This article was downloaded by: [Umeå University Library]

On: 02 October 2013, At: 09:39

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Production

Research
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tprs20

A method to align a manufacturing

execution system with Lean objectives
a b b a
J. Cottyn , H. Van Landeghem , K. Stockman & S.
a
Derammelaere
a
Department of GKG, University College of West-Flanders,
Kortrijk, Belgium
b
Department of Industrial Management, Ghent University,
Zwijnaarde, Belgium
Published online: 18 Mar 2011.

To cite this article: J. Cottyn , H. Van Landeghem , K. Stockman & S. Derammelaere (2011) A
method to align a manufacturing execution system with Lean objectives, International Journal of
Production Research, 49:14, 4397-4413, DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2010.548409

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2010.548409

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013
 International Journal of Production Research
Vol. 49, No. 14, 15 July 2011, 4397–4413

A method to align a manufacturing execution system with

Lean objectives
J. Cottynab*, H. Van Landeghemb, K. Stockmana and S. Derammelaerea
a
Department of GKG, University College of West-Flanders, Kortrijk, Belgium;
b
Department of Industrial Management, Ghent University, Zwijnaarde, Belgium
(Received 30 April 2010; final version received 13 December 2010)
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

The application of information technology and Lean principles have long been
seen as mutually exclusive, but both approaches are more and more claimed to be
interdependent and complementary. Real-time production information is crucial
to make important business decisions. A manufacturing execution system (MES)
can provide the necessary support during the Lean journey. MES can trigger, feed
or validate the Lean decision-making process by providing useful information.
In addition, MES can maintain the process improvements by enforcing the
standardised way of working. However, this is only possible when MES is aligned
and is kept aligned to the Lean objectives. The MES processes must be included in
the continuous improvement cycle to prevent them from becoming obsolete. In
this work, a method is proposed to analyse this alignment between Lean and
MES. The manufacturing operations management framework provided by ISA
95 is believed to deliver the necessary components to identify and structure this
alignment. Mapping MES and Lean activities onto the same framework brings
valuable insights about their dependency. The analysis is explored through a case
example. Preventing the system from becoming obsolete, by proposing standard
model changes, is an important direction for further research.
Keywords: manufacturing; execution system; Lean; ISA 95; continuous
improvement; value stream map

1. Introduction
Today’s economic environment drives the adoption of strategic initiatives. In order to
survive, companies need to get the most and the best out of the available resources. It is
a continuous struggle to eliminate unnecessary production costs; improve manufacturing,
process and business performance; increase throughput; reduce cycle times; maintain
quality; etc. (Epicor 2008a). One of the strategic initiatives that helps manufacturers to
remain competitive is Lean manufacturing. Lean is a philosophy with the motto ‘Doing
more, with less!’. The concept of ‘Lean’ was first introduced by Womack et al. (1990) in
order to describe the working philosophy and practices of the Japanese vehicle
manufacturers and in particular the Toyota Production System. The essence of Lean
thinking is specifying value and – by doing so – simultaneously uncovering waste. The
initial concept of Lean was extended to five key principles by Womack and Jones (1996):
specify value; identify value streams; make value flow; let the customer pull value and

*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

ISSN 0020–7543 print/ISSN 1366–588X online

ß 2011 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2010.548409
http://www.informaworld.com
 4398 J. Cottyn et al.

pursue perfection. The ultimate goal is a production process without any of the seven
deadly wastes: overproduction, waiting, transport, extra processing, inventory, motion
and defects. However, as that situation is impossible to reach, Lean manufacturing is a
continuous process towards perfection.
Lean thinking has evolved over time and has expanded beyond its origins in the
automotive industry and its narrow definition around shop floor improvement (Hines
et al. 2004). Lean is a philosophy and not a tool itself. Numerous tools and techniques –
such as single minute exchange of dies (SMED), Six Sigma, Kanban, value stream
mapping (VSM), 5 S, total quality management, theory of constraints, total productive
maintenance, business process management, visual management, etc. – can support the
Lean transformation in order to identify, measure and remove waste, variability and
overburden and deliver improvements in specific areas. SMED reduces waiting and
overproduction by creating shorter machine setup times. VSM draws the actual material
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

(and information) flow through the manufacturing resources and can reveal important
areas for improvement. VSM can be considered as the starting point for any Lean
transformation and its applicability is well documented in literature (Rother and Shook
1999, Braglia et al. 2006, Abdulmalek et al. 2007, Mazur and Chen 2008, Nash and Poling
2008, Serrano et al. 2008). Kanban reduces inventory by introducing a consumer-pulled
production system. The thoughtful application of the various approaches to exploit full
Lean potential has had its share of attention (Shah and Ward 2003, Lasa et al. 2009).
In order to avoid the misapplication of Lean manufacturing tools and metrics,
Pavnaskar et al. (2003) introduce a classification scheme. With the classification scheme,
manufacturing problems can be linked to the appropriate Lean manufacturing tools that
will solve the problem.
As various tools and techniques exist to work towards the Lean goal, it is necessary to
carefully plan and keep track of the Lean efforts. VSM results in the construction of a
Lean roadmap. This work plan is a sequence of Lean practices that will be performed in
order to evolve from the current (AS-IS) to the future (TO-BE) situation. A Lean planning
system can also document the progress, as the impact of each step on carefully selected
Lean metrics. This assessment tool structures the Lean journey by continuously updating
the performance and the work plan. Lean metrics are a set of performance measures for
Lean manufacturing. Examples are process throughput, total manufacturing lead time,
labour productivity, overall equipment effectiveness (OEE), etc. Many studies define their
own metrics by performing some sort of statistical analysis on survey data. Shah and Ward
(2007) use a feature extraction method to determine adequate measures of Lean
production. Ray et al. (2006) developed a Lean index for the wood products industry.
The study demonstrates that the statistical methodology of factor analysis can be used to
develop a quantitative definition and assessment of the concept of ‘leanness’ for any wood
processing company. The impact of typical Lean activities on the features of a Lean
environment and the Lean performance metrics are presented by Duque et al. (2007).
Mejabi (2003) proposes a framework for a Lean planning system that can be used to
monitor and quantify the continuous improvement efforts.
To be able to pinpoint improvement opportunities and assess the progress,
(historical and real-time) information must be available (AberdeenGroup 2005). That is
why manufacturers see a greater need to adopt, upgrade or expand their business
information technology (IT) solutions. For example, enterprise resource planning (ERP)
software maintains important business data and supports the administrative processes.
Product lifecycle management software guides the product through the different stages
 International Journal of Production Research 4399

of its lifecycle. Collecting, maintaining and updating the business data in support of the
business processes is important for daily operations. However, additionally, in-depth
business visibility can be created by adding an appropriate level of intelligence. Carefully
designed windows on the data can extract useful information, that is not visible at first
sight. This business intelligence can expose the necessary opportunities to steer the
business decision-making process.
Figure 1 shows how this idea can be extended to the manufacturing level. Real-time
production information is crucial to the daily manufacturing operations. But additionally,
manufacturing intelligence (MI) can provide the necessary visibility for the continuous
improvement efforts within the production facility. Different kinds of software tools can
analyse the real-time data and turn them into valuable knowledge to optimise
manufacturing operations. Production departments have always favoured the develop-
ment of custom-made software applications for manufacturing operations support, due to
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

lack of attention paid by information system specialists to the shop floor. However, the
difficulty of integrating multiple point systems has brought software providers to package
multiple execution management components into single and integrated solutions
(Saenz et al. 2009). These systems, commonly referred to as Manufacturing Execution

Figure 1. Creating business and manufacturing visibility to support the continuous

improvement cycle.
 4400 J. Cottyn et al.

System (MES), provide a common user interface and data management system. The
emergence of functional (MESA 1997) and integration (ISA 95 2000) standards defined
the role of those systems within computer integrated manufacturing more closely. That has
proven to be an important step from custom-made to pseudo-standard (configured) MES
solutions.
In this work, the necessary alignment between strategic objectives and operational
support is described. In particular, the role of manufacturing operations management
(MOM) during the Lean journey is emphasised. Both approaches pursue the same
objectives and – if properly combined – are seen as mutually supportive. MOM can
trigger, feed or validate the Lean decision-making process by providing useful informa-
tion. In addition, MOM can maintain the process improvements by enforcing the
standardised way of working. On the other hand, MOM processes must be included in the
continuous improvement cycle to prevent them from becoming obsolete. Section 2
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

provides a general overview of the combination of the Lean philosophy and the use of IT.
The MOM framework provided by the ISA 95 standard is believed to deliver the necessary
components to structure the alignment between MES and Lean. Section 3 describes the
method for this alignment, in as well green- as brownfield projects. The proposed method
is explored by a case example in Section 4. Section 5 concludes and mentions further
research.

2. Continuous improvement and IT

The application of IT and Lean principles have long been seen as mutually exclusive. Lean
advocates have the idea of putting in place a simplified information management system
(Houy 2005). They consider that organisations based on continuous flow should limit
information needs to local communication between upstream and downstream production
units. In their view, it is preferable for employees to search for the information they need,
as and when they need it, rather than configuring software to provide them with
information that is repeated at predetermined times. Womack gives the following idea
about information management: ‘Piling up information in a large inventory is as bad –
maybe worse – than piling up large inventories of products’. Information must be sent in
small batches at a high frequency instead of large batches infrequently. System failures
must be made immediately visible, so that they can be treated directly. Manual systems –
such as the labelling system (Kanban), the andon cord and others – are more suitable
because they are harder to ignore and force immediate action. Hicks (2007) describes the
application of the Lean philosophy on IT systems in more detail. Within the proposed
context of Lean information management, the seven deadly wastes are projected on the use
of IT systems.
However, both approaches are more and more claimed to be interdependent and
complementary (Epicor 2008b, Riezebos et al. 2009). A Lean approach to high product
mix, shared production assets and volatile demand scenarios are far from ideal. Kanban
cards and heijunka boards become unmanageable. Calculating raw material, work in
process, finished goods inventories, etc. can no longer be based on simple rules of thumb
and experimental design. Here is where IT comes in handy. Complex issues can easily be
dealt with in real-time. For example, Wan et al. (2007) describe a web-based Kanban
system for job dispatching, tracking and performance monitoring. Lean IT solutions can
also connect with suppliers, for example to include them in Kanban loops. The legal
 International Journal of Production Research 4401

provisions in regulated industries (e.g. food and pharmaceutical) require tracing

functionality to link each finished product to its raw materials and processing steps.
Without IT support, this task would be impossible to achieve. The human factor plays
a crucial role when it comes to process improvements. But it is also very important to
maintain those accomplished improvements. IT is seen as an enabler of the implemented
improvements. Bell (2005) and Rio (2005) describe IT as the ideal solution to enforce
standard work procedures. Ward and Zhou (2006) concluded that IT integration facilitates
the implementation and the use of effective Lean/JIT practices.

2.1 Continuous improvement – the role of MES

Some research has already been done on the combination between the Lean production
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

system and ERP (Goddard 2003). New technologies – such as SOA – enable the
development of software systems that are able to support the requirements of Lean
information management (Pfadenhauer et al. 2006). These MES systems can be flexible
enough to accommodate the continuous improvement philosophy of a Lean environment.
The (near) real-time information flow of the MES looks like a better fit for Lean than the
batch-oriented ERP systems. No previous research on this topic has been found, but
software vendors already anticipate the Lean MES story. Stand-alone applications have
already been developed to automate and support Lean practices, such as E-Kanban, Six
Sigma programmes, visual management screens, key performance indicators (KPI)
generators, etc. More and more MES software vendors have some Lean support
incorporated. Every product folder has some reference to the Lean philosophy (Siemens
2007, GE Fanuc 2009). It must be that there is a need for an MES that supports the Lean
philosophy. In its plant-to-enterprise model, the Manufacturing Enterprise Solution
Association (MESA) shows how strategic initiatives are linked to the shop floor within the
entire enterprise IT system (MESA 2008). The model depicts the generation of information
at the most basic value adding process levels of the plant and how this information
supports and is supported by enterprise business application processes and longer term
strategic initiatives. The importance of a well-established manufacturing operations layer
to create the necessary real-time manufacturing visibility is emphasised. MESA published
manufacturing guidebooks for each strategic initiative they defined. Lean manufacturing is
one of them (MESA 2010). However, a study of AMR (Masson and Jacobson 2007) shows
a limited adoption of Lean IT so far. Ease of deployment and use remains a barrier to the
adoption of Lean software on the shop floor. There is still room for innovators, for
example to provide much-needed analytical workbenches on top of real-time data
collection. A functionality that – in our opinion – is part of (or connected to) the presented
MOM framework and can be aligned with MES software.
The continuous improvement philosophy of Lean (kaizen) can be supported by the MI
incorporated in MES. Define-measure-analyse-improve-control (DMAIC) is a structured
and disciplined approach to process improvement and is part of the Six Sigma
methodology. Based on the DMAIC decision-making cycle, the role of MES in
continuous improvement can be illustrated. The first steps are defining metrics and
measuring them. A system that continually improves, relies on feedback. Due to its real-
time data availability, MES is seen as the best tool to measure real-time performance
indicators such as the use of materials, process times and machine breakdowns (Hwang
2006, Saenz et al. 2009). Typical operational KPI reflect safety, customer service and cost
 4402 J. Cottyn et al.

factors such as overtime, inventory, utilisation and quality (MESA 2006). The analysis
phase requires human expertise and additional tools such as operational research and
analytical methods. Process metrics (e.g. OEE for equipment performance), analysis (e.g.
Pareto charts for machine breakdown causes) and reporting has become somewhat
standard functionality within MES software applications. But the current literature lacks
sufficient attention on how to make MES (or even IT in general) support this analysis
(Saenz et al. 2009). Efforts rarely exceed the use of spreadsheets or stand-alone software
tools that require intensive human interaction. In fact, methods such as VSM are generally
believed to be manual processes (Biddle 2006). But the real-time data availability and user
friendliness of an MES can speed up and guide the analysis efforts. During the
improvement phase, MES is naturally not involved except for the necessary improvement
of MES itself to control the improved situation. To control the change, MES can
standardise the new way of working by imposing standard work on the shop floor.
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

2.2 MES – the role of continuous improvement

The main reason why the use of IT is feared by Lean practitioners is its tendency to
become obsolete. Bell (2005) discusses the use of IT to maintain continuous improvement
initiatives by also adapting the enterprise IT system itself. From the point of view of the
whole Lean enterprise, Bell focuses on ERP software. However, when considering Lean
production, the combination with an MES seems more appropriate. An MES is located
closer to production and is fine-tuned to the specific company needs. The usability of MES
highly depends on its ability to reflect the current manufacturing situation. The continuous
improvement of MES itself during the Lean journey is important to keep the system
reliable. An MES should always present the data wished for by the user, at the right
format, at the right time, at the right place. This application of the Lean philosophy to IT
is referred to as Lean information management (Hicks 2007). Recent literature
acknowledges the need for a reconfigurable (Zhaohui et al. 2009) and adaptable (Gang
et al. 2010) MES in order to follow manufacturing changes quickly and adequately. An
MES should be flexible enough to follow the changes made as a result of continuous
improvement initiatives.

3. Alignment method for MES and Lean

Before implementing an MES, all processes – from the material as well as the information
flow – must be critically reviewed to ensure an optimal workflow. Otherwise you just end
up ‘automating a mess’. That is why a thorough analysis is needed before selecting and
configuring the software. By modelling the AS-IS situation, everyone is forced to question
the current way of working. Problems get discovered and inefficiencies revealed, resulting
in a TO-BE situation. Lean practitioners strongly suggest a manual Lean transformation
before IT adoption (Masson and Jacobson 2007). But at which point can you switch from
manual to IT? When your processes are perfect and will not change anymore? Lean is a
continuous improvement process, so that situation will never occur. In addition, even early
Lean efforts can benefit from IT support, in particular for data collection and analysis. As
stated in Section 2, some functionalities even require the support of IT, because they are
too complex (e.g. controlling WIP with high product mix and volatile demand) or simply
enforced by legal provisions (e.g. tracking and tracing). So why not take both Lean and
 International Journal of Production Research 4403

MES into account during the first analysis and take the best of both (Gifford 2002)? This
approach could also have a positive impact on the return on investment (ROI) calculation,
as the intangible benefits of IT are quite difficult to quantify (Nagalingam and Lin 1997,
Fraser 2009, Nasarwanji et al. 2009). The quick wins of the Lean transformation could
help justify the initial investment cost of MES.

3.1 MOM analysis

MOM gives a detailed overview of all the activities that support manufacturing in the area
of production, inventory, maintenance and quality. As well MES as Lean activities can be
classified within this framework.
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

3.1.1 MES activities

Saenz et al. (2009) describe the traditional internal structure of most MES solutions. They
are designed on a modular basis, so each system can be configured and integrated as
desired. As a consequence, the complexity of analysing the manufacturing operations
support needed for each manufacturing case is high and far from trivial. The contribution
of the ISA 95 standard is only discussed briefly by Saenz et al. (2009) as the formalisation
of the exchange around the manufacturing system to other areas of the company. Its use is
presented as the design of information flows between shop floor level applications and
those of a higher level. In addition, ISA 95 is stated to deliver a consistent terminology.
Although these are in fact the main contributions, its practical benefits reach a lot further
and deserve some extra attention. ISA 95 part 1, 2 and 3 (ISA 95 2000) provide a number
of object models and terminology that serves as a common model of integration, a
standard terminology to define system requirements and integration between different
software systems. By mapping the existing manufacturing systems and tools on the models
(AS-IS situation), filling the blanks with new systems, checking the integration needs and
considering the different information flows, ISA 95 can be the roadmap for a well-
structured analysis. Based on the ISA 95 models, a blueprint of the TO-BE situation can
be constructed. Scholten (2007) describes the procedure to construct a user requirements
specification document. This document is used by the consultants to clearly specify the
requirements of the manufacturing company within the manufacturing operations
domain. The result can be used in the selection procedure of the MES solution that best
fits all needs. Figure 2 illustrates the use of the MOM framework to list the manufacturing
operations support in a specific company situation (AS-IS).

3.1.2 Lean activities

The MOM definition is a part of the ISA 95 standard and was mainly introduced to create
a common ground to classify and compare existing MES software systems or integrate
different components to seamlessly one solution. However, MOM provides a framework
to classify all manufacturing operations, disregarding whether they are performed
manually or automated. Therefore, the framework can also be used to classify the support
for Lean practices and as a consequence, check the possible alignment between MES
components and Lean practices (Cottyn et al. 2008, 2009). This is the foundation of the
proposed alignment within this article. Figure 3 illustrates how the Lean practices can be
marked onto the MOM framework. A non-restrictive amount of examples is given.
 4404 J. Cottyn et al.

Figure 2. Example of the use of the MOM framework to list the manufacturing operations support.
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

Figure 3. Example of the use of the MOM framework to list the Lean practices.

3.2 Alignment method

The MES functionalities and Lean practices can be mapped onto the same MOM
framework for a specific company situation. This makes it possible to check the necessary
information flow (support) in between all components during the MOM analysis. By
zooming into a certain functionality, the required information flows can be identified in
more detail. All information flows consist of standard object models, as defined by ISA 95
part 1, 2 and 3 (ISA 95 2000). Figure 4 shows the alignment method for a brown- and
greenfield project. A brownfield project has historical information at the start, while a
greenfield project has not. The available information is standardised to ISA 95 object
models to enable a generic MOM analysis. The result of the complete exercise is an
alignment between MES and the selected Lean practices in the work plan. In a greenfield
project, the support is incorporated in the requirements analysis. A change management
approach is necessary within a brownfield project.
VSM – a crucial Lean practice at the start of the Lean journey – is explored as an
example. Until recently, VSM has generally been a manual process (Biddle 2006). It is
based on five phases put into practice by a special team created for such a purpose (Rother
and Shook 1999): (1) selection of a product family; (2) current state mapping; (3) future
state mapping; (4) defining a work plan; and (5) achieving the work plan. Similarities
between product workflows are searched to define product families. The necessary data are
collected by walking through the production process. The current state map is drawn
with paper and pencil. After analysis, a future state map and a Lean transformation plan
 International Journal of Production Research 4405
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

Figure 4. The alignment method between MES and Lean for brown- and greenfield projects.

is created. Following up the Lean progress is done by continuously repeating the data
collection and drawing steps. However, this approach has a number of limitations:
. It is time and labour consuming. It takes a while to walk through the whole
process and collect all necessary data.
. The result is only a snapshot of the real value stream and can lead to poor
decisions.
. The manual process is prone to different kinds of errors: process interpretation
faults, wrong measurements, writing or reading errors, vague estimates, etc.
. The manual drawing of the current and future state can be sloppy and cause
misinterpretation within the team.
. The operational threshold is very high. The data collection will not be done
frequently due to the high time and labour intensity. That can cause an inefficient
follow-up of the progress and – as a consequence – an inability to react to
unforeseen circumstances. An insufficient follow-up makes it hard to sustain the
continuous improvement initiatives.
The use of IT can increase the practical performance of VSM (Serrano et al. 2008).
There are electronic tools available that allow a better representation of the maps, support
the analysis and document and visualise the progress. They are called electronic value
stream mapping (eVSM) tools and are mostly based on spreadsheets. Another recent
evolution is the combination of VSM with discrete event simulation to analyse and
evaluate the current and future states (Lian and Van Landeghem 2007). After a simulation
run, the potential impact of the proposed modifications can be measured. This allows the
team to make changes and observe the effects without disrupting the production process or
causing downtime and costs. But the main effort, namely collecting the data, remains
purely manual.
 4406 J. Cottyn et al.
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

Figure 5. Details of the MOM framework in the case of value stream mapping.

A good alignment with an MES – where a lot of data are already available – could
speed up this process. We are not suggesting a tool to automatically perform the
construction and analysis of VSM. But MES can deliver meaningful information to
generate an eVSM template to start from or to be used to validate the manual result. When
the information from MES does not match the manual result, then something is wrong. As
well a wrong manual exercise as information errors in MES is not acceptable and must be
corrected somehow. Figure 5 shows part of the MOM framework that is useful in the case
of VSM, which is contained within (or connected to) the performance analysis. Useful
information for the construction (or validation) of the VSM are the different incoming
arrows. Possible input from MES can be:
. identifying product families
. creating part of the AS-IS process flow
. creating part of the AS-IS information flow
All information can be identified through standard ISA 95 object models. Activity
definitions are described by process segment object models. The actual use of those
processes is delivered by segment response object models. Based on that information, the
different VSM atoms can be connected together to form the material and information value
stream. The corresponding performance information can be added as KPI on the map.

4. Case example: a furniture company

To illustrate the use of the alignment method, a case example is performed within a small
(550 employees) furniture company. There is (limited) production support by software
tools in the AS-IS situation, so the case is treated as a brownfield project.
 International Journal of Production Research 4407

Figure 6. The MOM support in the AS-IS situation of the case example.
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

4.1 Map the AS-IS situation

4.1.1 Information flow
The current manufacturing operations support is shown in Figure 6 and consists of:
. MS Excel: The production manager creates a production schedule once a week.
Internal quality problems are kept in another Excel file.
. Barcode scanning: The start of each activity on an order by an employee is
recorded through barcode scanning.
. Paper based: Work orders and product definitions are distributed by the
production manager based on the schedule. Once or twice a day, the progress is
measured by revisiting each work centre. Quality checks are indicated on the work
orders and results are written down by the employees.
. MS Access: Customer complaints are logged into a custom application.
. Custom ERP system: Accounting, procurement of raw materials, order process-
ing, etc.
Most of the above functionality was introduced in the past to be able to calculate some
KPI. Each month, the manager retrieves information from the different systems and
calculates the KPI values with MS Excel.
. number of seats produced
. efficiency of employee or work centre
. leather consumed
. number of internal reparations
. number of external complaints
Based on the scanning results, the theoretical production time of each step within ERP
is regularly modified (manually). This is done to actualise cost calculation for the different
models and can be used as a starting value for a comparable production activity for new
models.

4.1.2 Material flow

The available historical data (6 months of production) are mapped onto ISA 95 object
models. To generate a starting template for eVSM, the same steps are performed as in the
 4408 J. Cottyn et al.

Figure 7. The automatically generated eVSM template of the case example.

Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

manual case. All end products have a similar production path (production definition), so
they are combined to one product family. The map is drawn in the opposite direction of
the value stream itself. The last step of the VSM is the process segment of which the
corresponding segment responses have the final product(s) of the product family as
‘material produced actual’. Then, for each ‘material consumed actual’ of that segment
response, the next process segment (with that material type as ‘material produced actual’)
is drawn in front of the previous one. These steps must be repeated until the beginning of
the value stream, namely receiving the raw materials. The selected values to be added to
the map are the number of employees and the mean cycle time of each activity (the
duration is recorded by the barcode scanning). The time that each product stays in
inventory is not exactly known, but is expressed in a mean number of days (date of next
activity – date of previous activity). The eVSM template of Figure 7 can be used as a
starting document for the manual effort or later on used for validation purposes.

4.2 Map the TO-BE situation

On the one hand, the company wants to upgrade and simplify their manufacturing
operations (information flow). On the other hand, they want to optimise production
performance by reducing the work in process (and by doing so, reducing the product lead
time) and creating a higher manufacturing visibility. Figure 8 shows the desired software
landscape. In a first phase, all production support must be incorporated by a paperless
MES system. The production manager gets the released orders from ERP and must be able
to launch orders on the shop floor. Each work centre has a touch panel with an overview
of its waiting list of orders. Through simple screen actions, employees can indicate which
order they start. They get electronic information about the required materials and actions.
When finished, they are guided through some quality checks and can forward the order to
the next step. Based on this information, the monthly desired KPI are calculated in real-
time for the manager. In a second step, a small warehouse management system will be
implemented to control the stock of raw materials.

4.3 Create a Lean work plan

To start the Lean journey, 5 S will be introduced on the shop floor. In addition, a Visual
Management screen will keep all employees informed about the production performance
 International Journal of Production Research 4409

Figure 8. The TO-BE situation of software landscape of the case example.

Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

Figure 9. The phased approach of the Lean transformation of the case example.

(e.g. seats/day, quality problems/week, etc.). In order to reduce the work in process, a
CONWIP system will be initiated. The number of orders on the production floor will be
limited. Each time an order is finished, the production manager can launch a new one.
To optimise the production activities, each work centre will prioritise its waiting orders.
. The cutting process will group the available orders based on the colour. That will
minimise the changeover times.
. The sticking process will group orders with similar actions, because employees
prefer repetitive actions (and perform better this way).
. The covering process will group orders according to the region of the customer.
This approach must minimise the waiting times of the end products to be
transported to the customer.
This strategy will be initiated based on the historical data and later on fine-tuned
depending on the performance. The different practices will be implemented in a phased
approach (Figure 9).

4.4 Align MES with Lean

When considering the overlap of Lean and MES activities in the MOM framework, the
MES system must be configured to support the Lean practices. A few examples:
. Each work centre must have a user-friendly screen that enables the employees to
easily assess the priority of each order. For example, at the cutting process, each
 4410 J. Cottyn et al.

order is listed (and marked) depending on its colour. The information at the
covering process contains the region of the customer. At the stitching process, a
similarity percentage of each order can be given.
. The CONWIP restriction must be enforced. However, the production manager
must have the authority to fine-tune this value.
. The manager must have access to a dashboard screen containing all KPI values
and trends. Some values are displayed within the production hall to inform and
stimulate the employees.
. The time registration at each work centre must reveal the value-adding time.
A proper use of the system must be enforced by logical and fixed user screens.
The production manager must be informed of eventual abnormalities.
. The performance information can be used at a later stage to redraw a basic eVSM
document and re-analyse the situation.
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

Based on these requirements, the MES system must be configured. However, MES
must follow process improvements and must be reconfigured to control the change.

5. Conclusion and further research

Different kinds of software tools can analyse real-time data and turn them into valuable
knowledge to optimise manufacturing operations. However, the difficulty of integrating
multiple point systems has brought software providers to package multiple execution
management components into single and integrated solutions. These systems, commonly
referred to as MES, provide a common user interface and data management system. An
alignment method between an MES and Lean objectives is introduced within this work.
MES can provide the necessary support during the Lean journey. MES can trigger, feed or
validate the Lean decision-making process by providing useful information. In addition,
MES can maintain the process improvements by enforcing the standardised way of
working. However, this is only possible when MES is aligned and is kept aligned to the
Lean objectives. By mapping the activities of both on the MOM framework of ISA 95,
a common ground can be identified. In brownfield projects, historical data are available
to create a template to start or to validate a manual VSM. Greenfield projects start from
scratch. By structuring the information as ISA 95 object models, a generic analysis is
possible. After analysis, a TO-BE MOM situation can be drawn, which stipulates the
necessary requirements for the MES selection and implementation. In order to illustrate
the methodology, a case example of a small furniture company is explored. Further
research has to be done on a change management approach for MES that facilitates the
model state changes as a result of typical Lean transformations. The impact of the
proposed alignment on the ROI calculations can also be worthwhile.

References

Abdulmalek, F.A. and Rajgopal, J., 2007. Analyzing the benefits of Lean manufacturing and value
stream mapping via simulation: a process sector case study. International Journal of Production
Economics, 107 (1), 223–236.
 International Journal of Production Research 4411

AberdeenGroup, 2005. Manufacturing transparency: turning visibility into value [online].

AberdeenGroup. Available from: http://www.acumence.com/pdf/AberdeenTransparency.pdf
[Accessed 10 January 2009].
Bell, S., 2005. Lean enterprise systems: using it for continuous improvement. Chichester: John Wiley &
Sons, Ltd, ISBN: 978-0-471-67784-0.
Biddle, J., 2006. The lean benchmark report [online]. AberdeenGroup. Available from:
http://www.aberdeen.com/Aberdeen-Library/2845/RA_Lean_JB_2845.aspx [Accessed 10
January 2009].
Braglia, M., Carmignani, G., and Zammori, F., 2006. A new value stream mapping approach for
complex production systems. International Journal of Production Research, 44 (18), 3929–3952.
Cottyn, J., Stockman, K., and Van Landeghem, H., 2008. The complementarity of Lean thinking
and the ISA 95 standard. In: Proceedings of WBF European Conference: bridging the divide
between IT and manufacturing, 10–12 November, Barcelona, Spain.
Cottyn, J., et al., 2009. The combined adoption of production IT and strategic initiatives: initial
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

considerations for a Lean MES analysis. In: Proceedings of International Conference on

Computers and Industrial Engineering, Troyes, France, 39 (1–3), 1629–1634.
Duque, F.M.D. and Cadavid, L.R., 2007. Lean manufacturing measurement: the relationship
between Lean activities and Lean metrics. Estudios Gerenciales, 23 (105), 69–83.
Epicor, 2008a. How manufacturers are managing business in turbulent economic times [online]. Epicor
Software Corporation. Available from: http://www.nelsonequipment.com/newsletters/
Epicor_Manufacts_ManageBusiMana.pdf [Accessed 10 January 2009].
Epicor, 2008b. Designed to manage Lean principles [online]. Epicor Software Corporation. Available
from: http http://www.nambuyersguide.com/WSWeb/WAND_attachment.asp?mfg_code=
50640069&iFile_ID=1300 [Accessed 15 January 2009].
Fraser, J., 2009. Plant-to-enterprise integration: foundation for MES/MOM payback [online].
Cambashi. Available from: http://www.cambashi.com/content1278 [Accessed 10 January
2010].
Gang, H., Jinhang, L., and Xiaodong, Y., 2010. Developing an adaptable manufacturing execution
system framework. In: Proceedings of the 6th CIRP-Sponsored International Conference on
Digital Enterprise Technology, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 66, 749–756.
GE FANUC, Intelligent Platform, 2009. Lean production with work process [online]. ISA.
Available from: http://www.graymattersystems.com/Docs/Products/ProficyWorkflow/lean_
production_work_process_wp_gft738a.pdf [Accessed 20 February 2009].
Gifford, C.H., 2002. ‘LEAN’ or MES? To optimize, take best of both [online]. ISA.
Available from: http://www.isa.org/InTechTemplate.cfm?Section=InTech&template=/
ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=20074 [Accessed 20 November
2008].
Goddard, R.W., 2003. The role of information technology in the Lean enterprise. IE 780S:
Lean Manufacturing, Spring, IMfgE at Wichita State University.
Hicks, B., 2007. Lean information management: understanding and eliminating waste. International
Journal of Information Management, 27 (1–2), 233–249.
Hines, P., Holweg, M., and Rich, N., 2004. Learning to evolve: a review of contemporary lean
thinking. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 24 (10), 994–1011.
Houy, T., 2005. ICT and Lean management: will they ever get along? Communications and
Strategies, 59, 53–75.
Hwang, Y.-D., 2006. The practices of integrating manufacturing execution systems and six
sigma methodology. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technologies, 31,
145–154.
ISA 95, 2000. Enterprise-control system integration, ANSI/ISA 95.00.01 part 1: models and
terminology; ANSI/ISA 95.00.02 part 2: Object model attributes, Raleigh, NC.
Lasa, I.S., De Castro, R., and Laburu, C.O., 2009. Extent of the use of Lean concepts proposed for
a value stream mapping application. Production Planning and Control, 20 (1), 82–98.
 4412 J. Cottyn et al.

Lian, Y.-H. and Van Landeghem, H., 2007. Analyzing the effects of Lean manufacturing using
a value stream mapping-based simulation generator. International Journal of Production
Research, 45 (13), 3037–3058.
Masson, C. and Jacobson, S., 2007. Lean planning and execution software: extending lean thinking
across the enterprise [online]. AMR Research. Available from: http://www.amrresearch.com/
Content/View.aspx?CompURI=tcm:7-18992 [Accessed 14 January 2009].
Mazur, L.M. and Chen, S.-J.G., 2008. Understanding and reducing the medication delivery waste
via systems mapping and analysis. Health Care Management Science, 11 (1), 55–65.
Mejabi, O.O., 2003. Framework for a Lean manufacturing planning system. International Journal
of Manufacturing Technology and Management, 5 (5/6), 563–578.
MESA, 1997. White paper #02: MES functionalities and MRP to MES data flow possibilities [online].
MESA International. Available from: http://www.mesa.org/knowledge-base/details.
php?id=49 [Accessed 8 November 2008].
MESA, 2006. Metrics that matter: Uncovering KPIs that justify operational improvement
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013

[online]. MESA International and Industry Directions. Available from: http://www.

mesa.org/knowledge-base/details.php?id=5 [Accessed 8 November 2008].
MESA, 2008. Plant to enterprise model [online]. MESA International. Available from: http://
www.mesa.org/knowledge-base [Accessed 18 November 2009].
MESA, 2010. Guidebook Lean manufacturing [online]. MESA International. Available from: http://
www.mesa.org/knowledge-base [Accessed 18 September 2010].
Nagalingam, S.V. and Lin, G.C., 1997. A unified approach towards CIM justification. Computer
Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 10 (2), 133–145.
Nasarwanji, A., et al., 2009. The impact of manufacturing execution systems on labor overheads.
In: Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering Vol I, London, UK.
Nash, M.A. and Poling, S.R., 2008. Mapping the total value stream – a comprehensive guide for
production and transactional processes. New York: Productivity Press.
Pavnaskar, S.J., Gershenson, J.K., and Jambekar, A.B., 2003. Classification scheme for Lean
manufacturing tools. International Journal of Production Research, 41 (13), 3075–3090.
Pfadenhauer, K., et al., Shop floor information management and SOA. BPM 2006 Workshops,
LNCS 4103, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 237–248.
Ray, C.D., et al., 2006. The Lean index: operational ‘‘LEAN’’ metrics for the wood products
industry. Wood and Fiber Science, 38 (2), 238–255.
Riezebos, J., Klingenberg, W., and Hicks, C., 2009. Lean production and information technology:
connection or contradiction? Computers in Industry, 60 (4), 237–247.
Rio, R., 2005. Accelerated continuous improvement: getting to program impact [online]. ARC
Advisory Group. Available from: http://www.arcweb.com/ClientSponsored/
Accelerated%20Continuous%20ImprovemeIm.pdf [Accessed 12 January 2009].
Rother, M. and Shook, J., 1999. Learning to see: value stream mapping to add value and eliminate
muda. Brookline, MA: The Lean Enterprise Institute.
Saenz de Ugarte, B., Artiba, A., and Pellerin, R., 2009. Manufacturing execution system – a
literature review. Production Planning and Control, 20 (6), 525–539.
Scholten, B., 2007. The road to integration: A guide to applying the ISA-95 standard in manufacturing.
Research Triangle Park. NC: ISA.
Serrano, I., Ochoa, C., and Castro, R., 2008. Evaluation of value stream mapping in manufacturing
system redesign. International Journal of Production Research, 46 (16), 4409–4430.
Shah, R. and Ward, P.T., 2003. Lean manufacturing: context, practice bundles, and performance.
Journal of Operations Management, 21 (2), 129–149.
Shah, R. and Ward, P.T., 2007. Defining and developing measures of Lean production. Journal
of Operations Management, 25 (4), 785–805.
Siemens, Industry Solutions, 2007. Plant IT integration for collaborative manufacturing. Available
from: http://www.it-solutions.siemens.com/b2b/it/en/us/Documents/whitepapers/Plant-IT-
Integration-WP.pdf [Accessed 12 January 2009].
 International Journal of Production Research 4413

Wan, H.-d. and Chen, F.F.A., 2007. Web-based Kanban system for job dispatching, tracking, and
performance monitoring. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technologies,
38 (9–10), 995–1005.
Ward, P. and Zhou, H., 2006. Impact of information technology integration and Lean/just-in-time
practices on lead-time performance. Decision Sciences, 37 (2), 177–203.
Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., and Roos, D., 1990. The machine that changed the world. Toronto,
Canada: Collier MacMillan, ISBN 0892563508.
Womack, J.P. and Jones, D.T., 1996. Lean thinking. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Zhaohui, L., Yan, C., and Xiuquan, C., 2009. A reconfigurable manufacturing execution system and
its component reuse. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Computational Intelligence
and Natural Computing, Wuhan, China, 2, 190–193.
Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 09:39 02 October 2013