In this week, we
are talking about lean manufacturing and therefore I learned a few interesting
concepts. For example, “Push” and “Pull”. "Push type" means Make to
Stock in which the production is not based on actual demand. "Pull
type" means Make To Order in which the production is based on actual
demand. Supply chain models of "Push type" and "Pull type"
are opposite in terms of a demand and supply relationship. "Push
type" is represented by "Make to Stock" (MTS) in which the
production is not based on actual demand and "Pull type" is
represented by "Make To Order" (MTO) in which the production is based
on actual demand.
As technology
increase, the supply chain management is transforming from the traditional "Push
type" to modern "Pull type". Pull-type supply chain management
is based on the demand side such as Just-in-Time (JIT) and CRP (Continuous
Replenishment Program) or actual demand assigned to later processes. Therefore,
unlike the Push-type method it is not based on demand forecast. In this way, inventory
could be kept to a minimum amount and products can be supplied with short lead
times and at high speed. [1]
Basically
in my understanding, the core idea of this new lean thinking concept is about
flexibility. It emphasis on how quick a company could react to the changeable market
and customer demand and what techniques this company could use to achieve its
goal. Especially in a high pace industry, for example, fashion this ability of
quick react is like the water to a person that could decide the company’s fate
of death.
In
an article I read online called “Zara Clothing Retail Model Based on Lean
Inventories and Market Flexibility Could Change the Future of Manufacturing”,
the author points out that with shorter lead times,
Zara can ship fewer pieces, in a greater variety of styles, more often and they
can more easily cancel lines that don't sell as well, avoiding inventory
backlogs. The fact is because Zara only takes less than two weeks for a skirt
to get from Zara's design team in Spain to a Zara store in Qatar or Paris or
Tokyo, as much as 12 times faster than the competitors, who are dealing with a
complex global network just to make a simple shirt, in a process that could
take up to eight months from the design stage to the store. [2]
However,
in management, loose in one side means tight on the other. The success of Zara
is due to their strict controlling on all the steps of manufacturing clothes:
from design to fabric to manufacturing, distribution and sales so that they can
cut costs and make huge gains in speed and flexibility.
Similar
to Toyota’s case, Zara also has a rule to require all work to be highly specified
as to content, sequence, timing and outcome. For instance, each of the sale person and manager in every store is
required to constantly talking to its customers and listening to their feedback.
[3] They need to zap orders on
customized handheld computers over the Internet to Zara headquarters based on
what they see selling. What is more, they draw upon customer comments, or even
their idea of new styles that a customer might like to wear or could be copied
to Zara’s stores. While
stores provide valuable front-line data, headquarters plays a major role in
directing instore operations. Software is used to schedule staff based on each
store’s forecasted sales volume, with locations staffing up, say at peak times
such as lunch or early evening. The firm claims these more flexible schedules
have shaved staff work hours by two percent. This constant refinement of
operations throughout the firm’s value chain has helped reverse a prior trend
of costs rising faster than sales. [4]
Nevertheless, it
is said that freedom never comes free in this high competitive society. Other
costs will be gained to meet this need. For example, Zara need to invest on its
technology to achieve this quick point-to-point communication. The question for
a company to consider when they trying to choose their strategy is whether the
benefits outweigh additional cost and reform risks? After all, the lead
manufactory may not be suitable for everyone. What kind of companies or
industries do you think that are not suitable then? Can you think of any?
[1] Imaoka,
Zenjiro. "Understand Supply Chain Management through 100 Word." Push-Pull
Manufacturing.
KOUGYOUCHOUSAKAI. Web. 21 Feb. 2012.
<http://www.lean-manufacturing-japan.com/scm-terminology/push-pull-manufacturing.html>.
[2] "Zara Clothing
Retail Model Based on Lean Inventories and Market Flexibility Could Change the
Future of Manufacturing." AllBusiness.com. Dun & Bradstreet.
Web. 21 Feb. 2012.
<http://www.allbusiness.com/construction/4266194-1.html>.
[3] Ho, Matthew.
"Lean Fashion—Zara." 25 Apr. 2011. Web. 21 Feb. 2012.
<http://inspiredworlds.com/2011/04/25/lean-fashion-zara/>.
[4] Devangshu, Dutta. "Retail @the Spend of
Fashion." Third Eye Sight, 2002.
Web. 31 Jan. 2012. <http://thirdeyesight.in/articles/ImagesFashion_Zara_Part_I.pdf>
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.