CHAPTER - I

INTRODUCTION
1.1 ABOUT THE STUDY Competency is the vital behavioral skills, knowledge and personal attributes that are translations of organizational capabilities and are deemed essential for success. They distinguish exemplary performers for adequate performers. A Competency is an underlying characteristic of a person which enables him/her to deliver superior performance in a given job, role or a situation. DEFINITION: Competencies are generic knowledge motive, trait, social role or a skill of a person linked to superior performance on the job. Hayes (1979)

Competencies are personal characteristics that contribute to effective managerial performance. Albanese (1989)

A Competency is a set of skills, related knowledge and attributes that allow an individual to successfully perform a task or an activity within a specific function or job. - Unido (2002) Types of Competency Characteristics: Motives, Traits, 1

 Self-concept, Knowledge, Skill. COMPETENCY MAPPING: Competency mapping involves the determination of the extent to which the person possesses the various competencies related to the job. Benefits of Competency Mapping: Hiring the best available people, Productivity Maximization, Enhancing the 360 degree feedback process, Adapting to change, Aligning behavior with organizational strategies and values. LEAN SYSTEMS: Lean manufacturing is the systematic elimination of wastes and the operations systems that maximize the value added of each of their activities. Characteristics: Pull method of work flow, Consistent quality, Small lot sizes, Uniform work station loads, Standardized components and work methods, Close supplier ties,

 Flexible work force, Line flows, Preventive maintenance. Operational benefits of lean systems: Reduce space requirements, Reduce inventory investment in purchased parts, raw materials, work-inprocess and clerical staff, Increase the productivity of direct-labor employees, indirect-support employees and clerical staff, Reduce lead times. Increase equipment utilization, Reduce paper work and require only simple planning systems, Set valid priorities for scheduling, Encourage participation by the workforce, Increase service or product quality.

1.2 INDUSTRY PROFILE:

The Indian textile industry is one of the largest segments of Indian economy accounting for over one fifth of the industrial production. The winds of the change hall have transformed a traditional art to a modern industry, employing state of the art technology and providing employment state of the art of the technology and providing employment to around fifteen million people. This combination of traditional art and contemporary design has produce a variety of yarn, fabric, home textiles and other textile products sought after the world war. India is amongst the worlds largest reservoir of the population fiber. In addition the 80 add cotton varieties of different description being grown in India enables the industries produce covers almost every conceivable count and construction of fabric in width of choice. The Indian textile is an aggregate of Rs. 140 billion clothing industry, Rs. 788 billion finished fabrics products industry, Rs.92 billion textile industry and Rs. 29 billion house hold textile products industry. It provides employment of around 35 billion people making. It is Indias second largest employer after agriculture sector. The textile industry occupies a vital place in the Indian economy and contributes substantially to its export earnings. It has a high weight of over 30% in the national population. World over, the Indian textile industry is considered as the second largest industry. It has the biggest cotton average of 9 million hectares and is considered as the third largest producer of this fiber. In terms of staple fiber

production it comes fourth and sixth for filament yarn production. The country reports about one fourth of global trade in cotton yarn. Today, Indian industry is extremely fragmented. In the organized spinning sector there are nearly 2300 players with 280 composite. There are 1000 weaving units and around 1, 45,000 independent processing units and innumerable garment makers. The position of machinery technology is not well apart from the spinning sector. Nearly 100000 modern shuttles less looms are needed to set up and to satisfy the target by 2010. In the either part of the decade the growth of textile engineering industry was hampered due to lack of automation. However, the technology for automation of textile machinery has improved immensely leading to development of indigenous machines comparable to those manufactured in industrially advanced countries. Substantial and sustained efforts to strengthen indigenous technology were made and today the major manufacturers supply modern machines. Most of the largest technologies in automation are concentrating largely on making the new version more flexible, energy efficient and perfect through use of microprocessors and computers.

1.3 COMPANY PROFILE LAKSHMI MACHINE WORKS LIMITED (LMW) Founded by cavalier Dr. G.K.Devarajulu, a legend in his life time. GKD as he was affectionately was a colossus who had lived to see that the Indian industry was firmly entrenched on the industrial map of the world. In fact, it is widely believed that the emergence of Coimbatore as on industrial city is largely on account of his effort. As a standard bearer for industry and as a global player LMW quantifies the extent of industrial progress in India. LMW is one of the largest textile manufacturers in the world and one of the 3 to manufacture the entire range of spinning machinery. LMW is also the largest manufacturers of Ring frames globally, with 12 million spindles in operation. LMW adopts flexible manufacturing concepts in the production of its measures. It has separate units for producing Blow rooms preparatory machines, Spindles and Ring top Rollers, Ring frames and Jockey Pulley Bearings. LMWs well-organized manufacturing are spread over three units in and around Coimbatore. LMWs Unit-I in periyanaickenpalayam 20kms from Coimbatore is setup in a sprawling complex with an area of 122 acres of land. This is where the company has its major activity for manufacturing the complex range of spinning systems from bale to yarn, except ring spinning frames for which there is an

exclusive machinery facility at kaniyur, 24kms from Coimbatore in an area of 5.1 acres of land. LMW meets over 60% of demand in India alone. LMWs Affiliate companies:

Lakshmi Ring Travelers (Coimbatore) Ltd Lakshmi Electrical Control Systems Ltd Lakshmi Precise Tools Ltd Super Sales Agencies Ltd Lakshmi Textile Exporters Ltd SISCOL Adwaith steels LEDL Lakshmi Automatic Looms

LMW Vision: To enhance customer satisfaction and our image globally and achieve exponential growth to leadership through world class products and services. LMW Mission:

To deliver greater values to our customer by providing complete competitive solutions through technological leadership manufacturing excellence that is responsive to dynamic marked needs.

Quality Policy: To establish global presence in spinning systems by providing quality services and STATE OF THE ART machinery that enhance value on customer satisfaction through company wide efforts in continual improvement of people, systems, processes, technology and practices. Environmental Policy: LMW shall strive to achieve environment excellence through:

Compliance with applicable and legislative and other requirements and go beyond compliance to good practice and environment management.

Periodic reviews of its environment performance minimizing the environmental impacts, while achieving its business objectives.

Protection of air, water, land and bio-diversity and engaging with the community and business associates environmental issue of mutual interests.

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

Human Resource Mission Statement: Every human being has a potential. Our mission is to develop and lead employees for managing change by avoiding conflicts for growth of the organization as well as the individual.

HR Function: a) Human resource development, b) Quality management, c) Performance management system, d) Recruitment and selection, e) General office administration. f) Training and development, g) Business strategies, h) Joint ventures support. Human Resource Development: We have optimized organizations structure with an on-going review for assessment of effectiveness. The initiatives are as under;

To keep reduced level within organizational structure.

Promote greater involvement and team work employees. Established effective communication. Established effective HR system. Providing learning environment training and development.

Organizational Values: We believe in certain values that we live by and practice at all times. With this in mind, we set out the basic values for company. All employees are required to read, understand & abide by these values would be these values would be dealt with severally. 1. Integrity 2. Caring 3. Leadership 4. Performance 5. Quality 6. Co-operation 7. Confidentiality 8. Customers & Suppliers 9. Employees. Training: After placement the staffs is not left free. As the technology advances the staff are trained and retained because manpower is of significant important. Performance Appraisal: A periodic evaluation of managerial merit and performance is done. This shows area of improvement in the works and focuses attention on the weak spot. There are four patterns in performance appraisal. 180 degree performance appraisal if followed in LMW (Reviewer appraisal).

10

Motivation Techniques: Besides a good salary staffs are given bonus, etc., They are given timely promotion and career advancement. They got 7% share of net profit. There is a good relation exists between staffs.

Training and Development: Customer Training: It has setup world class training centre. To gain profound technical knowledge for a specialist in a spinning mill personnel at all levels. It is a comprehensive training programme for improving their operation technical and managerial skills. Training & Awareness: Periodic training for workers and staffs more emphasis is given on 5-S House-keeping to prevent accident and enhance good hue keeping. Suggestions scheme introduced to workers. Safety awareness program called SAFETY WALK is organized regularly. Articles on safety are regularly published in house magazine LAKSHMI safety week is celebrated every year on 4th march. Milestones of LMW: 1962: An agreement of collaboration between LMW and RIETER MACHINE WORKS LTD signed at Winterthur, Switzerland on 27 th April, 1962 set in motion

11

CAVALIER G.K.DEVARAJULUs plan to make India truly self reliant in textile machinery.

1968: Foundry A modern, mechanism foundry designed and executed jointly by FRIED KRUPP and RIETER MACHINE WORKS, provided basic requirement castings to international quality standards. LTE LMW setup Lakshmi Textile Exporters Limited (LTE) to offer consultancy, project engineering services to executed turnkey projects ad expand global trading activities. 1974: LRT With collaboration of M/S WALTER BRACKER of Switzerland, Lakshmi Ring Travelers (Coimbatore) was setup at Hosur, to cater to the demand of spinning mills for quality and high speed ring travelers. 1977: Exports

12

In 1977 LMW introduced the world to Indian Excellence in engineering. The year ended with exports totaling Rs.2.3 crores. The figure today continues to spiral thanks to export revenues from Indonesia, Thailand, Tanzania, Kenya, Sudan, Egypt and Sri Lanka. 1980: It was the product moment yet when LMW dispatched a machine to the Switzerland home of its collaboration RIETER MACHINE WORKS LTD. 1981: LPT LMW absorbed a dedicated tool making unit at Chennai and shifted it to Arasur, a suburb of Coimbatore. Lakshmi Precise Tools Ltd supports the manufacturing programme with quality tools and fixtures tool holders are manufactured in collaboration with SANDVICC AB of Sweden. 1983: Unit-II LMWs second manufacturing complex commenced operations at Kaniyur near Coimbatore. The modern plant boasts the latest machines and a high degree of automation. LECS Electrical controls are the critical components in a textile machine. LMW collaborated with sprecher schuh of Switzerland to manufacture compact precision tools at a dedicated facility. 1988:

13

MTD LMWs Machine Tool Division is a showcase for STATE-OF-THE-ART manufacturing facilities in India. The first major diversification, the Machine Tool Division was setup in the collaboration with the world leaders MORI SEIK COMPANY LTD, of Japan to usher in CNC Machine Tools.

1991: Administrative Office: The Administrative Office was established at periyanaickenpalayam. This two storeyed edifice function as the nerve centre of the group. The factory complex at Unit-I, where it all started, is complemented by the modern structure of the administrative office. Surrounded by manicured lawns, the building was set over an area of 10,000sq.ft houses at the offices of the managing director and commercial administration and information technology departments. 1992: CNC Systems Advanced CNC control systems are manufactured in collaboration with NUOVA-OSAL, an affiliate of Allen Bradley, USA at a dedicated facility at LECS, making a significant entry in the sphere of electronics. 1993: New foundry

14

A most modern, computerized foundry with a capacity of 12,000 tonnes per annum meets domestic and international needs for machine tools automobile and other engineering industries. Trading Centre Opened in 1993 the R&D cum training center provides a solid foundation for LMW customers.

Quality Assurance Quality is LMWs most visible asset and its greatest contribution to industry at large. Because of continues program of quality and improvement, al around up graduation of quality has been possible. The end result is most gratifying when you gauge the remarkable improvement in quality of finished yarns and finished goods. Awards to Company LMWs commitment of quality standards has won laurels and awards The company standardization award in 1985 from the institute of standards engineers recognizes LMWs concern for improving quality standards, increases productivity and reducing costs. Engineering export promotion council regional Top Exporter Shield for the year 1988-89 presented by SHRI. SURJITH SINGH BARNALA then chief minister of Punjab.

15

The ET-HBSAI award presented by DR. MANMOHAN SINGH then the Union minister.

Award for EXPORT EXCELLENCE presented by SHRI. P.CHIDAMBARAM then the minister of state of commerce [1990-91]

Federation of Indian Textile Engineering Industry TOP EXPORTER award for [1990-91] presented by

SHRI.P.CHIDAMBARAM then minister of state of commerce. LMW received prestigious All India Export Award Top Exporter for the year 2005 2006- Gold Trophy (Medium Enterprise) from Engineering Export Promotion Council, Kolkata in the function held at New Delhi on 1st June 2007. ICWAI National Award for Excellence in Cost Management 2007. This Award is given for companies practicing Best Costing Practices in India. Many top companies participated for this award at National Level and LMW bagged the First prize under Private Sector Manufacturing & Turnover over 1000 crores Category. Last year LMW won the Second prize under the same category.

16

ORGANIZATION CHART CMD

WHOLE TIME DIRECTOR

CFO

TMD

QA

R&D

SALES / MARKETING/ CSD

FOUNDRY

MTD

SCM

HRD

PERSONNEL

FINANCE

IT

17

Existing Competencies in the company: Group A For grade 06 & above (Executives) Group B For grade 07 to 09 (Technical Staff) Group C For grade 07 to 09 (Office Management staff) S.No 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. COMPETENCIES KNOWLEDGE LEADERSHIP PEOPLE MANAGEMENT PLANNING & ORGANISING TEAMWORK THINKING SKILLS QUALITY / COST CONSCIOUSNESS INNOVATION/CREATIVITY CUSTOMER ORIENTATION INFLUENCING ACHIEVEMENT ORIENTATION THOROUGHNESS RISK TAKING GROUP A GROUP B GROUP C

18

CHAPTER II

MAIN THEME OF THE PROJECT

2.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The specific objectives of this study are: To find out core competencies used in the organization to implement lean concepts in manufacturing. To study on expectancies of competencies for the project leaders and managers. To derive the set of competencies required to perform the job of the managers.

19

2.2 SCOPE OF THE STUDY:

(1) TO THE RESEARCHER: The scope is to understand the method of competency mapping. The assessment of competencies will be useful in identifying the potentials needed in implementing lean manufacturing in an organization. (2) TO THE ORGANIZATION: It creates a platform to derive set of competencies required in value stream managers for effective implementation of lean manufacturing. (3) TO THE RESPONDENTS: It is possible for the respondents to improve their behavior and skills of people and strengthen inherent capabilities by an organized and structured approach.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY:

The following are certain limitation the researcher has faced while doing this research or study.

The study was limited to employees of Lakshmi Machine Works (Unit I).

Inadequacy of time is the main limitation of the study. Almost all respondents are met personally at their working place some of them are reluctant to response.

20

The accuracy and reliability of the research is based on the consistency in the response of the respondents.

2.3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

2.3.1 STATEMENT OF RESEARCH PROBLEM The selection of research problem is an important and primary work in research. It is not an easy task. To formulate a research problem creative and imaginative thinking is necessary. The researcher chooses to study the competency assessment of the workers as the organization is implementing lean manufacturing at their work place and there are certain competencies necessary for their value stream managers and project leaders for effective implementation.

2.3.2 PILOT STUDY Pilot study is a small replica of the main study. It is the rehearsal of the main study. The researcher conducted a pilot study along the lines given in the objectives of the study. This was helpful to have some basic information about the topic. The selected topic was also discussed with HR Manager, experts, and the guide. And from this the researcher could get some idea about the universe which, in turn helped to formulate and prepare a suitable questionnaire. The questionnaire was circulated to about 6 members and got suggestions and then the questionnaire was reframed and data were collected.

21

2.3.3 SELECTION OF RESEARCH DESIGN The present study aims at analyzing detailed factors pertaining to competency assessment in implementation of lean manufacturing. Hence descriptive design has been chosen by the researcher. The researcher has chosen this descriptive study because it helps her to investigate in greater details on to the matter pertaining to competencies of the managers in Lakshmi Machine Works Limited.

2.3.4 METHOD OF SAMPLING Sampling is a process of selecting or representative part of the universe. There are different methods to select a sample from the universe. The universe in this study is the value stream managers and project leaders of lean implementation in LMW Limited, Coimbatore. The total work force of the company is 1500; these workers are taken as the universe.

2.3.5 SAMPLING The sample size includes 100 managers. These 100 respondents are selected through a convenience sampling. Thus the total number of sample is 100.

22

2.3.6 CONSTRUCTION OF TOOLS The researcher has chosen the questionnaire method as the tool of data collection from among various tools in social research. The type of questionnaire selected for this study is a structured one and the respondents were requested to answer the questions. Since the respondents are managers, the researcher preferred the questionnaire method as a tool. The questionnaire was constructed based on the pilot study. It is constituted of the following area: General information, Competencies assessment includes various competencies like Knowledge, Leadership, Planning,

Interpersonal Relations, Thinking skills, Innovation / Creativity, Integrity / Honesty, Accountability, Citizenship, Decisiveness, Influencing, Attitude Managing and change,

Organizational Orientation.

Communication,

Achievement

2.3.7 SOURCES OF DATA Data Collection is one of the important as well as indicative steps in the research study. Data here refers facts and useful information regarding to the study. The researcher have collected two kinds of data from different source viz., Primary data Secondary data

23

Primary data means the fresh information (or) facts collected from the resources. This data are used to analyze a particular study (or) research. The primary data has been normally collected by Questionnaire, Interview and so on. Secondary data means, the data or information are collected by someone, for some purpose, and we can use it for a study also, such as, Book reviews, Internet sources, newspaper information, Research Journals etc. Those studies and records available related to the current study.

2.3.8 ANALYSIS OF DATA The data were analyzed using the following tools; (i) Simple percentage analysis, (ii) Charts Pie charts, Bar charts, Cone charts, Cylinder charts, Column charts, Doughnut charts.

(iii) Weighted Average Method, (iv) Chi-square Test.

24

2.4 REVIEW OF LITERATURE:

Leading change through Human Resources C.Balaji, S.Chandrasekhar, Rajan Dutta Competencies are seen as job related: What the job requires you to be good at: for instance, planning, organizing, controlling, decision-making, ets., Competencies, on the other hand, are seen as part of the individuals personality: what the individual is good at for instance, leadership, self-awareness, flexibility, communication, stress-tolerance, empathy, etc., the organizational efforts need to be focused not only on establishing norms for competences and helping people to rise to the expected levels, but the thrusts also has to be on helping the individuals to develop their competencies.

25

CHAPTER III

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

COMPETENCIES ASSESSMENT: KNOWLEDGE:
The following table represents the knowledge of the respondents in lean concept.

Table 3.1
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 65 20 15 0 0 100 Percentage 65 20 15 0 0 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.1 65.00% of the respondents are excellent, 20% are very good and 15% are good in knowledge in lean manufacturing.

26

Fig 3.1
70 60 50 Percentage 40 30 20 10 0 Knowledge 20 15 Excellent Very Good Good 65

27

LEADERSHIP:
The following table represents the leadership qualities of the respondents in lean concept.

Table 3.2
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 28 42 11 14 5 100 Percentage 28 42 11 14 5 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.2, 28% of the respondents are excellent, 42% are very good, 11% are good, 14% are satisfactory and 5% are unsatisfactory in taking lead in responsible risk taking in developing lean.

28

Fig 3.2

5% 14% 28% Excellent Very Good 11% Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

42%

29

Table 3.3
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 13 37 26 16 8 100 Percentage 13 37 26 16 8 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.3 13% of the respondents are excellent, 37% are very good, 26% are good, 16% are satisfactory and 8% are unsatisfactory in encouraging employees in building lean programs.

30

Fig 3.3

8% 16%

13%

Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory 37% Unsatisfactory

26%

PLANNING:
The following table represents the percentage of respondents making plans regarding lean concept.

31

Table 3.4
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 6 27 30 23 14 100 Percentage 6 27 30 23 14 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.4, 6% of the respondents are excellent, 27% are very good, 30% are good, 23% are satisfactory and 14% are unsatisfactory in planning about the expectations of lean.

32

Fig 3.4
30 27 23

30 25 20 15 10 6 5 0 Excellent

14

Very Good

Good

Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

33

INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS:
The following table represents the interpersonal relation between the employees in lean manufacturing.

Table 3.5
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 83 17 0 0 0 100 Percentage 83 17 0 0 0 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.5, 83% of the respondents are excellent, 17% are very good in interpersonal relationship in lean manufacturing.

34

Fig 3.5

100 80 60

17

Very Good 83 Excellent

40 20 0

THINKING SKILLS:
PROBLEM SOLVING: The following table represents the problem solving qualities of the project leaders and value stream manages in lean manufacturing.

35

Table 3.6
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 8 18 10 54 10 100 Percentage 8 18 10 54 10 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.6, 8% of the respondents are excellent, 18% are very good, 10% are good, 54% are satisfactory and 14% are unsatisfactory in acting as a trouble shooter in lean implementation problems.

36

Fig 3.6
60 50 40 30 20 10 0

54
Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory

18 8 10 10

Unsatisfactory

ANALYTICAL SKILLS: The following table represents the percentage of analytical skills of the respondents.

37

Table 3.7
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 6 74 4 12 4 100 Percentage 6 74 4 12 4 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.7, 6% of the respondents are excellent, 74% are very good, 4% are good, 12% are satisfactory and 4% are unsatisfactory in using relevant facts in making conclusions about lean.

38

Fig 3.7

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 6 Excellent Very Good 4 Good 12 Satisfactory 4 Unsatisfactory 74

INNOVATION / CREATIVITY:
The following table represents the creativity percentage of the respondents in lean manufacturing.

39

Table 3.8
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 6 20 6 64 4 100 Percentage 6 20 6 64 4 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.8, 6% of the respondents are excellent, 20% are very good, 6% are good, 64% are satisfactory and 4% are unsatisfactory in producing innovative ideas and proposals in lean manufacturing.

40

Fig 3.8

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 6 20

64

Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

6

41

Table 3.9
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 6 76 6 10 2 100 Percentage 6 76 6 10 2 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.9, 6% of the respondents are excellent, 76% are very good, 6% are good, 10% are satisfactory and 2% are unsatisfactory in encouraging brainstorming ideas in lean concept.

42

Fig 3.9

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Excellent 6

76

6 Very Good Good

10 2 Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

INTEGRITY / HONESTY:
The following table represents the percentage of honesty of the respondents in lean implementation.

43

Table 3.10
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 53 34 4 9 0 100 Percentage 53 34 4 64 0 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.10, 53% of the respondents are excellent, 34% are very good, 4% are good, and 9% are satisfactory in communicating honestly about lean problems with people.

44

Fig 3.10

60

50

40

Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory

30

20

10

ACCOUNTABILITY:
The following table represents the percentage of accountability of the managers in lean manufacturing.

45

Table 3.11
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 4 66 8 16 6 100 Percentage 4 66 8 16 6 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.11, 4% of the respondents are excellent, 66% are very good, 8% are good, 16% are satisfactory and 6% are unsatisfactory in accepting personal responsibility in lean implementation.

46

Fig 3.11
70 60 50 66

Percentage

40 30 20 10 0
ry d at is fa ct o at is fa ct or U ns xc el le nt G oo d G oo y

16 8 4 6

er y

DECISIVENESS:
The following table represents the decision making level of the managers in lean manufacturing.

47

Table 3.12
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 47 10 22 19 2 100 Percentage 47 10 22 19 2 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.12, 47% of the respondents are excellent, 10% are very good, 22% are good, 19% are satisfactory and 2% are unsatisfactory in making better lean decisions.

48

Fig 3.12

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

47

Excellent Very Good 22 19 Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

10 2

INFLUENCING:
The following table represents the influencing level of the managers in lean manufacturing.

49

Table 3.13
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 4 60 22 12 2 100 Percentage 4 60 22 12 2 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.13, 4% of the respondents are excellent, 60% are very good, 22% are good, 12% are satisfactory and 2% are unsatisfactory in gaining cooperation from others in making lean decisions.

50

Fig 3.13

12%

2% 4%

Excellent Very Good

22%

Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

60%

MANAGING CHANGE:
FLEXIBILITY: The following table represents the change in flexibility in lean manufacturing.

51

Table 3.14
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 17 52 10 16 5 100 Percentage 17 52 10 16 5 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.14, 17% of the respondents are excellent, 52% are very good, 10% are good, 16% are satisfactory and 16% are unsatisfactory in giving assistance to team members about changes in a timely manner.

52

Fig 3.14

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory 17 16 5

52

10

53

Table 3.15
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 8 12 10 50 20 100 Percentage 8 12 10 50 20 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.15, 8% of the respondents are excellent, 12% are very good, 10% are good, 50% are satisfactory and 20% are unsatisfactory in providing new approaches in solving the lean problems.

54

Fig 3.15

8% 20% 12% Excellent Very Good 10% Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

50%

MANAGING RESOURCES:
CONTINUAL LEARNING: The following table represents the learning capacity in change in flexibility in lean manufacturing.

55

Table 3.16
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 23 41 7 18 11 100 Percentage 23 41 7 18 11 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.16, 23% of the respondents are excellent, 41% are very good, 7% are good, 18% are satisfactory and 11% are unsatisfactory in utilizing wide range about lean concept.

56

Fig 3.16

45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 23

41

Excellent Very Good Good 18 11 7 Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

LEVERAGING DIVERSITY: The following table represents the leveraging diversity of the respondents.

57

Table 3.17
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 74 16 4 3 3 100 Percentage 74 16 4 3 3 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.17, 74% of the respondents are excellent, 16% are very good, 4% are good, 3% are satisfactory and 3% are unsatisfactory in mentoring and developing employees throughout their careers.

58

Fig 3.17

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

74

16 4 Excellent Very Good Good 3 3

Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

TECHNICAL CREDIBILITY: The following table represents the technical credibility of the respondents.

59

Table 3.18
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 23 46 12 9 10 100 Percentage 23 46 12 9 10 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.18, 23% of the respondents are excellent, 46% are very good, 12% are good, 9% are satisfactory and 10% are unsatisfactory in demonstrating, maintaining and communicating details about lean manufacturing.

60

Fig 3.18

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 23

46

Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory 12 9 10

ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP:
TEAM BUILDING: The following table represents the team building capability of the managers in lean manufacturing.

61

Table 3.19
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 40 58 2 0 0 100 Percentage 40 58 2 0 0 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.19, 40% of the respondents are excellent, 58% are very good and 2% are good in recognizing that teamwork essential in accomplishing lean effectively.

62

Fig 3.19

2%

40% Excellent Very Good Good 58%

63

Table 3.20
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 22 56 4 10 8 100 Percentage 22 56 4 10 8 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.20, 22% of the respondents are excellent, 56% are very good, 4% are good, 10% are satisfactory and 8% are unsatisfactory in using cross- functional teams to increase organizational effectiveness.

64

Fig 3.20
60 50 40 30 22 20 10 0 Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory 10 4 8 56

CUSTOMER SERVICES: The following table represents the percentage of the respondents focusing on the customer services.

65

Table 3.21
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 4 26 10 58 2 100 Percentage 4 26 10 58 2 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.21, 4% of the respondents are excellent, 26% are very good, 10% are good, 58% are satisfactory and 2% are unsatisfactory in establishing and implementing customer focused lean business strategy.

66

Fig 3.21

60 50

58

Excellent 40 30 20 10 10 0 4 2 26 Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

67

Table 3.22
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 12 58 2 24 4 100 Percentage 12 58 2 24 4 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.22, 12% of the respondents are excellent, 58% are very good, 2% are good, 24% are satisfactory and 4% are unsatisfactory in using information from various sources in lean implementation.

68

Fig 3.22

4%

12%

24% Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory 2% Unsatisfactory

58%

COMMUNICATION:
The following table represents the percentage of communication of the respondents.

69

Table 3.23
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 3 34 29 27 7 100 Percentage 3 34 29 27 7 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.23, 3% of the respondents are excellent, 34% are very good, 29% are good, 27% are satisfactory and 7% are unsatisfactory in keeping abreast of policies of lean manufacturing that affect the organization.

70

Fig 3.23

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 3

34 29 27

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

ATTITUDE:
The following table represents the attitude of the respondents.

71

Table 3.24
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 6 48 8 30 8 100 Percentage 6 48 8 30 8 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.24 6% of the respondents are excellent, 48% are very good, 8% are good, 30% are satisfactory and 8% are unsatisfactory in focusing lean manufacturing issues in positive perspective.

72

Fig 3.24
60 50 40 30 30 20 10 0 6 8 8 48

x c e ll

G o o

G o

c to

a ti s fa

e ry

ACHIEVEMENT ORIENTATION:
The following table represents the percentage of achievement orientation towards job of the respondents.

73

U n

a ti sf a

c to ry

e n

ry

Table 3.25
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Opinion Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total No. of Respondents 62 16 6 12 4 100 Percentage 62 16 6 12 4 100

Interpretation
According to Table 3.25, 62% of the respondents are excellent, 16% are very good, 6% are good, 12% are satisfactory and 4% are unsatisfactory in commitment of work in goal achievement.

74

Fig 3.25

70 60 50 40 30

62

Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory 16 Unsatisfactory 12 6 4

20 10 0

75

WEIGHTED AVERAGE ON COMPETENCIES:

TABLE 3.26 S.NO 1 2 3 4 5 COMPETENCIES KNOWLEDGE LEADERSHIP PLANNING INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS THINKING SKILLS Problem Solving Analytical Skills INNOVATION / CREATIVITY INTEGRITY / HONESTY ACCOUNTABILITY DECISIVENESS INFLUENCING MANAGING CHANGE Flexibility MANAGING RESOURCES Continual Learning Leveraging Diversity Technical Credibility ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP Team Building Customer Services COMMUNICATION ATTITUDE ACHIEVEMENT ORIENTATION EXECUTIVES 4.50 3.52 2.88 4.83 2.60 3.46 3.15 4.31 3.46 3.61 3.52 2.99 3.47 4.55 3.43 4.06 3.9 2.99 3.12 4.20 RANK 3 10 19 1 20 8 14 4 13 7 11 17 12 2 9 6 16 18 15 5

6 7 8 9 10 11 12

13

14 15 16

76

INFERENCE:
In the above table, the competencies are ranked for the value stream managers and project leaders. From this we can infer that the three most critical competencies the executives in LMW are interpersonal relations, leveraging diversity and knowledge.

TABLE: 3.27

77

ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE KNOWLEDGE PROVIDED BY LMW IS SUFFICIENT

Null Hypothesis: The knowledge provided by LMW about lean manufacturing to the executives is not sufficient. Alternative Hypothesis: The knowledge provided by LMW about lean manufacturing to the executives is sufficient. Sl.No 01 02 03 Response Excellent Very good Good O E 33 33 33 O-E 32 -13 -18 [O-E]^2 1024 169 329 [O-E]^2/E 31.03 5.12 9.82

65 20 15

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = 45.97 Degrees of freedom = (n-1) =3-1 = 2 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = 45.97 Table Value Hypothesis. = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.28

78

ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES TAKE LEAD IN LEAN IMPLEMENTATION

Null Hypothesis: The Executives does not have the competency of taking lead in Lean implementation. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives have the competency of taking lead in Lean implementation. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

28 42 11 14 5

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.29 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES ENCOURAGE EMPLOYEES IN BULIDING LEAN PROGRAMS
Null Hypothesis: The Executives does not have the competency of encouraging employees in building lean programs.

79

Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives does not have the competency of encouraging employees in building lean programs. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 Response Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

13 37 26 16 8

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.30 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES PLAN IN LEAN EXPECTATION
Null Hypothesis: The plan made by the executives in lean concept is not effective. Alternative Hypothesis: The plan made by the executives in lean concept is not effective.

80

Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05

RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

E 20 20 20 20 20

O-E

[O-E]^2

[O-E]^2/E

6 27 30 23 14

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.31 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES MAINTAIN A GOOD INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP
Null Hypothesis: The Executives do not have good interpersonal relationship. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives have good interpersonal relationship among members in LMW. Sl. No RESPONSE O E O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

81

01 02

Excellent Very good

83 17

50 50

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.32 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES ACT AS A TROUBLE SHOOTER
Null Hypothesis: The Executives do not have the competency of being a trouble shooter in lean implementation problems. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives have the competency of being a trouble shooter in lean implementation problems. Sl. RESPONSE O E O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

82

No 01 02 03 04 05

Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

8 18 10 54 10

20 20 20 20 20

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.33 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES POSSESS ANALYTICAL SKILLS
Null Hypothesis: The Executives do not have the competency of using relevant facts in making conclusion about lean. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives have the competency of using relevant facts in making conclusion about lean. Sl. No 01 02 RESPONSE Excellent Very good O E 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

6 74

83

03 04 05

Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

4 12 4

20 20 20

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. : = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.34 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES ARE INNOVATIVE IN LEAN IMPLEMENTATION
Null Hypothesis: The Executives do not have the competency of producing innovative ideas and proposals in lean manufacturing. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives have the competency of producing innovative ideas and proposals in lean manufacturing. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

6 20 6 64 4
84

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. INFERENCE: = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.34 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES ENCOURAGE BRAINSTORMING IDEAS IN LEAN CONCEPT
Null Hypothesis: The Executives do not encourage brainstorming ideas in lean concepts. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives encourage brainstorming ideas in lean concept. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

6 76 6 10 2

85

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. INFERENCE: = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.36 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES ARE HONEST IN THE COMMUNICATION Null Hypothesis: The Executives are not honest in communication of lean problem with people. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives are honest in communication of lean problem with people. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory O E 25 25 25 25 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

53 34 4 9

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E =

86

Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. INFERENCE: = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.36 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES ARE ACCOUNTABLE TO THEIR OWN ISSUES Null Hypothesis: The Executives do not accept personal responsibility in their own issues. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives accept personal responsibility in their own issues. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

4 66 8 16 6

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4

87

Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. INFERENCE: = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.37 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE DECISIONS MADE BY EXECUTIVES ARE EFFECTIVE Null Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not make better lean decisions. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW make better lean decisions. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

47 10 22 19 2

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

88

INFERENCE:

TABLE: 3.38 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES GAIN COOPERATION FROM OTHERS Null Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not gain cooperation from others in making lean decisions. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not gain cooperation from others in making lean decisions. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

4 60 22 12 2

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value =

89

Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative Hypothesis. INFERENCE:

TABLE: 3.39 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES ARE FLEXIBLE TO CHANGES Null Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not give assistance to the team members about changes in a timely manner. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW give assistance to the team members about changes in a timely manner. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

17 52 10 16 5

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

90

INFERENCE:

TABLE: 3.40 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES PROVIDE NEW APPROACHES IN SOLVING LEAN PROBLEMS Null Hypothesis: The Executives do not provide new approaches in solving lean problems. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives provide new approaches in solving lean problems. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

8 12 10 50 20

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. INFERENCE: = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

91

TABLE: 3.41 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES HAVE EFFECTIVE LEARNING CAPACITY Null Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not utilizes wide range of lean concept. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW utilizes wide range of lean concept. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

23 41 7 18 11

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. INFERENCE: = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

92

TABLE: 3.42 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES LEVERAGE DIVERSITY OF EMPLOYEES Null Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not have the competency of mentoring and developing employees throughout their career. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW have the competency of mentoring and developing employees throughout their career. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

74 16 4 3 3

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. INFERENCE: = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.43

93

ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES POSSESS TECHNICAL CREDIBILITY Null Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not demonstrate, maintain and communicate details about lean manufacturing Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW demonstrate, maintain and communicate details about lean manufacturing Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

23 46 12 9 10

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. INFERENCE: = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.44 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE EXECUTIVES POSSESS TEAM BUILDING CAPABILITY

94

Null Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not have the competency of recognizing team work is essential. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW have the competency of recognizing team work is essential. Sl. No 01 02 03 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good O E 33 33 33 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

40 58 2

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. INFERENCE: = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.45 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE CROSS FUNCTIONAL TEAM IS ESSENTIAL Null Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not use cross- functional teams to increase organizational effectiveness in lean manufacturing. 95

Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW use cross- functional teams to increase organizational effectiveness in lean manufacturing. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

22 56 4 10 8

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. INFERENCE: = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.46 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE CUSTOMER SERVICES IN LMW IS EFFECTIVE Null Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not establish and implement customer focused lean business strategy. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not establish and implement customer focused lean business strategy.

96

Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05

RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

E 20 20 20 20 20

O-E

[O-E]^2

[O-E]^2/E

4 60 22 12 2

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. INFERENCE: = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.47 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE CUSTOMER SERVICES IN LMW IS EFFECTIVE Null Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not use information from various sources in lean implementation. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW use information from various sources in lean implementation.

97

Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05

RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

E 20 20 20 20 20

O-E

[O-E]^2

[O-E]^2/E

12 58 2 24 4

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. INFERENCE: = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.48 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THERE IS GOOD COMMUNICATION Null Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not keep abreast of policies of lean manufacturing that affect the organization. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW keep abreast of policies of lean manufacturing that affect the organization. Sl. No 01 RESPONSE Excellent O E 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

3
98

02 03 04 05

Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

34 29 27 7

20 20 20 20

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. INFERENCE: = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.49 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THE ATTITUDE OF EXECUTIVES IS POSITIVE Null Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW do not focus lean manufacturing issues in positive perspective. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW focus lean manufacturing issues in positive perspective. Sl. No 01 02 03 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good O E 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

6 48 8

99

04 05

Satisfactory Unsatisfactory

30 8

20 20

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E = Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

TABLE: 3.50 ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THERE IS ACHIEVEMENT ORIENTATION AMONG EXECUTIVES Null Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW are not committed towards work in goal achievement. Alternative Hypothesis: The Executives of LMW are committed towards work in goal achievement. Sl. No 01 02 03 04 05 RESPONSE Excellent Very good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory O E 20 20 20 20 20 O-E [O-E]^2 [O-E]^2/E

62 16 6 12 4

Calculated Value 2 = [O-E] ^ 2/E 100

= Degrees of freedom = (n-1) = -1 = 2 at 5% level of significance where degrees of freedom is equal to 4 Calculated Value = Table Value Hypothesis. = Since Calculated Value is greater than Table Value, Accept the Alternative

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS
COMPETENCIES ASSESSMENT:
65.00% of the respondents are excellent, 20% are very good and 15%

are good in knowledge in lean manufacturing. 28% of the respondents are excellent, 42% are very good, 11% are

good, 14% are satisfactory and 5% are unsatisfactory in taking lead in responsible risk taking in developing lean. 13% of the respondents are excellent, 37% are very good, 26% are

good, 16% are satisfactory and 8% are unsatisfactory in encouraging employees in building lean programs.

101

6% of the respondents are excellent, 27% are very good, 30% are

good, 23% are satisfactory and 14% are unsatisfactory in planning about the expectations of lean. 83% of the respondents are excellent, 17% are very good in

interpersonal relationship in lean manufacturing. 8% of the respondents are excellent, 18% are very good, 10% are

good, 54% are satisfactory and 14% are unsatisfactory in acting as a trouble shooter in lean implementation problems. 6% of the respondents are excellent, 74% are very good, 4% are good,

12% are satisfactory and 4% are unsatisfactory in using relevant facts in making conclusions about lean. 6% of the respondents are excellent, 20% are very good, 6% are good,

64% are satisfactory and 4% are unsatisfactory in producing innovative ideas and proposals in lean manufacturing. 6% of the respondents are excellent, 76% are very good, 6% are good,

10% are satisfactory and 2% are unsatisfactory in encouraging brainstorming ideas in lean concept. 53% of the respondents are excellent, 34% are very good, 4% are

good, and 9% are satisfactory in communicating honestly about lean problems with people.

102

4% of the respondents are excellent, 66% are very good, 8% are good,

16% are satisfactory and 6% are unsatisfactory in accepting personal responsibility in lean implementation.

47% of the respondents are excellent, 10% are very good, 22% are 19% are satisfactory and 2% are unsatisfactory in making better

good,

lean decisions. 4% of the respondents are excellent, 60% are very good, 22% are

good, 12% are satisfactory and 2% are unsatisfactory in gaining cooperation from others in making lean decisions. 17% of the respondents are excellent, 52% are very good, 10% are

good, 16% are satisfactory and 16% are unsatisfactory in giving assistance to team members about changes in a timely manner. 8% of the respondents are excellent, 12% are very good, 10% are

good, 50% are satisfactory and 20% are unsatisfactory in providing new approaches in solving the lean problems. 23% of the respondents are excellent, 41% are very good, 7% are

good, 18% are satisfactory and 11% are unsatisfactory in utilizing wide range about lean concept. 74% of the respondents are excellent, 16% are very good, 4% are

good, 3% are satisfactory and 3% are unsatisfactory in mentoring and developing employees throughout their careers.

103

23% of the respondents are excellent, 46% are very good, 12% are

good, 9% are satisfactory and 10% are unsatisfactory in demonstrating, maintaining and communicating details about lean manufacturing. 40% of the respondents are excellent, 58% are very good and 2% are

good in recognizing that teamwork essential in accomplishing lean effectively. 22% of the respondents are excellent, 56% are very good, 4% are

good, 10% are satisfactory and 8% are unsatisfactory in using crossfunctional teams to increase organizational effectiveness. 4% of the respondents are excellent, 26% are very good, 10% are

good, 58% are satisfactory and 2% are unsatisfactory in establishing and implementing customer focused lean business strategy. 12% of the respondents are excellent, 58% are very good, 2% are

good, 24% are satisfactory and 4% are unsatisfactory in using information from various sources in lean implementation. 3% of the respondents are excellent, 34% are very good, 29% are

good, 27% are satisfactory and 7% are unsatisfactory in keeping abreast of policies of lean manufacturing that affect the organization. 6% of the respondents are excellent, 48% are very good, 8% are good,

30% are satisfactory and 8% are unsatisfactory in focusing lean manufacturing issues in positive perspective.

104

62% of the respondents are excellent, 16% are very good, 6% are

good, 12% are satisfactory and 4% are unsatisfactory in commitment of work in goal achievement.

WEIGHTED AVERAGE ON COMPETENCIES:

The competencies are ranked for the value stream managers and project leaders. From this we can infer that the three most critical competencies the executives in LMW are interpersonal relations, leveraging diversity and knowledge.

105

CHAPTER V

RECOMMENDATIONS

The existing competencies used are very much attractive to the employees in your organization. The new set of competencies such as integrity,

accountability, decisiveness, managing change (flexibility), managing resources (continual learning, leveraging

diversity, technical credibility), Communication and Attitude. The model will be so effective if the training is given to each managers involved in Lean manufacturing. While including these competencies, it is advisable for the organization to evaluate the understanding of the

employees regarding particular competencies.

106

UNIT VI CONCLUSION
The present study on competency assessment in implementing Lean manufacturing at Lakshmi Machine Works Ltd., Coimbatore has been done by the researcher with the objective of finding set of competencies used in the organization enhance the individual and organizational performance. As a result of the study conducted, it has been found that the competencies used in the organization for implementing the lean manufacturing are attractive and challenging for the employees. Competencies such as Knowledge, Leadership and people management has high level of influence among the employees. Most of the competencies help the employee to learn and contribute to the organizational goal. Few suggestions were also given by the researcher in the areas like Some new competencies can be added in the existing model. It is effective to give training for managers in competencies to improve the efficiency of the employees. It has been a wonderful experience for the researcher to do the study on employees perception towards work environment in such a great company.

APPENDICES
107

A STUDY ON COMPETENCY ASSESSMENT IN IMPLEMENTATION OF LEAN MANUFACTURING AT LMW LTD

GENERAL INFORMATION: Name : Designation: Department: Grade Unit : :

Age & Sex: Experience: Employee No.: Division :

COMPETENCIES ASSESSMENT: 1) There is relevant professional understanding about lean manufacturing. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

2) Takes lead in responsible risk taking in developing lean innovation. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

3) Encourages employees to make innovative suggestions and to try new approaches in building lean programs. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

4) Continually balances competing and/or ill defined demands of scope, time, cost, quality, needs and expectations of lean. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

108

5) Establishes effective working relationships with the team members in implementing lean manufacturing. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

6) Act as a trouble-shooter by discovering, clarifying and eliminating causes of organizational or employee problems in line with lean implementation. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

7) Uses relevant facts, data and analytical tools to draw accurate and meaningful conclusions about lean. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

8) Produces highly imaginative and innovative ideas and proposals, which are not obvious to colleagues with lesser perspective. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

9) Encourages brainstorming, experimentation and ideas that may seem unconventional in lean concept. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

10) There is honest in communication about lean problems with people. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

11) Accepts personal responsibility, especially when things go wrong in lean implementation. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

12) Learns from past experiences to make better lean decisions in future. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

109

13) Gains cooperation from others to obtain information and accomplish goals in lean manufacturing. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

14) Assistance is given to team members in understanding, accepting and adapting to changes in a timely manner. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

15) New approaches in solving the problems. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

16) There is a utilization of wide range of learning experiences about lean concept to ensure individual and organizational competencies. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

17) Mentors and develops employees from different cultural, academic or racial background throughout their careers. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

18) Demonstrates, maintains and communicates current knowledge of basic concepts, facts and principles of particular of lean manufacturing. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

19) Recognizes that teamwork is essential to accomplish lean effectively. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

20) Uses cross-functional teams to increase organizational effectiveness. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

110

21) Establishes and implements a customer- and market-focused business strategy focused lean business strategy. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

22) Uses information from various sources to assess and improve services or products in lean manufacturing. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

23) Keeps abreast of policies and priorities of lean manufacturing that affect the organization. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

24) There is a positive focus towards things with respect to lean manufacturing issues. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

25) There is commitment towards work in goal achievement. [ ] Excellent [ ] Very Good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Unsatisfactory

Your suggestions for lean manufacturing improvement: _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ ______

THANK YOU

111

BIBLIOGRAPHY
SEEMA SANGHI, The Handbook of Competency Mapping Edited in 2004, Sage Publications. KOTHARI C. R (2003), Research Methodology; second edition, wisvaprakasham, New Delhi. ASWATHAPPA.K Human Resource Management Text and Cases, fifth edition, The McGraw-Hill Companies. PRASAD, L.M, Human Resource Management, Sultan Chand and Sons, Educational Publishers, New Delhi, 1992. LUTHAN, FRED, Organizational Behavior, Eight Edition, McGraw-Hill International Edition, New Delhi, 1990.

112