| Abstract | Definition | Benefit | History | Concept | Success | Barriers | Future | Conclusion | Bibliography | Author |                | Home | English | Thai

Barriers and Obstacles to Successful TPM Implementation

Elliot presents eleven general barriers to achieving manufacturing excellence that might well summarize many of the barriers to successful TPM implementation. (Elliott 2001) As expected, many of the barriers align closely with the success factors for successful TPM implementation; that is to say, successful implementers leverage the success factors to overcome the obstacles and barriers. 

1. Underestimating the task.

”Excellence requires a total commitment to process capability, variationreduction, and creation of a benchmark employee knowledge base.”(Elliott 2001 p. 7)

2. Lack of management consensus.

3. Under estimating the importance of knowledge.

”Often, managers believe that the only missing performance ingredient is effort.” (Elliott 2001 p. 8) Documenting and proliferating knowledge and learning was discussed in the previous section on success criteria for TPM implementation.

4. Complexity strangles performance.

Complexity “is the single greatest deterrent to performance excellence”.(Elliott 2001 p. 8) Following a proven standard implementation strategy and process reduces the complexity and the unknown.

5. Inconsistent and unclear expectations.

a. Objectives that create organizational conflicts.
b. The use of generalized or concept objectives without specific, measurable, activity-driven performance goals.

6. The challenge of passion.

”Excellence is the most difficult of all business or personal objectives to define and achieve. It requires an uncompromising passion to excel. ” (Elliott 2001 p. 8) Note the consistency with Nakajima’s passion for zerofail/zero-quality loss/zero-accident. As Hall states bluntly, "TPM is drivenby a few passionate maniacs on a mission!" (Hall 2003)

7. Staffs that take charge. (Staff objectives not consistent and aligned with organizational performance goals.)

8. Neglecting the basics.

”Without a focused organizational commitment to the basics of variation reduction, service, cost, and safety, there is no foundation on which tobuild a successful strategic plan.” (Elliott 2001 p. 8)

9. Resistance to daily discipline.

10. Limited involvement experience. (Total organizational commitment to address short falls in individual and organizational knowledge and improvement process experience.)

11. Too much focus on output measures rather than the quality of the process input.

Like success criteria, TPM literature identifies numerous barriers to successful implementation, many of which have been identified within Elliot’s barriers to manufacturing excellence. Some additional barriers to TPM implementation that must be addressed include the following.*

• Implementing to a rigid schedule regardless of results. (Ames 2003; Gardner2003; Tan, Hoh et al. 2003; Thomas 2003)

This is really two-faced barrier. The first concern is establishing unrealisticimplementation schedules, whether due to ignorance or lack of experience.Management pressure for quick wins versus a long- term commitment toimprovement is also noted. “Generally speaking, most managers tend to be very impatient”. (Tan, Hoh et al. 2003 p. 3) The second concern is not altering the schedule once it is obviously not appropriate.


• Deploying insufficient resources for successful implementation. (Ames 2003;Gardner 2003; Thomas 2003)

”Traditional JIPM [TPM] processes consume significant resources at a time when corporations are trying to run as lean as possible…many companies…are trying to understand where short-cuts can be taken to gain‘quick wins’ and utilize fewer resources. Some of these same companies alsopoint to the underlying principles of Theory of Constraints and have only implemented TPM concepts on constraint tool sets.” (Thomas 2003 p. 5)

Ames considers resources, “…taking the time and providing the resources [people]”, the most critical barrier to TPM implementation. (Ames 2003 p. 4)Until TPM becomes a way of doing business, implementation is an additional burden on the change implementers.

Gardner notes that it is a requirement of management to “consciously loadlevel the organization so that TPM does not overburden your top people.”(Gardner 2003 p. 2)

Shingo, on the other hand, presents an important reminder when identifying the lack of resources to be a reason for implementation failure when he says that lack of resources may be a lack or resourcefulness. (Shingo 1982)

• Resistance to change.

Resistance to change takes a number of forms.
o Reluctance of individuals to change roles. (Robinson and Ginder1995; Riis, Luxhoj et al. 1997; Cooke 2000)
o Inability to create dissatisfaction with the present situation (reason tochange). (Maggard and Rhyne 1992; Steinbacher and Steinbacher1993; Ireland and Dale 2001)

”The most difficult aspect of implementing TPM is to get every one inthe organization to recognize the need for change and to commit themselves.” (Steinbacher and Steinbacher 1993 p. 47)

o Inability to change organizational roles and culture. (Patterson andFredendall 1995; Lawrence 1999; Cooke 2000; Thomas 2003)

The organization’s ability to understand the restraining and driving forces** related to this resistance to change is critical to overcoming the barrier. (Bamber, Sharp et al. 1999)

• 
  Recognizing the benefits of TPM implementation. (Sekine and Arai 1992;Robinson and Ginder 1995; Cooke 2000; Tan, Hoh et al. 2003)

For TPM to be successful, “the improvement process must be recognized as benefiting both the company and the worker.” (Robinson and Ginder 1995 p.xvi)

”A common reason for the operator’s resistance to the idea of TPM is its perceived unfairness and one-sidedness. For the majority of production people interviewed, having a role in the first line maintenance means doing more work but without any more money.” (Cooke 2000 p. 1013)

• TPM presented as ‘the program of the month’.

”TPM is a long-term strategic initiative rather than a short-term tactical fix. It will fail if a ‘program of the month’ mentality exists.” (Robinson and Ginder1995 p. 7)

”For the most part, participants talked about TPM as a long-term process, not a quick fix for today’s problems. This seems to be an important attitude to hold, because results are not immediate or even quick. To see the full benefits of TPM, it appears that organizations need to make a continued commitment to the possibilities and philosophy espoused by TPM methodology.”*** (Horner1996 p. 9)

• 
  TPM implementation is dependent on continued engagement of one or too few specific individuals.

”Winning requires an institutionalized management proof process that is sustainable despite changes in leadership, strategy, and business conditions…”(Elliott 2001 p. 7)


• Implementing a ‘look at us’ TPM campaign. (Superficial implementation to impress auditors or customers without true commitment to the TPM goals ofzero-failures, zero-quality losses, zero-accidents.) (Sekine and Arai 1992)
  
  
• Lack of analysis capability. (OEE and equipment performance) (Patterson and Fredendall 1995)

[Original: Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) Concepts and Literature Review by Thomas R. Pomorski, Principal Consulting Engineer, Brooks Automation, Inc.]

* Again, this is not an all-inclusive list of barriers to TPM implementation, but does represent themes that are presented in the TPM literature.

** For a detailed discussion of restraining and driving forces (field-force analysis) see Pomorski, T.(2002). Change Management for Organizational Continuous Improvement: Literature Review. Cincinnati, OH, The Union Institute and University.

*** Other TPM researchers concur that TPM is a long-term process, but would argue that some immediate results and quick fixes are possible, and are in fact commonly achieved.