Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Available ScienceDirect
online
Procedia atonline
CIRP
Available www.sciencedirect.com
00 (2019) 000–000
at www.sciencedirect.com
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000
ScienceDirect www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Procedia CIRP 00 (2017)

Procedia 000–000
CIRP 98 (2021) 241–246
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
28th CIRP Conference on Life Cycle Engineering
28th CIRP Conference on Life Cycle Engineering
Development of a Model for Total Productive Maintenance Barriers to Enhance
Development of a 28th
Model
theCIRPfor
Life Total
Cycle
Design Productive
of Productive
Conference, Maintenance
Equipment
May 2018, Barriers to Enhance
Nantes, France
the Life Cyclea of Productiveb Equipment a
A new methodology Rajesh toP.analyze the functional
Mishra* ,Gajanand Gupta , Anitaand physical
Sharma , architecture of
existing products for
Rajesh
Department ofan
P. assembly
Mishra*
Mechanical
b
a
a
Engineering oriented
,Gajanand
BITS Pilani, Vidhyaproduct
Gupta b
, Anita
Vihar Campus, family
Sharma
Pilani, identification
Raj., 333031,
a
India
School of Mechanical Engineering Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai, Tamil Nadu - 600127, India
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering BITS Pilani, Vidhya Vihar Campus, Pilani, Raj. 333031, India
Paul Stief *, Jean-Yves Dantan, Alain Etienne, Ali Siadat
b
School of Mechanical
* Corresponding author. Tel.:+91-9950674963; Engineering Vellore Institute
fax:+0-000-000-0000.E-mail address: of Technology, Chennai, Tamil Nadu - 600127, India
[email protected]

* Corresponding
Écoleauthor. Tel.:+91-9950674963;
Nationale Supérieure d’Arts etfax:+0-000-000-0000.E-mail address:LCFC
Métiers, Arts et Métiers ParisTech, [email protected]
EA 4495, 4 Rue Augustin Fresnel, Metz 57078, France

Abstract
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 3 87 37 54 30; E-mail address: [email protected]
Abstract
The main intention of the organization is to focused on enhancing its efficiency, life cycle, and productivity by maintaining better delivery time
so that customer satisfying can be guaranteed. One way to achieve this intention is by implementing the concept of Total Productive
The main intention
Maintenance (TPM). of In
thethis
organization is to focused
study, barriers faced by onIndian
enhancing its efficiency,
manufacturing life cycle, and
organizations productivity
in the new emergingby maintaining
market had better
beendelivery time
determined
Abstract
so that customer satisfying can be guaranteed. One way to achieve this intention is by implementing the concept of Total Productive
through the questionnaire survey with the help of renowned academician and industrial experts. These barriers had been divided into key areas
Maintenance
namely (TPM).
behavioral, In this study,cultural,
organizational, barrierstechnological,
faced by Indian manufacturing
departmental, organizations
operational, in the new
and financial emerging
barriers. markethad
The barriers hadpositive
been determined
as well as
Innegative
today’sthe
through business environment, the trend towards more product variety and customization is unbroken.
effects on the actual implementation of TPM aligned with life cycle engineering of productive equipment. The study into
questionnaire survey with the help of renowned academician and industrial experts. These Due
barriersto this
had development,
been divided thekeyneed
identifies of
areas
the
agile andbarriers
namely
crucial reconfigurable
behavioral,to TPM production
organizational,
employment systems
cultural,
in Indian emerged to cope
technological,
manufacturing with various
departmental,
industries products
operational,
from and
and product
the literaturefinancial
reviewfamilies.
barriers. To
Thedesign
and industrial andhad
barriers optimize
experience. positive
Hence, production
asa well
unique as
negative
systems as effects
well ason tothe actual
choose implementation
the optimal product of TPM
matches,aligned with
product life
analysiscycle engineering
methods are of
needed.productive
Indeed,
model was developed for the determination of the driving and dependence power of the barriers to TPM execution to enhance the life cycle ofequipment.
most of the The
knownstudy identifies
methods aim the
to
crucial abarriers
analyze
productive product toorTPM
equipment employment
oneusing
product familyinonIndian
Interpretive manufacturing
the physical
Structure industries
level. Different
Modelling (ISM). from families,
product the literature review
however, mayanddiffer
industrial
largelyexperience.
in terms ofHence,
the numbera unique
and
modelofwas
nature developed for
components. Thisthefact
determination
impedes an of the driving
efficient and dependence
comparison and choice power of the barriers
of appropriate to TPM
product execution
family to enhance
combinations for the
the life cycle of
production
productivenew
system. equipment using is Interpretive Structure Modelling (ISM).
© 2020AThe methodology
Authors, Published proposed
by Elsevierto analyze
B.V. existing products in view of their functional and physical architecture. The aim is to cluster
these
©
This products
2021 The
is an in new
Authors.
open assembly
accessPublished oriented
article under product
by Elsevier B.V.
the CC BY-NC-ND families for the optimization
license of existing assembly lines and the creation of future reconfigurable
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
© 2020
assembly
This is The
an Authors,
systems.
open Based
access Published
on Datum
article by Flow
under Elsevier
the CC B.V.the physical
Chain,
BY-NC-ND licensestructure of the products is analyzed. Functional
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0) subassemblies are identified, and
Peer review under the responsibility of the scientific committee of the 28th CIRP Conference on Life Cycle Engineering.
This is an open
aPeer-review
functional underaccess
analysis is article
responsibility
performed.under the scientific
CC BY-NC-ND
ofMoreover,
the committee
a hybrid license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
of the
functional 28th CIRP Conference
and physical on Life
architecture graphCycle Engineering.
(HyFPAG) is the output which depicts the
Peer review
similarity
Keywords:between
under product
Interpretive
theStructural
responsibility
families of the
by
Modeling;
scientific
providing committee
design
Total Productive supportof to
Maintenance;
the 28th production
both,
Barriers;
CIRP Conference
systemonplanners
Life Cycle; Manufacturing
Life CycleandEngineering.
product designers. An illustrative
example of a nail-clipper is used to explain the proposed methodology. An industrial case study on two product families of steering columns of
Keywords: Interpretive
thyssenkrupp Structural
Presta France Modeling;
is then carriedTotal
out Productive Maintenance;
to give a first industrialBarriers; Life Cycle;
evaluation of the Manufacturing
proposed approach.
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
1. Introduction
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 28th CIRP productivity as well2018.
Design Conference as efficiency can be improved in the
maintenance activities.
1. Introduction productivity as well as efficiency can be improved in the
Over Assembly;
Keywords: Designthe
the period, method; Family identification
manufacturing sector has been maintenance activities.
struggling to remark its importance through various strategies. The main intention behind the present work is to identify
Over the period, the manufacturing sector has been
Since globalization is growing day by day, there exist at most the key barriers to implement total productive maintenance in
struggling to remark its importance through various strategies. The main intention behind the present work is to identify
requirements for better productivity, so that the manufacturing Indian manufacturing through a detailed literature review. The
1.Since globalization is growing day by day, there exist at most
Introduction thethe
of keyproduct
barriersrange
to implement total productive
and characteristics maintenance
manufactured in
and/or
industry can succeed in the global marketplace. Organizations study provides an inter-relationship among the major barriers
requirements for better productivity, so that the manufacturing Indian manufacturing
assembled in this through
system. In a context,
this detailed the
literature
main review. The
challenge in
are continually trying out different strategies to advance their to the TPM implementation. This shall directly be helpful for
industry
Due to can the
succeedfastin the global marketplace.
development in his Organizations
the workdomain study provides an inter-relationship among to the major
withbarriers
manufacturing potential. Cooke [1] with made ofit modelling
to the TPM
and analysis
Indian management to is
implementation.
now not only
understand
This
the role
shall
cope
directly
of each
be
single
barrier.
helpful for
are continually
communication trying
and out
an different
ongoing strategies
trend of to advance
digitization their
and products, a limited product range or existing product families,
very clear that growing competition in manufacturing units This further can be successful implementation using the TPM
manufacturing
digitalization, potential.
manufacturing Cooke [1]
enterprises with his
are facingwork made
important it Indian
but management
also to into
be able to understand the role of each barrier.
directly proportional to quality enhancement practices. Rapid program theto organization.
analyze and to An compare productsstructural
interpretive to define
very clear in
challenges thattoday’s
growingmarketcompetition in manufacturing
environments: a units new
continuing Thisproduct
further families.
can be successful
It can be implementation
observed that using the
classical TPM
existing
growth in competition has developed a threat for modeling methodology can be employed that determines
directly proportional to quality enhancement practices. Rapid program into the organization. An interpretive structural
tendency towardsindustries
manufacturing reduction of product
since development
customer times and
expectations are product families areamong
inter-relationships regrouped the in
keyfunction of clients
obstacles. These orobstacles
features.
growth product
in competition hasaddition,
developed isa an threat for modeling methodology can be employed that determines
shortened
raising continuously. lifecycles.
Numbers In of qualitytherepractices increasing
have been However, assembly
can be further linkedoriented product families
with literature review and are hardly to find.a
can develop
manufacturing industries since customer expectations are inter-relationships among the key obstacles. These obstacles
demand
employed of by
customization,
manufacturing being
firmsat all
theover
samethetime in aTPM
world, global is pair-wise relationship
On the product family among
level,them. In addition
products to theininter-
differ mainly two
raising continuously. Numbers of quality practices have been can be further linked with literature review and can develop a
competition
one of the with competitors
popular choices all overprofit.
to get the world.
With This
TPMtrend,firm relationships,
main the barriers,
characteristics: (i) the drivingofpower,
number componentsand dependence
and (ii) the
employed by manufacturing firms all over the world, TPM is pair-wise relationship among them. In addition to the inter-
which is inducing the development from macro to micro power
type of of the barriers
components (e.g. can be determined
mechanical, electrical, by MICMAC
electronical).
one of the popular choices to get profit. With TPM firm relationships, the barriers, driving power, and dependence
markets, results in diminished lot sizes due to augmenting Classical
power methodologies
of the barriers can considering mainly single
be determined products
by MICMAC
product varieties (high-volume to low-volume production) [1]. or solitary, already existing product families analyze the
2212-8271 © 2020 The Authors, Published by Elsevier B.V.
To
Thiscope
is an with this augmenting
open access article under thevariety as welllicense
CC BY-NC-ND as to(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
be able to product structure on a physical level (components level) which
identify
Peer reviewpossible
2212-8271 ©under
2020the optimization
Theresponsibility of thepotentials
Authors, Published by Elsevier
scientific in theof the
B.V.
committee existing causes difficulties
28th CIRP Conference regarding an efficient definition and
on Life Cycle Engineering.
This is an open
production access article
system, under the CCtoBY-NC-ND
it is important license knowledge
have a precise (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
comparison of different product families. Addressing this
Peer review under the responsibility of the scientific committee of the 28th CIRP Conference on Life Cycle Engineering.
2212-8271 © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
This is an©open
2212-8271 2017access article Published
The Authors. under theby CC BY-NC-ND
Elsevier B.V. license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0)
Peer-review
Peer-review under
under responsibility
responsibility of scientific
of the the scientific committee
committee of the of theCIRP
28th 28thDesign
CIRP Conference
Conference2018.
on Life Cycle Engineering.
10.1016/j.procir.2021.01.037
242 Rajesh P. Mishra et al. / Procedia CIRP 98 (2021) 241–246
2 Rajesh P. Mishra, Gajanand Gupta, Anita Sharma/ Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000

analysis. MICMAC analysis categorized by TPM quick to adopt quality improvement initiatives in the contest
implementation barriers can be split into four groups namely of the rivalry, The Indian manufacturing industry still facing
Autonomous, Linkage, Independent, and Dependent. A the challenge in achieving globalization [8].
hierarchy model of these barriers can be proposed by level
partition. 3. TPM barriers for Indian manufacturing industries

The prime aspect of the study is to focus on getting better In this study, barriers faced by Indian manufacturing
efficiency, higher life cycle, and more stable productivity. In organizations have been determined through the face to face
addition to recognize and minimize the crucial obstacles to questionnaire survey, interviews, and informal conversation
TPM employment in manufacturing industries in the Indian
with the academician and industrial experts. All the
context, so that customer is always under satisfied condition.
academician and industrial experts were from manufacturing
domain. These barriers have been divided into behavioral,
organizational, cultural, technological, departmental,
2. Literature review
operational, and financial barriers [7]. These barriers are
discussed in detail as follows:
2.1. Total productive maintenance
3.1. Organizational barriers
TPM is a strategy that is proposed to exaggerate the
productivity of a manufacturing firm as well as the efficiency
 Lack of top level management commitment
of the equipment during the course of its usage in the  Ineffective top level management to execute TPM
operations by whole contribution and enthusiasm of all its practices
personnel [2]. TPM is a systematic program focused on  Ineffective organization to change the culture
production enhancement which deals with the reliability of  Unaware to real prospective of TPM in the organization
the firm’s facilities and successful organization of plant  Ineffective organization to change the employees
resources by continuous involvement of employee, attitude
empowerment concerning manufacturing, maintenance, and  Focus on numbers of maintenance practices at a single
industrial function [3]. The principle motive behind the TPM time
terminology is minifying the waste incurred in the various  Improper consideration of the TPM rules
operations thus cutting down the overall cost by enhancing its  Lack of appropriate plans
productivity and generating excellent quality products [4].  Middle managements attitude towards not empowering
the bottom level operators
2.2. TPM barriers in literature  Ineffective management to firmly follow the TPM
principles
Bamber et al. [5] discovered key factors arousing effect on the  Organization’ s incapability to improve employees skill
employment of the TPM in small to medium industries in the towards work
UK and developed a generic model of the factors. Cooke [1] a  Unfriendliness of employees towards development
conducted study of four processing/manufacturing companies practices in the organization
that faced problems in adopting the TPM program and  Lack of suitable services for the organization’s workers
observed that implementation of TPM in the organization, is a  Lack of appropriate measurement system for measuring
organization’s performance
laborious job gloomily affected by the various obstacles such
 Lack of reward and promotions for the employees in
as financial, governmental, divisional, etc. Kumar et al. [6]
the organization
conducted a questionnaire survey of the machinery and
automobile industry all over India and examined the influence
3.2. Cultural barriers
of total productive maintenance practices on Indian
manufacturing output.
 Employee’s resistance towards the culture change
 Lack of quality perception in the organizational culture
2.3. Indian manufacturing industry –A review  Lack of motivation of the employees towards the
organization’s goal
Several researchers had carried out the study on the  Employees rigid attitude towards adapting new
organizations that implemented or implementing the TPM approaches or practices
program into their manufacturing and maintenance functions  Lack of skill employees in the workplace
across the world. Indian industry is in quick need to identify  Lack of employees participation in the decision making
and understand the key barriers to TPM implementation to  Lack of quality expertise in production to reduce
compete with the rivals in the global marketplace. To achieve rework
maintenance excellent in the competitive environment; major
Indian manufacturing organizations are also adopting the 3.3. Behavioral barriers
maintenance strategy. Ahuja et al. [7] highlighted major
hurdles in the implementation of the TPM program, severely  Employee’s resistance to familiarize themselves for
influencing the overall performance of the Indian new changes
manufacturing industry. Although global organizations are  Lack of cross functional working teams
 Rajesh P. Mishra et al. / Procedia CIRP 98 (2021) 241–246 243
Rajesh P. Mishra, Gajanand Gupta, Anita Sharma / Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000 3

 Inadequate motivation among organization’s employees  Lack of proper reward, incentive and credit system for
for its growth and development motivating its employees
 Lack of efforts of the employees towards learning multi  Lack of the standard quality measurement system due
–skills and updating their skills to economic condition of the organization
 Unwillingness of employees to learn new practices in
production and maintenance department 3.7. Departmental barriers
 Employee’s resistance to change because of fear of job
loss  Lack of coordination among various departments in the
 Employee’s preference towards traditional practices firm
 Lack of support and understanding in the management  Unwillingness of maintenance workers to adopt
behaviour autonomous maintenance program as their routine
function
3.4. Technological barriers  Separation of responsibilities in departments
 Lack of trust on efficient employee’s skills for
 Lack of importance on the production potential further independent maintenance jobs
than the design
 Lack of adequate system for assessing the reliability of 4. Development of a Model for TPM Barriers
the organization and faster delivery of the products
 Lack of adequate predictive maintenance services in the Interpretive structural modeling (ISM) is a process of
organization establishing an inter-relationship among the barriers. Expert
 Lack of adequate computerized maintenance judgments help to decide the inter-relation between the
management systems (CMMS) services in the firms barriers. ISM structures a model corresponding to the inter-
 Unawareness of incompetence of losses occurs in the relationship among the variables. Warfield [9] developed
production platform system and reworks that affecting ISM. Numbers of researchers had used ISM in different areas.
manufacturing development Mandal and Deshmukh [10] applied ISM for the selection of
 Lack of flexibilities in the production system because of vendors, Raj et al. [11] proposed a model of enablers affecting
long set up times the Indian flexible manufacturing system. Soti et al. [12]
 Lack of knowledge in the employees toward new employed ISM for modeling the critical factors of Six Sigma.
technologies because of improper training ISM methodology includes the following steps:
 Less emphasis on preservation practices for
improvements in the existing system 4.1. Identification of TPM barriers
 Efficiency of production system is not of good quality
Once the problem statement is clear, barriers affecting the
3.5. Operational barriers problem are identified through the literature review, industry
or academic experience, personal interviews, or questionnaire
 Accepting high level of the defects in jobs with less survey.
significance to the quality improvement techniques
such as 6σ and 6s principles 4.2. Construction of structural self-interaction matrix (SSIM)
 Lack of execution of the standard operating measures
 Lack of the empowerment of the workers in decision With pair wise assessment between the barriers, a
making related to organization’s equipment and structural self-interaction matrix is established by expert’s
machinery opinions as shown in Table 1. Four symbols are used to inter-
 Unavailability of check sheets for effective scheduled relate the barriers (i.e. i and j). These are:
maintenance  Symbol V represents that enabler i would lead enabler j.
 Top level management’s failure to implement safe work  Symbol A represents that enablers j would lead enabler
environment for workers i.
 Employee’s resistance to accomplish single  Symbol X represents that enabler i and j would help to
maintenance task in the production department attain one other.
 Inadequate environment conditions in lack of the 5 S  Symbol O represents that there is no relation between
implementation in the organization enabler i and j.
 More emphasis on repair of the facilities rather than Structural self-interaction matrix obtained from expert’s
stoppage of the breakdown opinions is shown in the Table 1.
 More focus on routine production goals rather than
continuous process improvements Table 1. Structural self-interaction matrix
S.N. Barriers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3.6. Financial barriers 1 Organizational Barriers X X X V V V V
2 Cultural Barriers X X X X V O O
 Lack of adequate system for assessing the execution of
3 Behavioural Barriers X X X O V O V
the TPM in the initial stage
 Ineffective top level to provide support the 4 Technological Barriers A X O X V A O
improvement program 5 Operational Barriers A A A A X X X
 244 Rajesh P. Mishra et al. / Procedia CIRP 98 (2021) 241–246
4 Rajesh P. Mishra, Gajanand Gupta, Anita Sharma/ Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000

6 Financial barriers A O O V X X O DEP 4 4 4 5 7 7 6

7 Departmental Barriers A O A O X O X RK IV IV IV III I I I
I

4.3. Development of Reachability matrix

The structural self-interaction matrix (SSIM) obtained in This procedure continues until all the levels are determined.
the previous step is then transformed into an initial Table 4, 5, and 6 shows I, II, and III level of the ISM
reachability matrix by replacing variables V, A, X, and O hierarchy respectively.
through 1 and 0 as per the methodology [13]. Further from the
Table 4. Level partition of the TPM Barriers - Ist Iteration
initial reachability matrix, shown in Table 2, a final
Barriers Reachability Antecedent Intersection Level
reachability matrix is formulated integrating the transitivity in set set set
it. The final reachability matrix is shown in Table 3.
1 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 1,2,3,4 1,2,3,4 I
Table 2. Initial reachability matrix 2 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 1,2,3,4 1,2,3,4 I
S.N. Barriers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 1,2,3,4 1,2,3,4 I
1 Organizational Barriers 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 1,2,3,4,6 1,2,3,4,6 I
2 Cultural Barriers 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 5 5,6,7 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 5,6,7
3 Behavioural Barriers 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 6 4,5,6 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 4,5,6
4 Technological Barriers 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 7 5,6,7 1,2,3,4,5,7 5,7
5 Operational Barriers 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
6 Financial barriers 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 Table 5.Level partition of the TPM Barriers - 2nd Iteration
7 Departmental Barriers 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Barriers Reachability Antecedent set Intersection Level
set set
5 5,6,7 5,6,7 5,6,7 II

4.4. Canonical matrix by level partitions 6 5,6 5,6,7 5,6

7 5,6,7 5,7 5,7 II
After obtaining the final reachability matrix from the
initial reachability matrix is obtained, the level partition has Table 6.Level partition of the TPM Barriers – 3rd Iteration
been accomplished on it. The variables are grouped into two
categories that are reachability and antecedent set Barriers Reachability set Antecedent set Intersection set Level
respectively. Reachability set is the group of the variables that 6 6 6 6 III
consists of 1 in the row, whereas the antecedent set is the
group of the variables that consists of 1 in the column.
4.5. Development of ISM Model
The Intersection of reachability and antecedent set provides
an intersection set. Level partition has been done based on the
Once the level partition has been completed, a structural
intersection criteria, more number of the variable from the
model of the barriers to TPM implementation is developed.
reachability set interesting with the antecedent, that barrier
The hierarchy of the ISM model is obtained by level partition
has been given the priority. This provides the levels of
and the connection among the barriers is obtained by
barriers. Once the 1st level barrier is obtained, it is removed
removing the transitivity from the final reachability matrix.
from the remaining variables.
Arrows from barrier “i” to barrier “j”, indicate the relationship
Table 3. Final reachability matrix with driving power and dependence
between barrier i and j. The obtained hierarchy of the ISM
RK- rank, DP- driving power, DEP- dependence model for TPM barriers is shown in Figure 1. Diagraph for
S. Barriers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 D R TPM barrier is obtained from the final reachability matrix
N. P K with driving and dependence power as shown in Figure 2.
1 Organizational 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 I
Barriers
2 Cultural 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 I
Barriers
3 Behavioural 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 I
Barriers
4 Technological 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 I
Barriers
5 Operational 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 II
Barriers
6 Financial 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 II
barriers
7 Departmental 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 II
Fig. 1. The hierarchy of ISM Model for TPM barriers
Barriers
 Rajesh P. Mishra et al. / Procedia CIRP 98 (2021) 241–246 245
Rajesh P. Mishra, Gajanand Gupta, Anita Sharma / Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000 5

5. Results and discussions 2. No autonomous barriers have been identified in this

digraph. Dependent barriers consist of organizational,
The ultimate objective is to determine the driving and cultural, and behavioral barriers in its category. Technological
dependence power of the barriers to TPM execution that is is the only linkage barrier. Independent/driver-category
furnished by employing the MICMAC analysis into practice. consists of operational, departmental, and financial barriers.
The analysis categorized the barriers into four groups of as
shown in Figure 2. Driving power and dependence barriers 6. Conclusions
are identified in the final reachability matrix, as shown in
Table 3. These four categories are as follows: It can be noted that the present situation of competition across
 Autonomous barriers: These are the barriers that the among organizations had increasing continuously. There
have poor driver power and poor dependence. is an instant need to adopt maintenance practices to compete
 Linkage barriers: These are the barriers to robust with competitors. The primary focus of every organization is
driver power and dependence. These barriers are to improve its efficiency and enhance productivity by
unstable and will affect other barriers. lowering delivery time so those customers are made happy.
 Dependent barriers: These are the barriers of poor To achieve this goal organization must implement some new
weak driver power but high dependence power. maintenance practices and TPM is one of them. In this study,
 Independent barriers: These are the barriers of robust a hierarchy model of TPM barriers was developed using an
strong driver power whereas poor dependence integrated ISM and MICMAC analysis. This approach had
power. Barriers of high driver power, known a helped organizational management to identify the significance
‘crucial barriers might be independent or linkage of TPM barriers and enable TPM into their system. MICMAC
barriers. analysis was done for identifying autonomous, linkage,
dependent, and independent barriers.
7 5, 6
The purpose of this research work was to recognize
6 7 the crucial obstacles to TPM employment in manufacturing
D
E Independent Linkage industries in the Indian context based on literature review and
P 5 4
Barrier Barriers experience. Presented work was focused on inter-relationship
E
N 1, 2
among the barriers of the TPM implementation. This can be
D 4 3 helpful for the organizational managers to understand the role
E of each barrier to the successful implementation of the TPM
N 3
C Autonomous Dependent program into the organization. An integrated ISM and
E 2 Barrier Barrier MICMAC interpretation were also employed to determine the
inter-relationships amongst the obstacles to TPM
1 implementation. Furthermore, ISM provides a pair-wise
relationship between the barriers and MICMAC analysis
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 provides the driving power and dependency power. Finally,
Autonomous, Linkage, Independent, and Dependent obstacles
DRIVING POWER were identified by driving and dependence power, and a
hierarchy model of these barriers was proposed by level
partition.
Fig. 2. Driving power and dependence digraph for TPM barriers
References
The study identifies the crucial barriers to TPM
employment in Indian manufacturing industries from the [1] F. L. Cooke, "Implementing TPM in plant maintenance: some
literature review and industrial experience. Inter-relations organisational barriers", International Journal of Quality & Reliability
between these barriers have been achieved from the group Management, vol. 17, no. 9, pp. 1003-1016, Jul. 2000.
judgments of the experts. An ISM methodology has been used [2] S. Nakajima, Introduction to TPM, Productivity Press, Cambridge, MA,
1988.
to inter-relate the barriers. ISM digraph has been developed
[3] I. P. S. Ahuja, and, J. S. Khamba, "An evaluation of TPM initiatives in
by final reachability matrix using driving and dependence Indian industry for enhanced manufacturing performance", International
power as shown in figure 2. Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 147-172,
The study shows that organizational, cultural, behavioral, 2008.
and technological barriers are at the top of the hierarchy [4] P. S. Poduval, V. R. Pramod, and R. V. P. Jagathy, “Barriers in
having strong driving power. Organizations must focus to implementation of TPM in industries”, International Journal of Scientific
consider the role of these barriers in the TPM implementation. and Technology Research, vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 28-33, May 2013.
[5] C. J. Bamber, J. M. Sharp, and M.T. Hides, "Factors affecting successful
The middle of the ISM hierarchy consists of operational and
implementation of total productive maintenance", Journal of Quality in
departmental barriers whereas the bottom of the hierarchy Maintenance Engineering, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 162-181,1999.
consists of financial barriers. [6] J. Kumar, V. K. Soni, and G. Agnihotri, "Impact of TPM implementation
Study of the driving and dependence power of the barriers on Indian manufacturing industry", International Journal of Productivity
affects the execution of TPM program in an organization and Performance Management, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 44-56, 2014.
using MICMAC methodology. In MICMAC analysis the [7] I. P. S. Ahuja and J. S. Khamba, "Strategies and success factors for
TPM barriers are divided into four groups as shown in Figure overcoming challenges in TPM implementation in Indian manufacturing
 246 Rajesh P. Mishra et al. / Procedia CIRP 98 (2021) 241–246
6 Rajesh P. Mishra, Gajanand Gupta, Anita Sharma/ Procedia CIRP 00 (2019) 000–000

industry", Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, vol. 14, no. 2, [11] T. Raj, R. Shankar and M. Suhaib, “An ISM approach for modelling the
pp. 123-147, 2008. enablers of flexible manufacturing system: the case for India”,
[8] M. K. Panneerselvam, “TPM implementation to invigorate manufacturing International Journal of Production Research, vol 46, no. 24, pp. 6883-
performance: an Indian industrial rubric”, International Journal of 6912, 2008.
Scientific & Engineering Research, vol. 3, no. 6, June 2012. [12] A. Soti, R. Shankar, and O. P. Kaushal, "Modeling the enablers of Six
[9] J. N. Warfield (1974), “Developing interconnection matrices in structural Sigma using interpreting structural modeling", Journal of Modelling in
modeling”, IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics, vol. 4, Management, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 124-141, Dec. 2010.
no. 1, pp. 81-87, 1974. [13] S. J. Gorane and R. Kant, “Modelling the SCM enablers: an integrated
[10] A. Mandal and S. Deshmukh, “Vendor selection using interpretive ISM-fuzzy MICMAC approach”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and
structural modelling (ISM)”, International Journal of Operations & Logistics, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 263-286, 2013.
Production Management, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 52-59,1994.