Determination Of A Company's Agility Needs example essay topic

The article by Sharifi and Zhang is outlining a developed methodology for achieving agility in manufacturing organization and describing its implementation and validation in two case study companies. In developing the methodology, the authors used two empirical studies: the concept of agility (Dove, 1996; Kidd, 1995), and the conceptual model of agility (Zhang and Sharifi, 2000) as their main references. Basically there are three major stages composed in the methodology: the determination of a company's agility needs and it current agility level, the determination of agility capabilities required in order for the company to become agile, and the identification of agility providers or business practices and tools which could lead to the recognized capabilities for the company. In order to give a better picture of the methodology, the authors created a graphical form of the methodology in figure 2 of the article. In the first stage of the methodology, an assessment model is developed to study the conditions in which a company struggles for success and to provide a mindset for the company to move toward agility. This includes two practical tools, referred to as tool one and tool two.

Tool one is used to determine the degree of turbulence with a range between 1 and 10. If the score is closer to 10, it means that the more turbulent is the company's business environment, the more agile the company needs to be. Based on this result the second tool is designed to determine the level of company's agility. There are two possible outcomes that can be expected from this tool: Gap analysis in which a speculative interpretation can be made to specify the level of agility needed, and direct result which indicates the company's weak points as well as how to respond to them in a proper manner. The second stage, which is the determination of agility capabilities, is carried out with the assistance of a network model with which external and internal changes / pressures effecting manufacturing organizations are classified and represented as inputs. The agility capabilities required to challenge and overcome the changes / pressures are represented as the outputs.

In addition to that, an industrial questionnaire and a series of case studies are used to establish the network connection Finally, in the last stage, the authors identify a list of business practices, methods, tools, and techniques as the agility providers. The importance of these agility providers to various capabilities is represented by a network relationship. The results from the network model described in the second stage are used as inputs to produce a set of outputs representing the importance of individual agility providers to a company. In implementing this methodology, the authors selected two UK manufacturing companies that had responded to the previous phases of the assessment work. The first company is a leading manufacturer of domestic cookers, which appears to be the only manufacturer that is profitable in this business. The second company is a manufacturer of high-technology electronics components and devices established to supply its mother's company.

This article review will only discuss about company one because the procedures used for both companies are pretty similar. In the implementation, both of these companies went through the three major stages of the methodology explained before: the assessment model, determination of agility capabilities, and determination of agility providers. For simplification, the last two stages are referred to as "the practical tool". For company one, the result of the assessment model reveal three major points: o Company one needs a moderate level of agility, though it is not an urgent agenda. o The areas in table I must be taken into consideration as potentially threatening factors when defining and designing the company's strategy. o The company's perception of its level of agility is higher than the perceived level and than the average score of tool number two of the assessment model. The next stage, referred to as "the practical tool" is applied in three steps: 1. Determining the drivers of the agility.

Table lists the types of agility drivers. 2. Determining the required capabilities. Table IV lists 20 prioritized capabilities. 3. Determining the practices and actions.

Based on the practical tool this company has ability level of 6.5 and less, therefore it needs the following important capabilities: sensing, perceiving and anticipating changes, immediate reaction to changes, strategic vision, co-operation (internal and external), products / services quality, cost effectiveness, and people flexibility. The practical tool also provides guidance for the company to choose the appropriate practices. Sets of practices that can assist company one to achieve the proposed capabilities are listed in table V. Table VI lists some of the practices that company one has adapted in responding to the change factors. These actions could have provided other capabilities which can be extended with further actions from the proposed practices. CRITIQUE Sharifi and Zhang have done an excellent work in developing a methodology for achieving agility in manufacturing and presenting details in its implementation and validation in the two case studies companies. They have also performed an extensive research and review of literature relevant to the subject to be used as a basis for the formation of the methodology to help manufacturing companies make strategic decisions in the pursuit of agile manufacturing.

Sharifi and Zhang have also made a great effort in collecting the data and information used for the application of the methodology in the two companies. These collection of data was obtained during the previous phases of the research by determining various aspects of the companies like the level of agility needed, the abilities of the companies in response to unpredictable changes, the capability required by the company to respond to changes in appropriate manner. In addition, data and information were acquired by examining the business environment, speculating the available strategic alternatives, and identifying the practices that could support the company's approach toward agility. Despite of its well-established content, this study is subject to improvements due to some limitations.

In some practical areas, the proposed methodology still needs a more advanced research, particularly in defining the relationship between agility capabilities and agility practices. A more extensive study in identifying the exact domain of capabilities, the corresponding practices, and the appropriate ways of implementing and assessing the capabilities would provide a more accurate guideline for organizations in pursuit of agile manufacturing. Another area for improvement can be found in the number and location of participating companies for this study. The present paper has only analyzed two manufacturing companies in UK, thus the application of the findings might not be appropriate for other manufacturing companies in other countries. Future study should definitely increase the number of participating companies from different regions of the world where influencing factors such as business environment, business practices, and the strategic alternatives available for the company to pursue might be different. By and large, the study on agile manufacturing in practice by Sharifi and Zhang is fairly comprehensive and well developed in terms of its content and method used.

The development and application of the proposed methodology for achieving agility in manufacturing is also well presented in such detail and appropriate way. Nonetheless, the proposed methodology still needs a more advanced research, particularly in defining the relationship between agility capabilities and agility practices. Although the proposed methodology is to be fully developed and validated, it still constitutes an essential effort in this regard and assists to bridge the gap between theory and practice in the agile manufacturing. H. Sharifi, Z. Zhang". Agile Manufacturing in Practice: Application of A Methodology". International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 21.5/6 4.2 (2001): 772-794..