Advertisement

Measuring manufacturing performance: a new challenge for managerial accounting research

  • Robert S. Kaplan

Abstract

Problems with the performance of U.S. manufacturing firms have become obvious in recent years. Japanese and Western European manufacturers are able to produce higher quality goods with fewer workers and lower inventory levels than comparable U.S. firms. The ability of foreign firms to become more efficient producers has gone largely unnoticed in the education and research programs of many U.S. business schools. A much greater commitment to understanding the factors critical to the success of manufacturing firms is needed. While an understanding of the determinants for successful manufacturing performance will require contributions from many disciplines, accounting can play a critical role in this effort. Accounting researchers can attempt to develop non-financial measures of manufacturing performance, such as productivity, quality, and inventory costs. Measures of product leadership, manufacturing flexibility, and delivery performance could be developed for firms bringing new products to the marketplace. Expanded performance measures are also necessary for capital budgeting procedures and to monitor production using the new technology of flexible manufacturing systems. A particular challenge is to de-emphasize the current focus of senior managers on simple, aggregate, short-term financial measures and to develop indicators that are more consistent with long-term competitiveness and profitability.

Keywords

Foreign Firm Inventory Cost Harvard Business Review Capital Budget Discount Cash Flow 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baldwin, William, ‘This is the Answer,’ Forbes (July 5, 1982), pp. 50-52.Google Scholar
  2. Banks, Robert L. and Steven C. Wheelwright, ‘Operations vs. Strategy: Trading Tomorrow for Today,’ Harvard Business Review (May–June 1979), pp. 112-120.Google Scholar
  3. Buehler, Vernon M. and Y. Krishna Shetty, Productivity Improvement: Case Studies of Proven Practice (New York: AMACOM, 1981).Google Scholar
  4. Business Week, ‘Quality: The U.S. Drive to Catch Up’ (November 1, 1982), pp. 66-80.Google Scholar
  5. Bylinsky, Gene, ‘The Race to the Automatic Factory,’ Fortune (February 21, 1983), pp. 52-64.Google Scholar
  6. Craig, Charles E. and R. Clark Harris, ‘Total Productivity Measurement at the Firm Level,’ Sloan Management Review (Spring 1973), pp. 13-28.Google Scholar
  7. Crosby, Philip B., Quality is Free (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979).Google Scholar
  8. Davis, Hiram S., Productivity Accounting (Industrial Research Unit, The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, 1955) (reprint edition, 1978).Google Scholar
  9. Fine, Charles, ‘Quality Control and Learning in Productive Systems,’ Working Paper, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University (January 1982).Google Scholar
  10. Fox, Robert E., ‘MRP, Kanban, or OPT: What’s Best?’ Inventories and Production Magazine (July–August 1982).Google Scholar
  11. General Electric Company, ‘Background Note on Management Systems: 1981,’ HBS Case 9-181-111 (Boston: Harvard Business School, 1981).Google Scholar
  12. George, Alexander L., ‘Case Studies and Theory Development,’ Working Paper, Department of Political Science (Standford University, 1982).Google Scholar
  13. Greenberg, Leon, A Practical Guide to Productivity Measurement (Washington, D.C.: Bureau of National Affairs, 1973).Google Scholar
  14. Hayes, Robert H., ‘Why Japanese Factories Work,’ Harvard Business Review (July–August 1981), pp. 57-66.Google Scholar
  15. —, ‘A Note on Productivity Accounting,’ HBS 0-682-084 (Boston: Harvard Business School, 1982).Google Scholar
  16. —, and William J. Abernathy, ‘Managing Our Way to Economic Decline,’ Harvard Business Review July–August 1980), pp. 67-77.Google Scholar
  17. — and Joseph A. Limprecht, ‘Germany’s World Class Manufacturers,’ Harvard Business Review (November–December 1982), pp. 137-145.Google Scholar
  18. — and Steven C. Wheelwright, ‘Link Manufacturing Process and Product Life Cycles,’ Harvard Business Review (January–February 1979a), pp. 133-40.Google Scholar
  19. —, and Steven C. Wheelwright, ‘The Dynamics of Process-Product Life Cycles,’ Harvard Business Review (March–April 1979b), pp. 127-136.Google Scholar
  20. Holt, Charles, Franco Modigliani, John Muth, and Herbert Simon, Planning Production, Inventories, and Work Force (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1960).Google Scholar
  21. Juran, J.M. ‘Japanese and Western Quality — A Contrast,’ Quality Progress (December 1978), pp. 10-18; also in Management Review (November 1978), pp. 27-28, 39-45.Google Scholar
  22. Kendrick, John W. and Daniel Creamer, Measuring Company Productivity: Handbook with Case Studies, Revised Edition (New York: The Conference Board, 1965).Google Scholar
  23. Koten, John, ‘Auto Makers Have Trouble with “Kanban”,’ Wall Street Journal (April 7, 1982).Google Scholar
  24. Landro, Laura, ‘G.E.’s Wizards Turning from the Bottom Line to Share of the Market,’ Wall Street Journal (July 12, 1982).Google Scholar
  25. Lincoln Electric Company, HBS Case 9-376-028, Revision (Boston: Harvard Business School, September 1975).Google Scholar
  26. Mammone, James L., ‘Productivity Measurement: A Conceptual Overview,’ Management Accounting (June 1980a), pp. 36-42.Google Scholar
  27. —, ‘A Practical Approach to Productivity Measurement,’ Management Accounting (July 1980b), pp. 40-44.Google Scholar
  28. Manuel, William G., ‘Productivity Experiences at Nucor,’ in Buehler and Shetty, Productivity Improvement: Case Studies of Proven Practice (New York: AMACOM, 1981), Chapter 4.Google Scholar
  29. Mohr, Lawrence, B., ‘The Reliability of the Case Study as a Source of Information,’ in Robert Coulam and Richard Smith (Eds.), Symposium on Information Processing in Organizations (J.A.I. Press, 1983, forthcoming).Google Scholar
  30. Monden, Yasuhiro, ‘What Makes the Toyota Production System Really Tick,’ Industrial Engineering (January 1981a), pp. 36-48.Google Scholar
  31. —, ‘Kanban System,’ Industrial Engineering (May 1981b), pp. 29-46.Google Scholar
  32. —, ‘Production Smoothing,’ Industrial Engineering (August 1981c), pp. 42-51.Google Scholar
  33. —, ‘Production Smoothing, Part II,’ Industrial Engineering (September 1981d), pp. 22-30.Google Scholar
  34. Moore, Brian. A Plant-Wide Productivity Plan in Action: Three Years of Experience with the Scanlon Plan (Washington, DC: National Center for Productivity and Quality of Working Life, May 1975).Google Scholar
  35. Murrin, Thomas, ‘Rejecting the Traditional Ways of Doing Business’ (Chicago: American Production and Inventory Control Society, October 1982).Google Scholar
  36. Pinches, George E., ‘Myopia, Capital Budgeting and Decision Making,’ Financial Management (Autumn 1982), pp. 6-19.Google Scholar
  37. Rappaport, Alfred, ‘Executive Incentives vs. Corporate Growth,’ Harvard Business Review (July–August 1978), pp. 81-88.Google Scholar
  38. Reich, Robert, ‘The Next American Frontier,’The Atlantic Monthly (March 1983), pp. 43-58 and (April 1983), pp. 97-108.Google Scholar
  39. Richardson, Peter R. and John R.M. Gordon, ‘Measuring Total Manufacturing Performance,’ Sloan Management Review (Winter 1980), pp. 47-58.Google Scholar
  40. Schonberger, Richard, Japanese Manufacturing Techniques (New York: Free Press, 1982).Google Scholar
  41. Skinner, Wickham, ‘Manufacturing — Missing Link in Corporate Strategy,’ Harvard Business Review (May–June 1969), pp. 136-145.Google Scholar
  42. —, ‘The Focused Factory,’ Harvard Business Review (May–June 1974), pp. 113-121.Google Scholar
  43. Solomons, David, Divisional Performance: Measurement and Control (Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, 1965).Google Scholar
  44. Takeuchi, Hirotaka, ‘Productivity: Learning from the Japanese,’ California Management Review (Summer 1981), pp. 5-19.Google Scholar
  45. Tsurumi, Yoshi, ‘Productivity: The Japanese Approach,’Pacific Basin Quarterly (Summer 1981).Google Scholar
  46. —, ‘Japan’s Challenge to the U.S.: Industrial Policies and Corporate Strategies,’Columbia Journal of World Business (Summer 1982), pp. 87-95.Google Scholar
  47. Wheelwright, Steven C., ‘Japan — Where Operations Really are Strategic,’ Harvard Business Review (July–August 1981), pp. 67-74.Google Scholar
  48. Williams, Jeffrey R.,’ schumpeterian Economies of Scope,’ GSIA Working Paper (Carnegie-Mellon University, June 1983).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert S. Kaplan
    • 1
  1. 1.Dean of the Graduate School of Industrial AdministrationCarnegie-Mellon UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations