Directory UMM :Data Elmu:jurnal:I:International Journal of Production Economics:Vol65.Issue1.Apr2000:

Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

Manufacturing strategy analysis and manufacturing
information system design: Process and application
Bin Wu!,*, Ray Ellis"
!School of Industrial and Manufacturing Science, Building 30, Cranxeld University, Cranxeld, Bedford MK43 0AL, UK
"Kenard Engineering Company Ltd, 573/579 Princes Rd, Dartford, Kent DA2 6DZ, UK

Abstract
This paper speci"es the structure of a manufacturing strategy analysis (MSA) to manufacturing system design (MSD)
interfacing model. In particular, it addresses the link between manufacturing strategic initiatives and the requirements of
manufacturing information system (MIS), and proposes a structured approach to help a company identify the key MIS
requirements that are needed to e!ectively support the company's future manufacturing strategic aims. The proposed
method has been successfully applied in a precision engineering company, resulting in an integrated MIS that was given
The UK Machinery Award for Innovation in Production Engineering, for being `the most innovative application of
computer technology in the manufacturing environmenta. ( 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Manufacturing strategy; Manufacturing system; Manufacturing information system

1. Introduction
A uni"ed framework has been proposed that
aims to set systems thinking into the context of

manufacturing systems management [1]. Manufacturing systems management (MSM) here is de"ned
as a functional domain that involves all of the
activities, such as design, implementation, operations and monitoring, etc., that are needed to regulate and optimise a manufacturing system as it
progresses through its life cycle. Following the key
principles of systems theory, this framework provides a uni"ed framework which identi"es the main
MSM functional areas, speci"es their generic functionality and contents, and then logically integrates
* Corresponding author. Tel: #44-0-1234-754154; fax: #440-1234-754154.
E-mail address: B.Wu@cran"eld.ac.uk (B. Wu)

them into a closed loop to provide the basis for
e!ective systems management. This paper focuses
on the manufacturing strategy analysis (MSA) and
manufacturing system design (MSD) interfacing
function within this framework at the information
and control level. It will "rst provide a brief overview of the structure of this MSM framework.
Then, following a description of the structure, processes and tools speci"ed along its MSA/MSD
cycle, various new features regarding the speci"cation of information system requirements will be
discussed.
Various approaches have been developed to enable companies to identify manufacturing strategic
direction, with the aim of satisfying corporate objectives. The implementation of a manufacturing

information system (MIS) within a manufacturing
organisation often forms part of the strategic approach to satisfying these objectives. This paper

0925-5273/00/$ - see front matter ( 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 2 5 - 5 2 7 3 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 9 0 - 0

56

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

"rst introduces the concept of manufacturing strategically driven analysis of MIS system requirements. It is pointed out that in order for a MIS to be
able to satisfy manufacturing strategic needs, a structured approach needs to be followed which provides
the system's development with a strategic direction.
A framework with a set of procedures is speci"ed for
such purposes, starting from the initial identi"cation of objectives, through to the `develop-or-buya
decisions, and system design and implementation.
The paper also describes how the proposed approach has been e!ectively applied to the case of a
typical modern precision engineering company,
which heavily utilises computer numerically controlled (CNC) facilities and specialises in the making of
aerospace and telecommunication components.

Through an analysis of the company's manufacturing strategic requirements, the proposed procedures revealed a number of MIS related issues and
features that helped to ensure a competitive edge.

2. Overview of the MSM framework
In order to deal with the complexity involved in
the design and operation of modern manufacturing
systems, attempts have been made to adopt a more
systems approach to the problems concerned. For
example, Wu [2] suggested an overall framework
of manufacturing systems design and evaluation,
with particular emphasis on systems analysis, systems design, and systems methodology. It consists
of the following keywords that relate to the main
areas of concern: systems (concepts and principles),
manufacturing (structures, technologies and operations), systems engineering (problem-solving and
structured decision-making) and manufacturing systems (design and evaluation). Of particular interest
from the above is a prototype system model that is
based on a range of key concepts of systems thinking, and a set of conditions necessary for the e!ective operation and control of manufacturing
organisations. If one relates these well-proved systems principles to the area of MSM, it becomes
apparent that certain key elements are lacking in the
current theory and practice. In order to "ll in the

gaps, a conceptual MSM framework has been proposed that logically link a number of new and

previously established techniques together. Its overall
structure closely follows that of the prototype system
model to satisfy the prerequisite conditions for the
e!ective control and operation of a system. This conceptual MSM framework speci"es the key functional
areas of MSM, outlines the contents and relationships within them, and then logically integrates these
into a closed-loop to provide the basis for the development of a set of consistent parameters and procedures. It consists of three main functional areas:
manufacturing strategy analysis (MSA), manufacturing system design (MSD) and manufacturing
operations management (MOM), as shown in Fig. 1.
Generally speaking, the nature of MSA approaches can be summarised as a method of helping a company analyse its products, market and
operations to identify areas of concern, and then
setting objectives for these to be improved. However, the implementation of strategic initiatives will
rely on the management of change through MSD
projects. The general aim of a MSD project can
therefore be de"ned as the determination of the best
structure of a manufacturing system in order to
provide the competence needed to support strategic
objectives, and this must be achieved within the
resource and other constraints. In addition, the

complete MSM cycle should also include the aspects of manufacturing to plan, monitor and control the production processes once the system is
implemented and in operation. Finally, the overlapping between these main areas identi"es three
additional MSM functions: MSA/MSD interfacing,
manufacturing system implementation and manufacturing system status monitoring. The proposed
framework re#ects the view that a systems approach should be adapted to the design, implementation and management of manufacturing systems.
A systems thinking in the management of manufacturing requires the development of a set of coherent
strategic objectives and goals. A hierarchy of compatible system structures should then support this
hierarchy of objectives.
As can be seen, three principal manufacturing
architectures have been speci"ed through MSD
activities within this framework [3]:
f The physical (or manufacturing) architecture represents the &hard' elements of the manufacturing

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

57

Fig. 1. Overall functional structure of a MSM Framework (Source: [1]).

systems, including the machines, transportation

and storage equipment and the other facilities
required to support the manufacturing process.
This also describes the #ow of materials throughout the system.
f The human and organisational architecture represents the organisational structure and the interactions of the employees within the manufacturing
system, including their roles, responsibilities and
production tasks.
f The information and control architecture represents the planning and control functions of the
manufacturing system and the processes involved in decision making. This also describes
the #ow of data and information in all its formats, whether paper or computer based, throughout the system.
This structure provides an e!ective basis for the
clear clari"cation of the MSM domain. Each of the
blocks in the framework represents a particular
functional module where speci"c contents regarding functionality, relevant techniques, parameters,

values and relationships, etc., can be speci"ed in
detail if required. For instance, the current development of enterprise resource planning (ERP), which
inherits its nature from its forerunner, manufacturing resource planning (MRP II), is a typical
example of the kind of IT systems used to provide
an integrated information system for the planning
and control functions required.

However, it has been observed from a number of
unsuccessful cases reported in the literature, that
purely technical-oriented ERP implementation is
one of the main reasons for failure [4}7]. There
seems to be a lack of a structured, strategically
driven approach to assist companies mapping
a function-oriented software into business-oriented
system. It is evident that di!erent industrial companies have di!erent focuses on their business/
manufacturing function, but current ERP systems
have di!erent merits and weaknesses, when related
to di!erent industrial requirements [8]. The proposed MSM framework provides a sound basis for
a strategically driven analysis of manufacturing information system requirements, giving a strategic

58

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

direction for information system evaluation, implementation and administration [9,10].

3. Manufacturing strategy and MIS

Competition in industry places manufacturers
under constant pressure to become more e$cient.
This forces the industry to evolve towards being
more capable and productive. The key factors in
this evolutionary process are those that a!ect
a manufacturing company's competitive position,
such as product quality, cost of manufacture,
manufacturing lead time and #exibility. In order
that these fundamental elements can be addressed
and acted upon, the whole manufacturing process
needs to be analysed and an overall manufacturing
strategy needs to be formulated based upon the
company's competitive standing. Once an overall
manufacturing strategy has been developed, the
way in which the implementation is carried out in
order to meet these strategic requirements becomes
very important.

Therefore, a company should be able to identify
the relevant options and the related MSD tasks, so

that their MSD action addresses the key issues to
achieve the improvement required. The MSA/MSD
interface as shown in Fig. 1 aims to enable manufacturing companies to make more informed decisions in this regard. Once the initial strategic
objectives are speci"ed, they generally provide
a qualitative and/or quantitative indication of the
di!erences between what the market requires from
the company, and the actual performance of the
company's manufacturing system. In addition, the
manufacturing criteria de"ned through the MSA
process will relate manufacturing strategy to manufacturing system by de"ning the system purpose,
system performance, system characteristics and system cost structure. Following these, a number of
MSA/MSD link tables have been produced and
relevant MSA/MSD cause-e!ects relationships are
embedded in these tables. These are used as decision-making aids to establish the linking process.
At the information and control level, in particular, the normal process of manufacturing strategy

Fig. 2. Structure of the overall process.

Data
Rapid

7.1.1.1
Shop-#oor collection response
facility
information
display
Quality
Delivery
lead time
Delivery
lead time
(prototype)
Delivery
reliability
Design
#exibility
Volume
#exibility
Cost/price

Information

gathering

@
@

@

@

@

@

@
@

@

@
@

Tooling
Job
management costing

@

@

@

@

DNC "le
Inspection
management audit &
control

@

Preventative
maintenance

Software Machine
integration tool
performance
monitoring

Delivery
monitoring

@
@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@
@

@
@

@

@

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

Table 1
Performance/requirement matrix

59

60

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

Each stage of the generic procedures will be identi"ed and presented in a simplistic way, allowing the
user to gradually progress through the stages. For
instance, one of these requires a tabulation of the key
MIS requirements and the corresponding strategic
aims. This correlation is useful to serve as a reminder of which of the initially de"ned strategic
aims has been instrumental in establishing the particular key MIS requirements. To help this process,
a set of generic correlation between the competitive
performance criteria and key MIS requirements, as
shown in Table 1, has been developed. The various
cross checkings involved are as illustrated in the
more detailed #owchart of Fig. 3.

4. Example of the MSA/MIS Analysis

Fig. 3. Identi"cation of MIS requirements.

analysis is extended by adding a set of generic
procedures to help companies identify key MIS and
systems requirements based on the initiatives derived from strategic analysis. This strategically
driven analysis approach aims to identify the key
MIS requirements required in order to satisfy any
designated competitive performance criteria. As
summarised in Fig. 2, the whole processes can be
divided into three sections: the de"nition of manufacturing strategy aims and initiatives (starting with the
manufacturing strategy analysis carried out against
the competitive performance criteria, with the polar
plots drawn for each of the customers/products,
leading onto the de"nition of the strategic aims
through a SWOT analysis), the identi"cation of key
MIS requirements (cross reference via tabulation
drawn of competitive performance criteria verses
key MIS requirements), and the decision on the
choice of MIS design, structure and implementation (either through the purchase of an o!-the-shelf
system, commissioning of a bespoke system or by
in-house development).

The proposed approach has been e!ectively applied to Kenard Engineering Ltd., UK, which is
a typical modern precision engineering machine
shop, utilising computer numerically controlled
(CNC) facilities and specialising in the making of
aerospace and telecommunication components. It
o!ers a service from prototypes through to, and
including, production batches.
4.1. Market analysis and manufacturing strategic
initiatives
The subcontracting market place has a reputation of being tough and competitive. Although the
reasons for subcontracting have not changed, many
organisations now regard their subcontractors as
an important extension to their own facilities, making the necessary steps to make them feel part of
their team. This has resulted in organisations reducing their supplier base, by selecting the companies that they feel can o!er the best service. With
this reduction of suppliers within companies' supplier bases, come even more "erce competition, not
only within the same supplier chains, but also globally with subcontractors wishing to be included
within the supplier chain of an organisation.
In order to increase its competitiveness, a customer survey was carried out by the company to
determine its customer requirements, and to identify
how orders are won against competitors. Table 2

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

61

Table 2
Summary of gap analysis results
Criterion

Co. A

Co. B

Co. C

Co. D

Co. E

Co. F

!10
Q

10
Q

!10
Q

0

!20

Co. G

!10
Q

10
Q

10
Q

10
Q

!10

!10

!40

!30

!30

Quality

Gap
Quali"er

Lead time

Gap

Lead time reliability

Gap
Quali"er

!30
W

!30
W

!60
W

!50
W

!20
W

!20
W

!20
W

Design Flexibility

Gap
Quali"er

10
P

70
P

80
Q

70
Q

!10
W

10
W

30
Q

Volume Flexibility

Gap
Quali"er

10
W

0
W

20
Q

30
Q

!10
Q

!10
Q

10
Q

Cost/Price

Gap
Quali"er

30
P

40
P

0
P

0
P

50
P

!10
P

!10
P

Notes: W: Order winning, those which directly and signi"cantly contribute to winning business, regarded by customers as key factors
of competitiveness; P: potential order winning, that have the potential to become order winning; Q: order qualifying, those aspects of
competitiveness, where performance has to be above a certain level even to be considered by the customer [11].

summarises the performance gap for each of
Kenard Engineering's key customers (between
!100 and #100, with a positive number implying that manufacturing performance criteria has
been exceeded and a negative number implying
performance needs to be improved). In particular, it
was revealed that for both delivery reliability and
delivery lead times, almost all the results showed
negative gap values. In this particular case, delivery
lead times can be further divided into delivery lead
times for production and delivery lead times for the
manufacture of prototypes, both needing to be reduced in order to remain competitive. However, it
could be argued that it is more important to reduce
lead times of prototype components, since these are
nearly always needed in a hurry and that in many
cases the supplier selected to manufacture the
prototype is invariably the supplier that ends up
manufacturing the production run. It is therefore
important to understand and to "nd ways of improving delivery performance, especially for prototyping operations. For instance, it is generally
accepted that there is more involved in the preparation prior to manufacture of a prototype component, than in the preparation of a component that

has previously been manufactured. There are time
bene"ts to be had by using CAD "le information
directly in the manufacturer's CAM system, assuming that the customer allows this transfer of data
(which is more likely if he bene"ts from the reduction in lead-times and possibly in cost). By making
such a gap analysis for each of the criteria the
company identi"ed its future strategic aims/initiatives under each of the headings. A sample of these is
shown in Table 3.
4.2. Key MIS requirements
To specify the requirements of the manufacturing
information system (MIS) which is able to a!ect the
de"ned strategic initiatives, it is essential that there
is a clear understanding of exactly what the strategic initiatives are. This ensures that valid judgement is then made as to whether the strategic
initiatives will be achieved by the proposed solution.
In considering the manufacturing information
system requirements that are able to satisfy strategic initiatives, one should consider the appropriate MIS features for each functional group. Whilst

62

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

Table 3
Sample strategic aims/initiatives table
Competitive performance criterion

Strategic aims

Strategic initiatives

Delivery reliability

Improve delivery reliability and
predictability
Create stability

Consider "nite capacity of personnel Finite capacity of machine tools
Eliminate unknowns through improved planning
Implement shop #oor MIS that
provides all necessary operator information
Implement MIS to monitor set-up
and cycle times and to re establish
standard times as necessary. Monitor delivery performance
Monitor machine tool performance. Time and attendance data
collection. Provide correct information
Establish lead times with customer.
Using customer CAD "les for
drawing modi"cations to aid reprogramming speed and accuracy
Demonstrate speed and cost saving
advantages

Give operators explicit instruction
Constant monitoring of job progress
Implement preventative and planned maintenance
Information on tooling, "xture setup written and visual prompts. Integrated information package
Improve time estimations by referring to historical manufacturing information and collected data

Monitor machine tool performance. Time and attendance data
collection
Using customer CAD "les to aid
programming speed and accuracy
Demonstrate bene"ts of early design information

Provide correct information. Tooling visual display

Provide information to minimise time waste
Establish accurate standard
times

Eliminate time wasting

Delivery lead
times (production)

Reduce production lead times
to less than that of competitors

Encourage customers to provide
any design change information
direct from CAD system
Eliminate time wasting

Delivery lead
times (prototype)

Reduce prototyping lead times
too less than that of competitors.
Encourage customer } supplier
information exchange

the list of appropriate features for each of the functional groups as shown in Fig. 4 is not extensive, it
does serve as a foundation from which to build:
f MIS features for the utilisation of plant and resources. The four basic MIS features that have
been selected for improved utilisation of plant
and resources are shop #oor information display,
machine tool preventative maintenance, tooling
management and DNC "le management. These
features have been selected as they cover most
aspects of plant utilisation. However, it is accepted that MIS features or requirements can be
added to inde"nitely until any given strategic
initiative has been satis"ed. Another reason for

Full documentation of proven
manufacturing methods (Not reinventing the wheel)
Reduce lead times by accurate capacity planning. Reduce lead times
by concurrent manufacturing
Demonstrate information integrity
and reduced prove out time

Recall historical data of similar
parts or features
Value engineering (to reduce both
time and cost)

the selection of these basic MIS requirements is
that they are broad in de"nition and cover
a wide range of material within the topic. For
instance, DNC "le management could include
programming and editing aids for the production of part programs as well as the ability to
transfer part programs between machine tools
and the programming o$ce.
f MIS Features for the utilisation of collected data.
The four basic MIS features that have been selected for improved utilisation of collected data
are time and attendance monitoring, delivery
performance monitoring, machine tool performance monitoring and job costing. Again, these
features have been selected as they cover most

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

63

Fig. 4. Identi"cation of key MIS requirements.

aspects of data collection, and in this area too it
is accepted that MIS features or requirements
can be added to inde"nitely until strategic initiative has been satis"ed.
f MIS features for the additional system requirements. The four basic MIS features that have
been selected for additional system requirements
are rapid response facility, information gathering, software integration and inspection audit
and control. These MIS features have been used
to illustrate the diversity of additional features
that can be used. The selection of additional
system requirements is seen as an over spill from
the utilisation of plant and resources and the
utilisation of collected data, rather than any feature which does not "t into these two categories.
In this case a MIS that has a rapid response
facility has the features that are required to assist
in providing a manufacturing rapid response service along with normal production controlling
systems. Similarly, a MIS that provides information gathering can be explained as having the
mechanism to manage the accumulation of data
from information gained throughout the production life cycle for any given component. Although these MIS requirements are somewhat
diverse, and not at "rst glance obvious, they
serve to illustrate the purpose of this particular
functional group.
It is next necessary to check each of the initiatives
in turn to see if the basic MIS features are able, in
principle, to satisfy them, which would by de"ni-

tion have the desired a!ect on the relevant competitive performance criteria. The overall #ow chart for
the veri"cation of key MIS requirements is shown
in Fig. 5. In the case of Kenard Ltd, this helped to
establish a total of twelve key MIS requirements
(Table 4). These act as a quick reference to identify
the strategic initiatives that have instigated the particular key MIS requirement.
By de"ning the key MIS requirements it allowed
the management to look at the manufacturing information systems on the market and to evaluate
them based on their strategic requirements, as illustrated in Table 5 (this table is for the purpose of
demonstration only } it has no general implication
regarding the features of any speci"c system).
Through this analysis the company identi"ed
two major areas where key MIS requirements had
not been met by any of the system available (rapid
response facility and job costing) and hence the
corresponding strategic initiatives that could not be
directly supported. Due to the strategic implications of these, the company made a decision to
purpose-build a system that more closely supported the requirements.

5. System implementation
The key MIS requirement list proved to be extremely valuable in providing guidance to the design and implementation of this system. In fact, the
MIS has been designed and developed in such
a way that each of the 12 requirements has been

64

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

systems structure, and examples to illustrate how
some of the key requirements are supported by the
system.
5.1. System structure
The analysis as outlined above helped Kenard
Engineering to develop its MIS named KIDS
(Kenard Information and Data-collection System),
with the overall objectives:
f To set up a direct data link via modem, so that
drawing "les from customer's CAD system, can
be transmitted into the company's CAM system
without the need to edit or reconstruct drawing
elements.
f To allow the transmitted CAD drawing elements
to be used to generate cutter paths ready for
post-processing to any suitable and available
CNC machine tool.
f To cut prototyping lead times, both by reducing
CNC programming time and by reducing the
time for CNC program veri"cation at the prove
out stage.
f To provide machine operators with job-related
information in a focused and user-friendly
manner.

Fig. 5. Flow chart for the veri"cation of key MIS requirements.

cross-checked to ensure that relevant modules and
functions were built into the system, so that all the
requirements would be satisfactorily supported
[12,13]. The following provide an overview of the

Essentially the KIDS system has evolved
from the integration and utilisation of standalone software that was already being used in the
every day operation of the company. The fundamental essence of the KIDS system is to bring
together existing and new software in an integrated
way, resulting in the gathering and distribution
of essential data and presenting such data in a focused and task orientated way to satisfy the key
MIS requirements. The overall KIDS system structure is shown in Fig. 6. It shows the company
database plus the proprietary software packages
production scheduling system, CAM and the CAD
system supplying data to the KIDS system. In
addition, photographic information is supplied as
a visual aid into the system. The gathering of shop#oor information in the form of machine tool
monitoring and the booking of time spent by operators on each job are fed back into the KIDS
system.

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

65

Table 4
Key MIS requirements verses strategic aims
Key MIS requirements

Strategic aims

Shop-#oor information and display

Promotion of information availability throughout the manufacturing process
Improvement of small batch handling through reduction of programming prove
out time
Improvement of small batch handling through set up time reduction
Encourage customers to provide any design changes direct from CAD
Eliminate time wasting
Improved delivery reliability and predictability
Provide information to minimise time waste
Quality standards to be improved above that of competitors thus safe guarding
reputation of quality
Accurate and e$cient collection of manufacturing cycle time and all other manufacturing costs
Accurate and e$cient performance monitoring
Improved method for the preparation of quotations through historical information
Reduce machine down time while waiting for inspection of "rst o!
Establish accurate standard times
Promotion of information sharing between customer to suppliers
Reduce production lead times to less than that of competitors
Reduce prototyping lead times to less than that of competitors
Promotion of information sharing between customer to suppliers
Improvement of small batch handling through reduction of programming prove
out time
Accommodate customer quality requirements in an e$cient and cost e!ective way
Quality standards to be improved above that of competitors thus safe guarding
reputation of quality
Reduce machine down time while waiting for inspection of "rst o!
Provide information to minimise time waste
Costing implications for splitting and joining of batches
Accurate and e$cient collection of manufacturing cycle time and all other manufacturing costs
Improved method for the preparation of quotations through historical information
Create stability
Promotion of system integration within organisation
Promotion of system integration with all customers
Accurate and e$cient collection of manufacturing cycle time and all other manufacturing costs
Establish accurate standard times
Eliminate time wasting
Improvement of small batch handling through set up time reduction
Accurate and e$cient collection of manufacturing cycle time and all other manufacturing costs
Improve delivery reliability and predictability
Establish accurate standard times

Data collection and data monitoring

Rapid response facility

Information gathering
DNC "le management
Inspection audit and control

Tooling management
Job costing

Preventative maintenance
Software integration

Machine tool performance monitoring

Delivery monitoring

5.2. Management and utilisation of plant and
resources
This section illustrates KIDS' ability to satisfy
some of the key requirements under this heading.

For example, when "rst deciding on the way in
which information should be accessed and displayed, it was considered important that the user
found the system easy to operate and understand,
as well as providing readily assessable relevant

66

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

Table 5
Example of system evaluation according to key requirements
Key MIS requirements

Mori Seiki
MSC 518

Dialog Dlog.

ERT Seiki

Shop-#oor Information
display
Shop-#oor data
collection
2
Other features
Edit facility
Photographs displayed
2

@

@

@

@

@

2

2

2

2

2

2

@

@
@
2

@
@
2

@
@
2

@
@
2

@

2

information to the task in hand, so that the user
would have more incentive to use the `newa system
if system provided useful information in a logical
and e$cient way.
Traditionally, Kenard Engineering and most
manufacturers of machined mechanical components have issued job cards/route cards, as detailed
as required, with each batch of components launched on the shop #oor. Within Kenard Engineering
this paper document had evolved from carrying
basic instruction for what were essentially basic
jobs, for example, &rough and "nish turn complete',
to providing more sophisticated information. It
was decided that the MIS would mimic some of the
traditional approaches, both in operation and in
visual presentation, This would allow the operator
of the system to feel immediately at home, and able
to relate with the proposed MIS system. By adopting this approach the traditional Kenard job
card has been used as the front menu for obtaining
focused task-centred information required to satisfy the management and utilisation of plant and
resources. Hence, the system has been designed so
as to provide the following information:
f Job cards } manufacturing documentation.
f CAM information } cutter paths, feeds and
speeds.
f Photographs } component and "xture recognition.
f Drawings } stage manufacturing drawings and
"nal drawings.

GNT DNC
Max

Alta systems
real vision

Tech
systems

@

@
@

2

f Scheduling information } machine work-to-lists
and forward visibility.
f Machine tool information } capacity, achievable
tolerances.
f Tooling information } tools required, cutter life,
feeds and speeds.
f Part Programs } proved or unproved "les, recent
edits.
The component job card, taken from the
database, acts as the menu for the selection and
displaying of information. This simple approach to
information selection via the job card has been
readily accepted by all users, and has allowed the
system to evolve when information from other
sources has been integrated.
5.3. Management and utilisation of shop yoor
collected data
Four of the key MIS requirements that are listed
under management and utilisation of shop-#oor
collected data are data collection and data
monitoring, delivery performance monitoring, machine tool monitoring and job costing. All of these
key MIS requirements rely on receiving information from the shop #oor. Receiving accurate information from the shop #oor is equally as
important as providing accurate information to the
shop #oor. It could be argued that receiving false
form information from the shop #oor by way of
collected data could be more detrimental to the

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

Fig. 6. Overall structure of KIDS.

67

68

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

overall manufacturing function than supplying inadequate information, since false information received could lull the operator into a false sense of
security. Consequently, shop #oor data collection
and monitoring has been designated as a key MIS
requirement.
In particular, delivery performance measuring is
seen as the overall measure of delivery reliability
within the company. The seven companies that
participated in the Kenard Engineering customer
survey each monitor their suppliers in di!erent
ways. On one extreme some customers appear not
to be monitoring their suppliers at all, and on the
other extreme some customers have fairly complex
ways in which they measure delivery performance,
the results of which are taken seriously. In most
cases information required for delivery performance measuring can be obtained from the company database, since information such as date of
order placement, due date and customer date delivered are readily available for every job. However,

in a particular case the way in which the customer's
suppliers are o$cially monitored is complex, involving additional information to be retrieved from
the database. At this stage only basic delivery performance information has been made available
within the KIDS systems. This information has
been obtained from the company database and
then entered into the KIDS microsoft jet engine
database where delivery monitoring parameters
that are speci"c to each customer are displayed.
So far as the machine operational data are concerned, the system collects, in real time, and displays machine tool cycle times in the form of
a Gantt chart, together with the relevant job card
and if necessary a photograph of the component
being machined (Fig. 7). The Gantt chart can be
seen for one particular machining centre and the
cycle time length of three di!erent pallets is displayed. This display can be called up on any of the
KIDS workstations either on or away from the
shop #oor. A machine tool can be selected and

Fig. 7. Visual display of machine tool monitoring.

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

monitored to see if the machine tool is operating,
and operating times compared with the standard
times that have been set. It is also possible to check
the same information from a remote location away
from the manufacturing facility through the use of
a modem.
A related requirement to the above job costing.
The ability to be able to calculate the cost for
manufacture of a component is paramount in the
subcontracting manufacturing environment. A system for the initial cost estimation that is accurate,
consistent, e!ective and quick, is important when
dealing in a competitive market environment.
Equally, to be able to e$ciently collect the data
necessary to be able to accurately calculate the true
manufacture is important. Job costing which encompasses both the initial estimation of the cost of
component manufacture and the calculation of the
actual cost of manufacture upon completion, has
been identi"ed as a key MIS requirement for
Kenard. The KIDS costing system has been designed to enable the user to retrieve historical data
from the company database. This can include past

69

job cards of manufactured components identifying
the equipment used at that time together with the
standard time and actual time taken for each operation. This together with stored photograph and
drawing "les when available, enables the user to use
the system as a historical reference, proving extremely useful for cost estimation of similar components. Manufacturing instructions of all parts made
are broken down into individual operations. When
completed, these instructions are stored/archived
and can be recalled to reveal the associated cost of
each individual operation calculated. This is particularly useful for the cost estimation of new parts
that have similar features or characteristics to parts
machined in the past, as shown in Fig. 8.
5.4. Additional system enhancements
A particularly important strategic requirement
was the ability to provide a rapid response facility
for prototyping services. With time to market pressures, early design of component parts are needed
for evaluation. Typically, in the early stages of

Fig. 8. KIDS visual display of costing/calculation menu.

70

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

development small quantities of parts, sometimes
only one o!, are required urgently to evaluate before proceeding with the next development stage.
The pressure is on for the designer to produce
a drawing of the part as quickly as possible and the
manufacturer to make it as quickly as possible.
The KID system handles the rapid response information transmitted from customers through
a process called `information chaina. The customer
provides three-dimensional CAD "les in IGES format of the component part that is required by rapid
response, via an Internet service provider. The "le is
viewed on the Kenard CAD and price and delivery
is given to the customer. If necessary KIDS Costing
could have been used for this purpose. Once a price
and delivery has been agreed, the relevant drawing
"le is copied from CAD system to the CAM system.
At this stage material is obtained and if necessary
the CAD "le is plotted. Because prede"ned parameters have already been set, all drawing tolerances
are known together with material speci"cations
and surface "nishes etc. The relevant pro"les are
captured within the CAM system and cutter paths

are simulated. A tooling list is automatically generated within the CAM database and identi"cation
numbers assigned. Once the CAM used is happy
with the cutter path simulation, the CAM "le is
postprocessed for the designated machine tool on
which the component will be manufactured. Concurrently, customer order details are entered into
the Company database and a production engineer
writes the component job card, which is identi"ed
as a rapid response job. The production engineer
decides on how the component will be manufactured, assigning the number of operations, the machine tools to be used and estimating the standard
time for each operation. If the appropriate machine
tool is available the machine tool operator can be
alerted and the KIDS system interrogated the to
"nd the rapid response job card. At this stage there
should be on the system, a detailed manufacturing
description ( job card), the customers drawing,
a tooling list, a cutter path simulation, and the part
program "le which has been identi"ed as an unproven "le. By using such a facilities, together with
working closely with customers, manufacturing

Fig. 9. KIDS shop-#oor information and display (rapid response facility).

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

lead times can be reduced signi"cantly, thereby
playing an important part in helping customers to
reduce the time their designs are used in the market
place. Fig. 9 shows a typical component that has
been manufactured under the rapid response facility, showing a graphical display of cutter, a cutter
path, the job card, together with the part program
"le (unproven) and the customers drawing of the
component.

71

When a component is "rst manufactured, information is gathered in the form of CAD "les or
drawings from customers, from which a job card is
written etc. The same is true if the component is
manufactured under normal conditions other than
the rapid response facility. With components that
start as development components, it is hoped
that pre-production and then production runs will
follow. It is recognised that as the product

Table 6
Component life cycle verse information gathering
Customer
component life cycle

Typical batch size

Customer
response/requirements

Manufacturers
response/requirements

KIDS

Prototype

1

CAD "le

Rapid response value
engineer

Display prototype job card

Certi"cation.

3

Revised CAD "le

Quick response

Pre-production

10

Revised CAD "le

Re"ne manufacturing
methods

Production

20

Cost justi"cation

Optimise manufacturing
methods

Increased prod.

50

Decrease cost

Additional optimisation

Decreased prod.

20

Maintain cost

Reduce set up times

Spares

5

Reluctant price increase,
no manufacturing details

Recall manufacturing
methodology

Display cutter paths
Display prototype drawing
Display initial tool list
Display revised job card
Display revised cutter paths
Display drawing
Display revised tool list
Display photograph of part
Display revised job card
Display revised cutter paths
Display revised drawing
Display revised tool list
Display photograph of part
Display "xture photograph
Display optimised job card
Display optimised cutter
paths
Display drawing
Display optimised tool list
Display photograph of part
Display "xture photograph
Display stage drawings
Display critical dimensions
As above plus:
Display "xture set up
Information on production
problems
Inspection history
As above plus:
any optimisations made
during full production.
All past information held
within KIDS

72

B. Wu, R. Ellis / Int. J. Production Economics 65 (2000) 55}72

matures and with the experience of various production runs, continuous improvements to manufacturing techniques can be introduced. But in order
to do so, information needs to be gathered and
re"ned as the components pass through their respective life cycles. Table 6 shows typical information
gathering and displays the various stages of a customer's component life cycle on the KIDS system.

6. Conclusion
Demands on manufacturing industry to provide
quality, #exibility and to reduce costs have
put pressures on manufacturing companies to improve productivity. These demands, coupled with
computer hardware and software advances, have
encouraged MIS development. As a result, the
role and importance of MIS within the manufacturing environment have changed dramatically in recent years. However, the initial design of such
a system must be very carefully considered, because
the way in which it is structured and organised will
have a profound e!ect on the way in which information can be delivered and utilised to support
the company's strategic aims. This paper has
attempted to address the key question of how to
logically link the strategic and MIS requirements.
The application of the proposed approach has
helped the case company to develop an integrated
system to e!ectively support its strategic intentions,
which has enabled the company to: improve prototyping quality and lead time, by down-loading
directly engineering information from customer's
CAD system to be used to generate cutter paths
ready for postprocessing; improve cost control
by providing on-line data collection and realtime analysis; and increase operational e$ciency
by providing operators with job-related information in a focused and user-friendly manner.
Due to its success, the system was given the UK
Machinery Award for Innovation in Production
Engineering, for being `the most innovative

application of computer technology in the manufacturing environment [14]a.

References
[1] B. Wu, Towards a uni"ed theory of manufacturing systems
management, International Journal of Production
Research, 1999, submitted for publication.
[2] B. Wu, Manufacturing Systems Design and Analysis,
Context and Techniques, 2nd Edition, Chapman & Hall,
London, 1994.
[3] B. Wu, R. Hull, A task-centred methodology to support an
integrated and open computer-aided manufacturing systems design environment, Proceedings of the International
Conference on Manufacturing Automation, 1997, Hong
Kong.
[4] R. Gumaer, Beyond ERP and MRP II, IIE Solutions
(1996) 32}35.
[5] B. Hecht, Choose the right ERP software, Datamation
(1997) 56}58.
[6] D.A. Hicks, The manager's guide to supply chain and
logistics problem-solving tools and techniques } part II:
tools, companies and industries, IIE Solutions (1997)
24}27.
[7] E.R. Puchalski, ERP help manufacturers control their
businesses, I&CS (1997), 63}66.
[8] B. Wu, Y.L. Chang, A structured approach to the selection
of ERP solutions, Proceedings of the Logistics Research
Network 1998 Conference, Cran"eld, 1998, UK, pp.
410}419.
[9] B. Wu, R. Ellis, The structure and implementation of
a task-centred manufacturing information system for
small-to-medium-sized engineering companies, International Conference on Manufacturing Automation, ICMA
97, Hong Kong.
[10] B. Wu, R. Ellis, Manufacturing strategically driven analysis and implementation of an integrated MIS, Proceedings of The Third International Conference } Managing
Innovative Manufacturing, MIM'98, University of Nottingham, 1998, UK.
[11] N. Slack, Manufacturing Advantage, Gold Arrow Publications Limited, London, 1991.
[12] B. Wu, An overview of the technical requirements for an
integrated computer-aided manufacturing systems design
environment, International Journal of Manufacturing
Systems Design 2 (1) (1995) 61}72.
[13] Machinery and Production Engineering, KIDS } the new
generation (1997) 103}104.
[14] Machinery Market, Machining centres, (1998) 12.