Improving Productivity in the Apparel Industry Through Gain Sharing and Continuous Process Improvement: the Case of a Serbian Manufacturer

Slović, D.; Tomašević, I.; Radovic, M.

doi:10.5604/12303666.1168239

Artykuł - szczegóły

Tytuł artykułu

Improving Productivity in the Apparel Industry Through Gain Sharing and Continuous Process Improvement: the Case of a Serbian Manufacturer

Autorzy

Slović D. , Tomašević I. , Radovic M.

Treść / Zawartość

Pełne teksty:

Pobierz

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5604/12303666.1168239

Warianty tytułu

Poprawienie produktywności poprzez ustalenie głównych planów udziałów w korzyściach i ciągły proces poprawy. Przykład serbskiego producenta

Języki publikacji

Abstrakty

This paper analyses the effects of combined implementation of gain sharing wage incentives and continuous process improvement on productivity growth in the apparel industry. Results were obtained through empirical research conducted in a Serbian apparel manufacturer - Javor. A five step research approach was designed and applied in Javor, where productivity was continuously measured over a five year period. Results show a significant increase in productivity in Javor by the end of the fifth year, even though productivity was in decline in the apparel sector. The results were statistically tested, showing that productivity gains can really be attributed to combined implementation of gain sharing and continuous process improvement. The paper has significant practical implications, since it suggests that wage incentives can be used as an efficient tool for motivating employees to take an active role in improvement efforts while relying on existing knowledge and resources.

Praca analizuje efekty wspólnego zastosowania odpowiedniego udziału płac i ciągłego procesu wzrostu produktywności w przemyśle odzieżowym. Wyniki uzyskano poprzez badania empiryczne wprowadzone w serbskim przedsiębiorstwie produkującym odzież – Javor. Zaprojektowano badania pięciostopniowe i zastosowano w przedsiębiorstwie Javor, gdzie produktywność była mierzona w sposób ciągły podczas kolejnych pięciu lat. Wyniki wykazały znaczny wzrost produktywności w Javorze pod koniec piątego roku badań, nawet w okresie kiedy produktywność zmniejszała się w całej branży odzieżowej. Wyniki były oceniane statystycznie pokazując, że produktywność może być rzeczywiście odniesiona do wspólnego zastosowania odpowiedniego udziału płac i ciągłego procesu wzrostu produktywności w przemyśle odzieżowym. Artykuł ma znaczenie praktyczne wskazując realne możliwości poprawy produktywności.

Słowa kluczowe

productivity apparel gain sharing incentives continuous process improvement

przemysł odzieżowy wydajność produktywność

Wydawca

Sieć Badawcza Łukasiewicz - Łódzki Instytut Technologiczny

Czasopismo

Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe

Rocznik

2016

Tom

Vol. 24, no. 2 (116)

Strony

15--22

Opis fizyczny

Bibliogr. 30 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Slović D.

Faculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Republic of Serbia

autor

Tomašević I.

tomasevici@fon.bg.ac.rs

Faculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Republic of Serbia

autor

Radovic M.

Faculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Republic of Serbia

Bibliografia

1. Bruce M, Daly L and Towers N. Lean or agile: a solution for supply chain management in the textiles and clothing industry?. International journal of operations & production management 2004; 24, 2: 151-170.
2. Stengg W. The textile and clothing industry in the EU. Enterprise papers 2001; 2.
3. Lee J, Lee YJ and Ulasewicz C. International and Beyond: Reflecting on the Identity of International Textile and Apparel Association. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 2011; 29, 2: 165-182.
4. Silva SKPN. Applicability of Value Stream Mapping (VSM) in the Apparel industry in Sri Lanka. International Journal of Lean Thinking 2012; 3, 1: 36-41.
5. Storey DJ. Understanding the small business sector. London: International Thomson Business Press, 1994.
6. Đorđević D, Ćoćkalo D, Urošević S and Đekić V. Clusters and Competitive Ability of Small and Medium Enterprises in the Textile and Clothing Industry: Serbian Economy Review. Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe 2011; 19, 5: 88.
7. Urošević S and Stamatović M. Role of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in the Enhancement of the Serbian Textile Industry in Times of Crisis. Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe 2011; 19, 4: 14-19.
8. Hadžić M and Pavlović P. How to overcome (SME) crisis: Serbian case. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica 2011; 8, 1: 61- 80.
9. Johnston R and Clark G. Service operations management: improving service delivery. Pearson Education, 2005.
10. Slack N, Chambers S and Johnston R. Operations management. Pearson Education, 2010.
11. Oeij PRA, De Looze MP, Ten Have K, Van Rhijn JW and Kuijt-Evers LFM. Developing the organization’s productivity strategy in various sectors of industry. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 2011; 61, 1: 93-109.
12. Tangen S. Demystifying productivity and performance. International Journal of Productivity and performance management 2005; 54, 1: 34-46.
13. Thürer M, Stevenson M, Silva C, Land MJ, Fredendall LD and Melnyk SA. Lean Control for Make-to-Order Companies: Integrating Customer Enquiry Management and Order Release. Production and Operations Management 2014; 23, 3: 463-476.
14. Womack JP and Jones, DT. Lean thinking: Banish waste and create wealth in your organisation. New York: Simon and Shuster, 1996.
15. Kapuge AM and Smith M. Management practices and performance reporting in the Sri Lankan apparel sector. Managerial Auditing Journal 2007; 22, 3: 303- 318.
16. Stoll EE and Ha-Brookshire JE. Motivations for Success Case of US Textile and Apparel Small-and Medium-Sized Enterprises. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 2012; 30, 2: 149-163.
17. Maslow AH. A theory of human motivation. Psychological review 1943; 50, 4: 370-396.
18. Chiu RK, Luk VWM and Tang TL. Retaining and motivating employees: compensation preferences in Hong Kong and China. Personnel Review 2002; 31, 4: 402-31.
19. Takahashi K. Effects of wage and promotion incentives on the motivation levels of Japanese employees. Career Development International 2006; 11, 3: 193-203.
20. Barber AE and Bretz RD. Compensation, attraction, and retention, in Rynes SL and Gerhart B (Eds). Compensations in Organizations: Current Research and Practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2000.
21. Lane HE. The Scanlon Plan Revisited. Business & Society Review, Winter 75/76 1976; 16: 57-64.
22. Henderson RI. Compensation management in a knowledge-based world. Prentice Hall, 2003.
23. Geare AJ. Productivity from Scanlon-type plans. Academy of Management Review 1976; 1, 3: 99-108.
24. Fein M. Improved productivity through worker involvement. Industrial management 1982; 25, 3: 4-15.
25. GAO. Productivity sharing programs: Can They Contribute To Productivity Improvement. US GAO, Gaithersburg, AFMD-81-82, 1981. Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/assets/80/79298.pdf
26. Kaufman RT.E Effects of Improshare on Productivity, The. Indus. & Lab. Rel. Rev. 1991; 45: 311.
27. Yin RK. Case study research: Design and methods. London: Sage, 1994.
28. Coughlan P and Coghlan D. Action research for operations management. International journal of operations & production management 2002; 22, 2: 220-240.
29. Schein EH. Process consultation revisited: Building the helping relationship. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1999.
30. Westbrook R. Action research: a new paradigm for research in production and operations management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 1995; 15, 12: 6-20.

Uwagi

Opracowanie ze środków MNiSW w ramach umowy 812/P-DUN/2016 na działalność upowszechniającą naukę.

Typ dokumentu

Bibliografia

Identyfikator YADDA

bwmeta1.element.baztech-0a363c6d-fd08-4408-89a7-03c1cd2e7327