems that use quantitative measurement and analysis to improve processes continuously.

Maintain Stability in Changing Environment: Establish strategies to maintain program stability in a changing customer-driven environment.

Figure 5 Overarching Practices of Lean Enterprise(Source: Murman et al, 2002)

These practices are interdependent and interconnected. Each must be adapted to some extent. For instance, mutual trust is essential for seamless flow of information and for implementation of integrated product and process development, a seamless flow of information is paramount.

Integrated Entities

Nightingale defines three levels of enterprise based on the entity being considered. This is the next element in the definition of enterprise.

Program Enterprises

'A program is collection of activities that produces a particular product, system, or service that is delivered to the customer and generates revenue.' (Nightingale, 2003)

Program is the most basic unit of a business activity. A program enterprise encompasses the Lifecycle processes in generic process architecture for lean enterprise (figure 2). Most program enterprises feature one core value stream.

In aerospace, programs can range from billions of dollars, like Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program of United States Air Force (USAF), to those of a few million dollars. Largest program enterprises, such as JSF are substantial enterprise in themselves. JSF is jointly funded by the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Italy, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, and Turkey. Its development is spread over last two decades and organisations and people involve in JSF program would continue to work in enterprise through the lifecycle of aircrafts produced under JSF.

Multi Program Enterprises

Organisations involve in execution of multiple programs are multi-program enterprises. Multi-program enterprises provide leadership and enabling infrastructure in generic process architecture of lean enterprise (figure 2).

Multi-program enterprises contain multiple value streams that are part of several program enterprises. At the risk of simplification, multi-program enterprises can also be treated as a program enterprise comprised of many product lines. For instance; Airbus could be considered an enterprise with many product lines. But 'fuselage' manufacturing division/unit at Airbus is an enterprise in itself.

National and International Enterprise

'…the collection of all entities that contribute to the creation and use of products, systems, or services comprise a national or an international enterprise. This would include not only the products or service providers but also their customers, suppliers, end users, government regulators, etc.' (Nightingale, 2003)

For example, the United Kingdom Aerospace Enterprise includes all customers (British Airways, Royal Air Forces, Satellite service providers etc.), government end users, manufacturers ( BAE Systems, Rolls Royce, domestic and international suppliers etc.) , infrastructure (civilian and military airports, maintenance depots, air traffic management), and other related institutions and civil bodies (universities, R&D laboratories etc.)

Enterprises are global entities now with military systems being sold all over the world. Few countries, such as India, specifically ask for some portion of the hardware to be manufactured in their countries through transfer of technology agreements. This creates a larger international aerospace enterprise comprising of various countries and organisations working in the field of aerospace, and the UK aerospace enterprise, a national enterprise, is part of this larger international aerospace enterprise.

Core and Extended Enterprises

Each of these three distinct levels further have distinct core and extended enterprises.

'The core enterprise consists of entities tightly integrated through direct or partnering relationships. Less tightly coupled customers, suppliers, and government agencies encompass the extended enterprise all the entities along an organization's value chain, from its customer's customers to its supplier's suppliers, that are involved with the design, development, manufacture, certification, distribution, and support of a product or family of products. In this definition, products include all of the goods and services that satisfy the customer's, and ultimately the end user's, needs.' (Nightingale, 2003)

This definition suggests that extended enterprise essential acts as a base for core enterprise. And for an enterprise to become lean, both core and extended enterprise have to transform into lean at all three levels of the enterprise, program, multi-program and national and international. All these levels of enterprises are interconnected and interdependent and lean transformation must be across these levels otherwise it would just lead to 'islands of success.'

Enterprise Stakeholders

Nightingale argues about the importance of stakeholders in lean enterprise. Lean has always been focused on customer pull and as such is customer driven. But in today's world, and aerospace industries, a much broader vision is required to balance the needs of all the stakeholders. This is not depreciating customer to a secondary role, quite contrary to that, Lean Enterprise encourages a focus on customer to driver up the revenue, which ultimately satisfies all the stakeholders!

Value Creation

As discussed earlier, focus of lean enterprise should be two forked, eliminate waste and create value. Elimination of waste and creation of value are the driving forces in a lean enterprise. Murman et al describes value creation for stakeholders as a three phased framework.

Value

Identification

Value

Delivery

Value

Proposition

Find Stockholder Value

Execute on the promise

Agree to and develop the approach

Figure 6 Value Creation Framework (Source: Murman et al, 2002)

First phase of this framework involves identifying the stakeholders and part/s of project adds value to their investment. Next step involve value proposition where enterprise structures 'value exchanges', creating a clear picture of how stakeholder values are being met and how stakeholders are contributing towards enterprises value. Third phase is focussed on delivering the value to various stakeholders as well as the customers. This phase has been focus of lean and most widely discussed in the context of lean enterprise.

One important aspect of this framework is interconnectedness and interdependence of each phase. Nightingale suggests that each phase should be revisited at different phases of the product life cycle, and iteration must take place among levels of program enterprises, as well as between the program enterprise and multi-program and national enterprises.

Value Phases

Enterprises

Value Identification

Value Proposition

Value Delivery

Program

Opportunities

Opportunities

Most lean principles and practices have been focussed here

Multi-program

Opportunities

Opportunities

Most lean principles and practices have been focussed here

National and International

Opportunities

Opportunities

Most lean principles and practices have been focussed here

Table 1 Opportunities for Extension of Enterprise Value Creation (Source: Nightingale, 2003)

Table 1 shows that there are many opportunities for extending the focus of lean enterprise from just value delivery to the entire spectrum of value creation phases.

Case Studies

Introduction

Islands of Success

Case A

An Engineering Support Island: The F-16 Build-To-Package Centre

When problems are found on a typical aircraft production line, the solutions usually are included in the official product definition - the Build-To-Package (BTP). Even minor changes can considerably delay the engineering check and result in expensive rework.

To tackle this problem, engineers at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics (LMA) created the F-16 Build-To-Package Support Centre. Before the F-16 BTP support centre, changes had to pass through several stations- engineering design, manufacturing planning, manufacturing engineering, tool planning, tool design, tool manufacturing, and various support group - before the final approval. This used to be a time consuming process with lots of paperwork. This state of affairs was in conflict with all lean principles.

LMA's solution employed classic value stream approach. LMA first mapped the existing flow by following the paperwork, identifying where it went and who touched it. They developed this flow with several iterations to create a new and more 'lean' flow. Figure 7 shows the BTP centre created on the factory floor.

BTP support centre works by pulling out the technical expertise to the centre when required. Centre is arranged in a series of engineering cells. Each package passes through the cells in single piece flow without waiting and supports modification with the possibility that some tasks can be performed in parallel, allowing scheduling improvement without the dangerous elimination of necessary steps, checks, or reviews. Communication is face-to-face with co-located personnel to minimize delays and miscommunication.

LMA's approach has resulted in consistent, sustainable improvements: 40% fewer steps, 75% fewer handoffs, and a 90% reduction in travel distance. Also, there has been a 75% cycle-time reduction, greatly easing the paperwork pressure on operations personnel.

The biggest barrier to BTP's success has been the struggle for over stretched personnel to function at full efficiency. For all its achievements, BTP Support Centre remains an island of success as traditional functional organisation goals from the outside tend to subvert the value stream and functional interactions, it struggles to maintain critical personnel and it's costly to implement.

While these isolated islands of success demonstrate suitability and pragmatic advantages of lean, they still remain isolate in the enterprise. And that is the strongest argument in support of lean enterprise. Only when the entire enterprise is transformed to lean, and all these isolate islands are linked that enterprise would be able to truly exploit the benefit of lean practices.

Production Problem Release BTP, Available at Point of Use

BTP Support Centre

Computer

Tools

Pull on Demand

* Canopy *Fuel Sys. *Fire Control Sys. *Harness Def. *Avionics *Elect Planner *TMP *MRP Planner

*Propulsion *Coproduction *Buyer *NC Programmer *Tool Design *Wiring Instl. *CRB *ECS Insti.

*Life Suppt. *Process Control *Structure *Labs *M&P *Ldg Gear *PP&C *Parts Engrg

*Escape Sys. *Safety*Customers *DCMC *Stress *ECS Sys. *Arm Sys. *Scheduling *Hydraulics

*Equip Instl. *Program *PQA *Planner *Frac.& Fat. *Maintainability *Tool Mfg

Figure 7 BTP Support Centre (Source: Murman et al, 2002; Garry Goodman, Presentation to LAI Product Development Workshop, 2000)

Case B

Integrating Supplier and Material Management at GE Lynn

At the LAI 1998 Plenary workshop, Ernie Oliveira, the GE Lynn leader of manufacturing initiatives, gave a presentation on lean transformation at the GE aircraft engine plan in Lynn, Massachusetts. This lean transformation was enabled by the changes to the manufacturing and assembly facilities, the material management system and the supply chain.

One of the fundamental changes implemented at Lynn plant involved scrapping the functional department approach where one department deals with many product lines. Instead a linear process approach was established. Resources were grouped, according to requirement for assembly of a particular engine to constitute one linear flow. These linear flow lines were shorter and more linear (!), which meant that product moved a shorter distance. Also, since there were fewer units in the product line, it was easier to identify the delayed assemblies and rectify them. All these improvements lead to a reduction in work-in progress.

Furthermore, GE developed an electronic data exchange system to facilitate open and real time communication with suppliers and customers. This electronic data exchange system also provided GE with a medium to signal suppliers for parts and financial transactions. GE also managed to establish a replenishment system with suppliers of highest-cost parts which bear close resemblance to Toyota's supplier arrangements.

GE developed a kanban system with the supplier for 100 percent on time delivery. Factory also committed to freeze requirements two weeks prior to the actual date parts are needed. GE managed to solve the parts shortage - the most pressing problem at the plant - through this kanban system of pull linkages with the internal and external supplier base.

C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\MEDIA\CAGCAT10\j0240695.wmf

C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\MEDIA\CAGCAT10\j0187423.wmf C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\MEDIA\CAGCAT10\j0285360.wmf

MRP

CustomerC:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\MEDIA\CAGCAT10\j0199549.wmf

This system helped GE to achieve 100 percent deliveries to customer's schedule. Engines are completed, tested and loaded directly into a customer truck every three days to match assembly requirements at the customer site.

GE Lynn is a success story because of its lean approach to system transformation and supplier relationship. Ernie Oliveira, who headed the lean initiative at Lynn, also managed to involve critical stakeholders - workforce and suppliers. The results of this transformation were astounding as detailed in the table 2.

Performance Metric

Improvement (Actual Average)

Inventory Turnover

33%

Throughpput Time

35%

Quality (Internal -DPU's/engine)

28%

Human Effort per engine

17%

Table 2 Lean Manufacturing results at GE Lynn (Source: Murman et al 2002; LAI Plenary Workshop proceedings and presentation by Ernie Oliveira, 'The transition to Lean Manufacturing in Lynn Engine Assembly Operation, GE Aircraft Engines' 1998)

Case C

The Pratt & Whitney Story

During late 1992, Pratt & Whitney (P&W) refocused its energies to reduce costs, improve manufacturing performance, and increase competitiveness.

In 1993, in accordance with lean principles, P&W was trying to transform its General Machining Product Centre in East Hartford, Connecticut from a departmental layout to a series of manufacturing cells. Result of this transformation was dramatic. Top performing cell's lead time saw a huge reduction from eight to three weeks; average number of pieces in process dropped from 233 to 77; travel distance went from 13,670 to 5800 feet; and average setup time shrank from 6 hour to 30 minutes.

Reference Profile (α)

Cook C. R., and Graser J.C., 'Military Airframe Acquisitions Costs: The Effects of Lean Manufacturing' (Santa Monica, CA:RAND, 2001), RAND Study MR-1325-A.

Johns R, Crute V and Graves, A. Working across the Value Chain: Understanding the Challenges. School of Management, University of Bath May, 2006.

Johns R., Crute V., and Graves A., Lean Supply: Cost Reduction or Waste Reduction, A preliminary study of Lean initiatives and lower tier suppliers in the Aerospace Sector. School of Management, University of Bath October, 2002.

Murman E, Allen T, Bozdogan K, Cutcher-Gershenfeld J, McManus H, Nightingale D, Rebentisch E, Shield T, Stahl F, Walton M, Warmkessel J, Weiss S and Widnall S. Lean Enterprise Value: Insights from MIT's Lean Advancement Initiative. Palgrave Macmillan. 2002.

Nightingale D., 'Lean Enterprises - A Systems Perspective', Engineering Systems Division Working Paper Series, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 2003.

Ohno T, Toyota Production System-Beyond Large Scale Production. Cambridge, MA: Productivity Inc. Published in Japanese in 1978; in English in 1988.

Porter M E, Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. New York: The Free Press, 1985.

The Interim Report of the Aerospace Innovation and Growth Team 2003.

"What is Lean?" Lean Enterprise Institute, http://www.lean.org/WhatsLean/

Womack J P and Jones D T, Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation. Free Press; New Edition. 2003.

Womack J, Jones D, Roos D, The Machine That Changed the World- How Lean Production Revolutionized the Global Car Wars. Simon & Schuster Ltd; New Edition , 2007.

Y. Sugimori, K. Kusunoki, F. Cho, and S. Uchikawa, 'Toyota Production System and Kanban Systems - Materialization of Just-In-Time and Respect-for-Human Systems', International Journal of Production Research 15:6 (1977), 553-64