English Version / TPM Concepts and Literature Review / Definition

Definition of TPM

The TPM literature offers a number of definitions for Total Productive Maintenance.

“TPM is the general movement on the part of businesses to try to do morewith less.” (Lawrence 1999 p. 63)
TPM is “an integrated life-cycle approach to factory maintenance andsupport”. (Blanchard 1997 p. 72)
TPM is a program that “addresses equipment maintenance through a comprehensive productive-maintenance delivery system covering theentire life of the equipment and involving all employees from production and maintenance personnel to top management”. (McKone, Schroeder etal. 1999 p. 123)
TPM is “a way of working together to improve equipment effectiveness”.(Society_of_Manufacturing_Engineers 1995 p. vii)
“TPM is a methodology and philosophy of strategic equipment management focused on the goal of building product quality by maximizing equipment effectiveness. It embraces the concept of continuous improvement and total participation by all employees and byall departments.” (Society_of_Manufacturing_Engineers 1995 p. ix)
“TPM is a production-driven improvement methodology that is designed to optimize equipment reliability and ensure efficient management of plant assets.” (Robinson and Ginder 1995 p. 5)
“TPM is a method for bringing about change. It is a set of structured activities that can lead to improved management of plant assets when properly performed by individuals and teams.” (Robinson and Ginder 1995 p. 2)
TPM is intended to “bring both functions (production and maintenance) together by a combination of good working practices, team working, and continuous improvement.” (Cooke 2000 p. 1003)
TPM is “all of the strategies needed to sustain a healthy maintenance log.”(Steinbacher and Steinbacher 1993)

TPM literature indicates that two main approaches to defining TPM exist, the Western Approach and the Japanese Approach (Bamber, Sharp et al. 1999), with significant commonality within the two. Bamber (Bamber, Sharp et al. 1999) in particular describes the Japanese school of thought represented by Nakajima (Nakajima 1984; Nakajima 1989), Tajiri and Gotoh (Tajiri and Gotoh 1992) and Shirose (Shirose 1996) and the Western approach represented by Willmott (Willmott1994), Wireman (Wireman 1991) and Hartmann (Hartmann 1992). The Japanese Institute of Plant Maintenance (JIPM) promotes the Japanese approach. Siiechi Nakajima is a vice chairman of JIPM and is considered to be the father of TPM. Nakajima’s Japanese definition of TPM is characterized by 5 key elements.(Nakajima 1984)
1. TPM aims to maximize equipment effectiveness.
2. TPM establishes a thorough system of Preventive Maintenance (PM) for the equipment’s entire life span.
3. TPM is cross-functional, implemented by various departments (engineering,operators, maintenance, managers).
4. TPM involves every single employee.
5. TPM is based on the promotion of Preventive Maintenance through themotivation of management and autonomous Small Group Activity (SGA).

Shirose offers a very similar definition for TPM. (Shirose 1996)
1. TPM strives for maximum equipment effectiveness.
2. TPM establishes a total system of Preventive Maintenance for the entire life ofthe equipment.
3. TPM includes participation by all sectors of the organization that plan, use,and maintain equipment.
4. TPM participation is from top management to the frontline staff.
5. Execution of TPM is based on Small Group Activity.

The Western approach is closely tied to the Japanese approach. Willmott, for instance, acknowledges the Nakajima definition (Japanese Approach) but offers his own definition that is based on teamwork but does not necessarily require total employee participation. He places the emphasis on the use of teams to achieve specific operational goals. “The philosophy at the heart of the TPM process is that allthe assets on which production depends are kept always in optimum condition and available for maximum output.” (Willmott 1994 p. 2) Hartmann presents a similar definition to Willmott and says, “Total Productive Maintenance permanently improves the overall effectiveness of equipment with the active involvement of operators.” (Hartmann 1992 p. 15)

The differences in the Japanese and Western approach to defining TPM are subtle, with commonality highlighted more than significant variation. The Japanese approach emphasizes the role of teamwork, small group activities and the participation of all employees in the TPM process to accomplish equipment improvement objectives. The Western approach focuses on the equipment while understanding that operator involvement and participation in the TPM effort isrequired. While very similar, the Japanese approach seems to be more people and process focused while the Western definition approaches first from equipment improvement objectives, “which moves the emphasis away from both maintenance and teamwork and towards equipment management and utilization with operator participation.” (Bamber, Sharp et al. 1999 p. 165) V. A. Ames, former TPM Program Manager for SEMATECH, offers an interesting observation related to differences in the Japanese and Western approaches to TPM. “After observing JIPM consultants in Japan and the U.S., as well as attending a TPM Prize audit, I believe that the Japanese are just as focused directly on the results as the Western approach is.” (Ames 2003)He suggests that although there is very little real difference in the approaches, The Western definition emphasizes on results as a marketing, or selling, tool to gain the interest of Western managers.

In 1989, the Japanese Institute of Plant Maintenance (JIPM) acknowledged the emerging trend to widen the scope of TPM activity from a singular focus one equipment to a broader application towards company-wide productivity. JIPM currently defines TPM as follows.

“TPM aims at:
1. Establishing a corporate culture that will maximize production system effectiveness.
2. Organizing a practical shop-floor system to prevent losses before they occur throughout the entire production system life cycle, with a view to achieving zero accidents, zero defects and zero breakdowns.
3. Involving all the functions of an organization including production, development, sales and management.
4. Achieving zero losses through the activities of ‘overlapping smallgroups’.” (Japan_Institute_of_Plant_Maintenance 1996)

I do not find sufficient conflict between the Japanese and Western definitionsof TPM to warrant further discussion of two models of TPM implementation. As will be discussed later in this paper, some degree of process adaptation and customization will always be required to implement TPM (or any other continuous program for thatmatter) for each implementer’s site and operating environment. The following definition will be used to describe Total Productive Manufacturing (Maintenance) through the remainder of this paper. Total Productive Manufacturing is a structured equipment-centric continuous improvement process that strives to optimize production effectiveness by identifying and eliminating equipment and production efficiency losses throughout the production system life cycle through active team based participation of employees across all levels of the operational hierarchy.

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