See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/32117285

The implementation of world class manufacturing techniques in

Egyptian manufacturing firms: An empirical study

Article in Industrial Management & Data Systems · May 2007

DOI: 10.1108/02635570710740698 · Source: OAI

CITATIONS READS
48 3,011

2 authors:

Salaheldin Ismail Salaheldin Riyad Eid

Helwan University United Arab Emirates University
46 PUBLICATIONS 1,013 CITATIONS 128 PUBLICATIONS 3,882 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Riyad Eid on 25 September 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-5577.htm

World class
The implementation of world manufacturing
class manufacturing techniques in techniques
Egyptian manufacturing firms
551
An empirical study
Salaheldin Ismail Salaheldin
Department of Management and Marketing,
College of Business and Economics, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar, and
Riyad Eid
Wolverhampton Business School, Wolverhampton University, Wolverhampton, UK

Abstract
Purpose – The purposes of this paper are to illustrate how the world class manufacturing (WCM)
techniques which could be described as outperforming the industry’s global best practices have been
implemented in the Egyptian manufacturing firms, to identify the critical driving and resisting forces
toward WCM techniques implementation in Egyptian manufacturing firms, and to provide guidelines
for the successful implementation of WCM by Egyptian manufacturers.
Design/methodology/approach – The data analyzed in this study are collected from a mail
questionnaire sent to 200 manufacturing firms in Egypt.
Findings – The findings of this study indicate that the Egyptian manufacturers are still in the 1970s
and 1980s, when compared with world-class manufacturers. The most important variables that
promote the implementation of WCM techniques are “reduced operating costs (marketing and
production)” and “global issues (environment-market).” More importantly, the results of this study
indicate that poor planning and lack of knowledge are the most significant barriers to WCM
implementation in the Egyptian manufacturing sector.
Research limitations/implications – There is a need to empirically explore the benefits of WCM
implementation by the Egyptian manufacturing companies. Furthermore, more research is needed to
study how the perceived importance of these drivers and barriers may differ across each industry such
as manufacturing equipment, chemical and plastics, telecommunications, hardware equipment, textile
industry, home equipment, scientific and medical equipment, management consulting, and software
development.
Practical implications – This study hopes to create more awareness among management and
employees about the strategic importance of WCM techniques to operations processes in the Egyptian
manufacturing firms.
Originality/value – Although the last few years have witnessed phenomenal growth in WCM
techniques, the underlying factors driving and inhibiting its diffusion are not well understood
specially in the context of less developed countries in general and Egypt in particular. Therefore, this
paper presents an empirical research that investigated the factors driving and inhibiting WCM
implementation in Egypt and it provides insight into the strategies currently being adopted by
Egyptian manufacturers in an effort to meet the challenge of obtaining WCM status.
Keywords World class manufacturing, Manufacturing industries, Egypt, Developing countries
Industrial Management & Data
Paper type Research paper Systems
Vol. 107 No. 4, 2007
pp. 551-566
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
The authors sincerely thank the editor and the anonymous IMDS reviewers for their constructive 0263-5577
and valuable comments and suggestions. DOI 10.1108/02635570710740698
IMDS Introduction
The rapid changes in business environment due to its unique characteristics, the raise
107,4 of international competition among companies, shrinkage of markets, and diffusion of
the IT through organisations have put pressure on businesses to continually review
and adopt their traditional manufacturing strategy. In fact, there is a constant search
for new ways to achieve a competitive advantage through new manufacturing
552 techniques. Therefore, increasing knowledge and coordination of the company’s
processes that crosses its manufacturing functions becomes a main requirement of
many companies seeking a competitive advantage.
Undoubtedly, a combination of external and internal factors including population
growth, weak infrastructure, foreign debt, increasing inequalities between individuals,
groups and regions has prevented many developing countries from achieving
significant socio-economic improvements. Some developing countries such as Egypt
have, therefore, made manufacturing management their prime agenda. They are going
through a process of restructuring their manufacturing systems to emphasize
competition, integration with global markets and increasing level of privatizations.
Global competitors operating in global markets almost always tend to have
world-class performance. World class manufacturing (WCM) has often been
characterised by three core strategies of customer focus, quality, and agility (i.e. the
ability to quickly, efficiently and effectively respond to change), and six supporting
competencies; employee involvement (EI), supply management, technology, product
development, environmental responsibility and employee safety, and corporate
citizenship (Kinni, 1996). Thus, in order to compete in global markets, Egyptian
manufacturing necessarily needs to acquire world-class performance.
In fact, as is the case with many other new concepts in management, there is no
consistent definition of WCM. The term “world class” was coined by Hayes and
Wheelwright (1984) to describe the capabilities which had been developed by
Japanese and German companies, as well as the US firms which had competed equally
with the Japanese and German firms. The term “World Class Manufacturing” was used
because these firms have achieved an outstanding performance in their global
competition, resulting in their being described as “World Class”. However, the term
became popular only after Schonberger (1986) discussed it as “ . . . .the term nicely
captures the breadth and the essence of fundamental changes taking place in industrial
enterprises.” WCM is one of the broadest philosophies focusing primarily on
production. It includes, for example just in time (JIT), total quality management (TQM)
and EI to achieve continuous improvement of a process. WCM also include more
structural changes such as new production technology (Schonberger, 1986; Vokurka
and Davis, 2004).
Greene (1991, p. 14) gave an in depth definition for WCM companies which could be
described as follow:
WCM companies are those companies which continuously outperform the industry’s global best
practices and which know intimately their customers and suppliers, know their competitors’
performance capabilities and know their own strengths and weaknesses. All of which form a
basis of – continually changing – competitive strategies and performance objectives.
Although many writers have focused on the area of WCM since Schonberger’s work in
1986, very few of the studies have actually collected empirical evidence which would
outline and highlight the important factors included within WCM. Furthermore, it was
discovered that only a few studies on WCM implementation in developing countries World class
have appeared recently (Salaheldin, 2005; Saxena and Sahay, 2000). With this manufacturing
perspective, the main task of the current empirical study is to investigate the critical
variables that are driving and inhibiting the implementation of WCM techniques in techniques
Egyptian manufacturing firms. Moreover, this investigation is seen as a principal step
towards formulating strategies and tactics that remove and avoid many of the severe
obstacles that impede the successful implementation of WCM philosophy on the road 553
to achieving its potential benefits.

Contribution to current knowledge

The contribution of this study is threefold. First, the findings of this study contribute to
operations management literature in general and to WCM literature in particular. This
may provide some ideas for other researchers to execute more research in the field of
the WCM techniques implementation.
Second, there has not been any reported research of the implementation of WCM
techniques in less developed countries in general, and in Egypt in particular. Thus, this
paper represents a first attempt at reporting a story of the driving and resisting factors
toward WCM implementation in the Egyptian industrial sector.
Third, a very significant contribution of this study is to provide guidelines for the
successful implementation of WCM by Egyptian manufacturers, and which can be
used as a template for other manufacturing companies.

Research questions and objectives

To analyze the implementation of excellent manufacturing techniques by Egyptian
manufacturing firms, the researchers developed two major questions:
(1) What progress have Egyptian manufacturers made towards World-Class status
and where are they currently?
(2) What are the drivers that encourage Egyptian manufacturers to adopt these
WCM strategies? And what are the difficulties which may prevent them from
embracing such strategies?

These were the overall questions to be answered by the current study; defined by the
following three objectives to:
(1) explore the current status of Excellent Manufacturing Techniques applications
and management practices in Egyptian manufacturing;
(2) identify the critical driving and resisting forces toward WCM techniques
implementation in Egyptian manufacturing firms; and
(3) provide guidelines for the successful implementation of WCM by Egyptian
manufacturers.

Literature review
Overview of the definition of world class manufacturing
The term “world class manufacturing” has been first introduced by Hayes and
Wheelwright (1984). Since, then, various researchers have embraced and expanded this
concept. WCM determines which set of activities needs to be undertaken by identifying
IMDS what is needed by the companies to compete globally. Moreover, WCM itself involves
107,4 many factors systematically related to promotion, for example, raw materials, energy,
machinery, labour, and management. Furthermore, World Class companies optimise
the problem-solving abilities of their employees in applying both modern techniques
and traditional engineering process.
According to Hayes and Wheelwright (1984), WCM is composed of six dimensions:
554 workforce skills and capabilities, management technical competence, competing
through quality, workforce participation, rebuilding manufacturing engineering, and
incremental improvement approaches. By comparing the practices of Japanese and
German manufacturers with US manufacturers, Hayes and Wheelwright claimed that
the US plants must focus on these six broad categories of practices in order to achieve
their WCM status.
Schonberger (1986) provided a list of 16 principles of WCM which fall into eight
categories: general, design, operations, human resources, quality and process
improvement, information for operations and control, capacity, promotion and
marketing. Schonberger actually asked managers to evaluate their own plants based
on these 16 principles. He warned those plants that scored low on the 16 principles to
identify their problems and make an effort to improve these practices to keep up with
the competition.
However, the phrase “world-class manufacturing” is one of the most overworked
terms in management glossaries at present. Often, it is a name given to a novel
development that is taking place in most competitive manufacturing operations
across the globe. Schonberger (1987) used it to refer to many techniques and
technologies designed to enable a company to match its best competitors. These
techniques includes for example, JIT, quality circles (QC), Kanban, material
requirements planning (MRP), flexible manufacturing system (FMS), computer aided
design (CAD), computer aided manufacturing (CAM), computer integrated
manufacturing (CIM), manufacturing resource planning (MRPII), total quality
control (TQC), total productive maintenance (TPM)/Preventive Maintenance, TQM,
simultaneous engineering, benchmarking, intelligent manufacturing, electronic
commerce, business process re-engineering (BPR), enterprise resource planning
(ERP), electronic data interchange (EDI) and supply chain management.

Drivers and barriers to WCM implementation

Drivers and barriers to WCM implementation in general have been classified in
various ways. For example, Assiri et al. (2006), Avlonitis and Karayanni (2000), Eid
and Trueman (2004) and Poon and Jevons (1997) talk about external drivers, i.e. global
competition, international customers’ needs, developments in IT. Chan and Swatman
(2000) includes internal drivers, i.e. changes in the organisational strategies
and savings. Others talk about WCM barriers, i.e. need for cost justification,
resistance to change, lack of management support, lack of knowledge, lack of
appropriate monitoring and lack of employee education and training (Porter, 2001;
Skinner, 1999).

WCM implementation drivers

External drivers, internal drivers, or both motivate WCM implementation. Naturally,
external drivers relate to the increased level of global competition, the changes in the
international customers’ needs, recent developments in IT, and competition (Chan and World class
Swatman, 2000; Cronin, 1996; Eid and Trueman, 2004; Hollensen, 2001; Poon and manufacturing
Jevons, 1997; Skinner, 1999; Hsu and Lin, 2006). Internal drivers are mainly related to
changes in the organisational strategies and cost savings (Chan and Swatman, 2000; techniques
Cronin, 1996; Skinner, 1999).
Perhaps, one of the strongest drivers is the increasing level of competition in the
global markets. This has emphasised the need for organisations to innovate if they are 555
to cope with global standards of products and services. Therefore, increasing
knowledge and coordination of the company’s processes that cross its manufacturing
functions become the main requirements of many companies seeking a competitive
advantage. Gilgeous and Gilgeous (1999), Kasul and Motwani (1995), Kreitner (1995)
approach the WCM as a tool to dramatically improve business performance and gain
or maintain a competitive position.
Similarly, Salaheldin (2005) and Saxena and Sahay (2000) also believe that WCM is
driven by the never-ending needs of customers who are looking for better services and
products. Finally, competitors’ use of the WCM techniques and their ability to respond
to customers has a strong effect on the adoption of the WCM.
On the other hand, technology drives organisational change at process,
communications, and strategic level. Changes in organisational strategy may
involve WCM use to bring about new strategic goals. For example, it may wish to
broaden the use of existing electronic trading technology to include an advanced
manufacturing technique as an alternative medium (Chan and Swatman, 2000).
Reducing costs by substituting the WCM for other traditional techniques is yet
another driver for WCM use since it is associated with cost savings. For example,
Skinner (1999) states that sellers can obtain cost savings in “finding new customers”
and “administration costs” generated through timesaving and the reduction in staff
numbers.

Barriers to WCM implementation

There is a widespread recognition that WCM is a necessary technique for the
achievement of competitiveness. It combines a system of knowledge, techniques,
experiences, skills, and organisational characteristics that are needed to produce,
utilise and control output. WCM is crucial to competition, because the techniques and
resources it combines can create new opportunities. Such an approach is given added
impetus by rapid technological changes and fierce competition, requiring Egyptian
manufacturers to consider the adaptation of modern techniques which can be classified
under the overall umbrella term of WCM.
However, many authors have argued that WCM implementation has a number of
limitations that are needed to be addressed in the manufacturing strategy (Hollensen,
2001; Porter, 2001; Skinner, 1999; Wilson and Abel, 2002).
When implementing the WCM techniques, there may be different barriers: such as
partial implementation of WCM techniques (Becker, 1993), overly optimistic
expectations (Doyle, 1992) and implementation of WCM to conform to societal
norms rather than for its instrumentality (Campbell, 1994).
However, some of the prominent problems in WCM implementation include partial
implementation, lack of a well-defined routine for attaining the objectives of
implementation, cultural resistance to change, lack of training and education, and lack
IMDS of organizational communication (Crawford et al., 1988; Becker, 1993; Patterson et al.,
107,4 1995; Westphal et al., 1997). These problems reflect the lack of a clear understanding of
what are the fundamental and complementary manufacturing practices. It can also be
inferred that companies that encountered failure in their program implementation
neglected the development of practices that support the implementation of WCM
techniques.
556 Moreover, Safayeni et al. (1991) contend that failure of WCM implementation is
partly due to confusion over what exactly constitutes WCM and its implementation
within an existing organization structure that does not provide the necessary support.
The major barrier that will possibly affect WCM implementation is the inability of a
company to coordinate its human resource practices, management policies and
technology (Fredendall et al., 1997). Together, these problems reflect the lack of a
system that supports the implementation of WCM programs.

Research methodology
Hypotheses
This research is empirical and this characteristic stems from its objectives. Thus,
in order to shed light on the status of the Egyptian manufacturing firms,
implementation of WCM and factors which may influence the adoption of WCM
techniques in an Egyptian context; it is important to consider the following hypotheses:
H1. The most modern WCM practices are less implemented by the Egyptian
manufacturing firms.
H2. Basic drivers of WCM positively affect the implementation of the WCM
techniques in the Egyptian context.
H3. Basic barriers of WCM negatively affect the implementation of the WCM
techniques in the Egyptian context.

Research instrument development – measures

The development of the research instrument was based mainly on new scales, because
we could not identify any past studies directly addressing all of the issues in this
research. However, and where possible, we used validated measures that have been
previously applied. The constructs, scale items and factor loadings obtained from
exploratory factor analysis are presented on the data analysis section.
Two consecutive rounds of pre-testing were conducted in order to insure that
respondents could understand the measurement scales used in the study: first, the
questionnaire was reviewed by three academic researchers experienced in
questionnaire design and next, the questionnaire was piloted with two WCM
experts known to the researchers. The pilot took the form of an interview where the
participants were first handed a copy of the questionnaire and asked to complete it
followed by a discussion on any comments or questions they had. The outcome of the
pre-testing process was a slight modification and alteration of the existing scales, in
light of the scales context under investigation.
The pilot work was undertaken in August 2005. Based on the results and comments
from the pilot tests, revisions were made to the questionnaire design. The formal
survey was conducted between January and April 2006. A total of 200 manufacturing
firms in Egypt were selected as the samples of the survey.
Instrument validity and reliability World class
Discriminant validity was assessed using factor analysis. The 17 items (variables) manufacturing
measuring the WCM drivers and barriers were subjected to principal component factor
analysis. Eigenvalues and scree plot were used to determine the number of factors to be techniques
extracted. Moreover, in order to ensure the use of factor analysis, the Berlett test of
sphericity (BTS) and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test of appropriateness were carried
out accordingly (Table I). 557
The result (BTS was 1,625.44 and the level of significance at P ¼ 0.000) indicated
that the data are appropriate for the purpose of factor analysis. Statistically, this means
that there exist relationships between the variables and that they can be appropriately
included in the analysis (Bryman, 1989). The result of sampling adequacy was 0.940
which, following Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin measure of sampling adequacy, reflected high
sampling adequacy.
The 17 items loaded on the two factors as suggested using the criteria of an
eigenvalue greater than 1 and the extracted factors account for 72.077 of the total
variance (Table II). A viramax rotation was also performed. All items loaded onto the
expected factors as they were originally designed. Factors loading were higher than 0.5
on its own factors. As suggested by Hair et al. (1998), a factor loading higher than 0.35
is considered statistically significant at an a level of 0.05. The reliability of the
constructs was assessed by the Cronbach a reliability coefficient and exceeded
Nunnally’s standards for research (Nunnally, 1978) (Table III).

The sample
The mail survey questionnaire that was sent to 200 manufacturing firms in Egypt
focused on company characteristics, human modification efforts to be undertaken prior
to WCM implementation and WCM implementation drivers and problems.
The survey population of this study is defined as all Egyptian manufacturing
companies (200 companies) in the Egyptian ex-public industrial sector[1]. The
target respondent in each company was the production manager or materials
manager. All the selected companies had implemented at least one of the WCM
techniques at least one year ago. A research packet, which contained a covering
letter and an anonymous (self-administering) questionnaire, was mailed to the head
of production departments; production managers, or material managers (200 in
total). This procedure resulted in 96 useful responses or a 48.00 percent overall
response rate.

Bartlett’s test of sphericity

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy Approx. x 2 df Sig.
Table I.
0.940 1,625.440 136 0.000 KMO and Bartlett’s test

Factor Eigenvalue Variance explained (percent) Cumulative variance (percent)

1 11.124 65.436 65.436 Table II.

2 1.129 6.641 72.077 Total variance explained
IMDS
Factor loading Cronbach a
107,4
WCM drivers 0.945
Global issues (environment-market) 0.685
Local competitiveness 0.857
Government pressures 0.800
558 Economical justification 0.718
Reduced operating costs (marketing and production) 0.742
Improving the range and quality of services 0.739
Take advantage of being an early adopter 0.535
Avoiding losing market share to competitors who
are already implementing WCM 0.758
B-to-B IIM Barriers 0.944
Need for cost justification 0.624
Resistance to change 0.618
Lack of management support 0.731
Poor planning 0.770
Lack of knowledge 0.786
Lack of appropriate monitoring 0.640
Table III. Lack of employee education and training 0.833
Factor loading and Lack of employee motivation 0.618
Cronbach’s a analysis Lack of communication 0.807

The sample can be described as follows: a majority of the respondents were involved
on WCM implementation (69.81 percent), few were younger than 40 years old
(16.7 percent), and the majority (approximately 47.9 percent) were more than 50 years
old. With respect to number of employees in each company, approximately 46.9 percent
of the sample had more than 1,000 employees, 22.9 percent had 501-1,000 employees,
16.7 percent had 101-500 employees and only 13.5 percent had only less than
100 employees. In terms of the production sector, 27.1 percent of the respondents were
members of engineering and electronic sector, 27.1 percent were food companies,
19.8 percent were chemical companies, 11.5 were textile companies 9.4 percent were
working in the mining industry and only 5.2 percent were producing wood products.
Finally, more than half of the respondents hold the position of operation manager in
their companies (58.3 percent). On the other hand, 17.72 percent hold the position of
marketing manager, 11.5 percent hold the position of Purchasing and 12.5 percent are
IT manager.
To ensure that the valid responses were representatives of the larger population, a
non-response bias test was used to compare the early and late respondents. x 2 tests
show no significant difference between the two groups of respondents at the 5 percent
significance level, implying that a non-response bias is not a concern.

Data analysis
The findings of the survey
The interpretation of the two-factor solution was accomplished by relating them
to theoretical concepts of production and operation management. The first factor
seems to fit very well with the WCM drivers since all the elements such as “global
issues (environment-market)” “government pressures,” “local competitiveness,”
“economical justification,” “reduced operating costs (marketing and production),”
“improving the range and quality of services,” “take advantage of being an early World class
adopter” and “avoiding losing market share to competitors who are already manufacturing
implementing WCM” suggest a very strong incentive for WCM implementation. Here,
the most important variables are “reduced operating costs (marketing and production)” techniques
and “global issues (environment-market).” This supports other research findings that
WCM is driven by the never-ending needs of companies to reduce their costs and to
meet the global standards (Kasul and Motwani, 1995; Kreitner, 1995; Salaheldin, 2005; 559
Saxena and Sahay, 2000). On the other hand, WCM promises significant savings in
costs, such as making it cheaper to find new customers, lower administration costs
generated through time saving and the reduction in staff numbers.
The second factor, WCM barriers reveals the elements that are likely to detract from
WCM implementation. Here, poor planning and lack of knowledge are the most
significant variables. Similarly, “need for cost justification,” “resistance to change,”
“lack of management support,” “lack of appropriate monitoring,” “lack of employee
education and training,” “lack of employee motivation” and “lack of Communication” are
all barriers for using the WCM techniques. Thus, this factor was labelled WCM barriers.

Testing hypotheses
Manufacturing techniques used by the Egyptian companies. The first hypothesis (H1)
focused on the current WCM practices that are considered to be implemented by the
Egyptian manufacturing firms. According to Table IV, the results are found to be very
different from the mid-point 3.0. JIT purchasing was the practice most implemented
(mean ¼ 3.7292), JIT production came second with a mean of 3.2396, TQM came third
(mean ¼ 3.0833) and MRP are the fourth used technique by the Egyptian
manufacturers (mean ¼ 3.0729). On the other side, the least implemented
techniques were group technology/cellular manufacturing (mean ¼ 1.1667),
followed by CAD (mean ¼ 1.1771) and CAM (mean ¼ 1.1771).
These results support the first hypothesis that the most modern WCM practices are
less implemented by the Egyptian manufacturing firms. This actually leads the
Egyptian manufacturers to apply older techniques that lie under umbrella of mass
production approach (the 1970s and 1980s techniques).

WCM drivers and barriers

The second and third hypotheses focused on the association between WCM drivers and
barriers and potential WCM techniques implementation. A one-sample test was
conducted to determine whether these observed means of the WCM drivers and
barriers are significantly different from the mid-point 3.0. The results are given in
Table V.
According to Table V, the results are found to be very significantly different from
the mid-point 3.0 ( p , 0.01). This confirms that all the WCM drivers are in the positive
side and WCM barriers are in the negative side.
Furthermore, the second and the third hypotheses can be expressed in a multiple
linear regression equation as:

WCM Successful Implementation ¼ Constant þ B1 WCM Basic Drivers

þ B2 WCM Basic Barriers þ 1

IMDS
Manufacturing techniques N Mean SD Std. error mean
107,4
Quality circles (QC) 96 1.2188a 0.41557 0.04241
Just in time (JIT) production 96 3.2396 0.66086 0.06745
JIT purchasing 96 3.7292 0.88828 0.09066
Kanban 96 1.7604 0.42907 0.04379
560 Material requirement planning (MRP) 96 3.0729 0.56652 0.05782
Flexible manufacturing system (FMS) 96 1.2083 0.40825 0.04167
Computer aided design (CAD) 96 1.1771 0.38374 0.03917
Computer aided manufacturing (CAM) 96 1.1771 0.38374 0.03917
Computer integrated manufacturing (CIM) 96 1.2396 0.42907 0.04379
Manufacturing resource planning (MRPII) 96 2.9896 0.67270 0.06866
Total quality control (TQC) 96 1.3229 0.55241 0.05638
Total productive maintenance (TPM) 96 1.30208 0.564191 0.057582
Time to market 96 1.2604 0.52805 0.05389
Logistic management 96 1.3021 0.50513 0.05155
Optimised production technology 96 1.2500 0.52315 0.05339
Total quality management (TQM) 96 3.0833 0.49559 0.05058
Group technology/cellular manufacturing 96 1.1667 0.40175 0.04100
Simultaneous engineering 96 1.2917 0.50088 0.05112
Benchmarking 96 1.3646 0.65083 0.06642
Intelligent manufacturing 96 1.3438 0.62959 0.06426
Electronic commerce 96 1.3438 0.59521 0.06075
Business process re-engineering (BPR) 96 1.3854 0.63858 0.06517
Enterprise resource planning (ERP) 96 1.2813 0.49637 0.05066
Electronic data interchange (EDI) 96 1.2500 0.48123 0.04911
Table IV. Supply chain management 96 1.3229 0.55241 0.05638
Extent of WCM
implementation Note: aBased on a five-point Likert scale (n ¼ 96)

To investigate the hypotheses, entering all variables in a single block, we found that
the proposed model explains a significant percentage of variance in WCM successful
implementation. Table VI shows that 81.3 percent of the observed variability in the
WCM Successful Implementation is explained by the two independent variables
(R 2 ¼ 0.813, Adjusted R 2 ¼ 0.809).
To test the equivalent null hypothesis that there is no linear relationship in the
population between the dependent variable and the independent variables, the
ANOVA in Table VII is used.
Results from Table VII shows that the ratio of the two mean squares (F) was 202.135
(F-value ¼ 202.135, P , 0.001). Since, the observed significance level was less than
0.001, the two variables influence manufacturers’ attitudes toward implementing the
WCM techniques.
To test the null hypothesis that the population partial regression coefficient for a
variable is 0, t-statistic and its observed significance level were used. The results are
shown in Table VIII.
Results from Table VII indicate that we can safely reject the null hypotheses that
the coefficients for WCM basic drivers (B ¼ 0.618, t ¼ 5.867, p , 0.001) and WCM
Basic Barreirs (B ¼ 2 0.304, t ¼ 2 2.885, p , 0.01) are 0. The b weights show that
WCM basic drivers (B ¼ 0.618) have a strong significant positive influence on WCM
success. Similarly, the b weights show that WCM basic barriers (B ¼ 2 0.304) have a
 Test value ¼ 3
95 percent confidence
interval of the difference
T df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean difference Lower Upper

Global issues (environment-market) 5.923 95 0.000 0.80208 0.5332 1.0709

Local competitiveness 7.363 95 0.000 0.90625 0.6619 1.1506
Government pressures 7.685 95 0.000 0.94792 0.7031 1.1928
Economical justification 7.266 95 0.000 0.92708 0.6738 1.1804
Reduced operating costs (marketing and production) 4.094 95 0.000 0.50000 0.2576 0.7424
Improving the range and quality of services 6.951 95 0.000 0.81250 0.5804 1.0446
Take advantage of being an early adopter 5.772 95 0.000 0.75000 0.4920 1.0080
Avoiding losing market share to WCM competitors 6.485 95 0.000 0.75000 0.5204 0.9796
Need for cost justification 2 5.796 95 0.000 20.69792 20.9370 2 0.4589
Resistance to change 2 7.795 95 0.000 20.98958 21.2416 2 0.7375
Lack of management support 2 4.840 95 0.000 20.65625 20.9254 2 0.3871
Poor planning 2 6.281 95 0.000 20.71875 20.9459 2 0.4916
Lack of knowledge 2 3.557 95 0.001 20.39583 20.6168 2 0.1749
Lack of appropriate monitoring 2 6.944 95 0.000 20.84375 21.0850 2 0.6025
Lack of employee education and training 2 7.913 95 0.000 21.03125 21.2900 2 0.7725
Lack of employee motivation 2 5.809 95 0.000 20.75000 21.0063 2 0.4937
Lack of communication 2 7.325 95 0.000 20.94792 21.2048 2 0.6910
techniques
manufacturing

One-sample test
Table V.
World class

561
IMDS strong significant negative influence on WCM success. Multicollinearity between the
107,4 independent variables was minimal, as shown by the values of tolerance (0.182) and
VIF that was less than ten (5.510) indicating that the results were reliable. These
results support the second and third hypotheses (H2 and H3).

Discussion
562 The results of this study indicate that the Egyptian manufacturers are still using the
mass production philosophy. When asked about their extent of implementing the
results were: “Just in Time Purchasing and Production (JIT)” was the practice most
implemented by the Egyptian firms, followed by “Total Quality Management (TQM)”
and then MRP. These results support the findings of Green and Inman (2005), Kros et al.
(2006) and Mistry (2005) studies that the JIT philosophy and associated practices are
alive and well within the manufacturing sector. Furthermore, the most modern
practices to emerge in the 1990s were considered as the least performed by the
Egyptian manufacturers which mean that they are still dominated by the old style
“mass production theme” and have not yet been touched by the new world class
theme of “mass customizations.”
These findings indicate that the Egyptian manufacturers are still in the 1970s and
1980s when compared with world-class manufacturers. It can be concluded that
non-awareness of new practices such e-commerce, EDI, lean production, ERP, and
supply chain management can guarantee that Egyptian manufacturers will fall apart

Model R R2 Adjusted R 2 Std. error of the estimate

a
1 0.902 0.813 0.809 0.50634
Table VI.
a
Model summary Note: Predictors: (constant), WCM barriers, WCM drivers

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 103.646 2 51.823 202.135 0.000a

Residual 23.843 93 0.256
Total 127.490 95
Table VII.
Summary of ANOVA Note: aPredictors: (constant), WCM basic drivers, WCM basic barriers

Unstandardized Standardized Collinearity

coefficients coefficients T-value Sig. statistics

Model B b Tolerance VIF

Constant 1.773 2.706 0.008
WCM basic drivers 0.690 0.618 5.867 0.000 0.182 5.510
Table VIII. WCM basic barriers 2 0.305 20.304 2 2.885 0.005 0.182 5.510
Results of regression
coefficientsa Note: aDependent variable: WCM implementation
after WTO ascension. In other words, it will keep them too far behind from any World class
competitive advantage that can be acquired in the manufacturing world today. manufacturing
Considering the WCM drivers and barriers, the results of this study are consistent
with previous studies such as Feldman (1991), Ozatalay and Saad (1988), Rohan (1990), techniques
and Steudel (1992) who see that WCM implementation is driven by the never-ending
needs of customers to look for better services and products. However, all B-to-B IIM
drivers are in the upper end of Likert scale. Similarly, the need to avoid losing market 563
share to competitors is a key incentive, since this research has found that competitors’
use of the WCM and response to customers also has a strong, (driving) effect on the
adoption of the WCM techniques.
At the same time, the need to improve the “range and quality of services” relates to
Chan and Swatman (2000) who found that IT developments are forcing organisations
to be up-to-date in their use of advanced technologies regarding the production and
delivery of speedy and high quality information, as well as facilitating greater degrees
of communication and integration across business units and external partners.
To sum up, the Egyptian manufacturing firms are driven to adopt the WCM
techniques because of the incentives or gains achievable through the use of these
new techniques where advantages outweigh disadvantages regardless of the barriers
that might decrease its use.

Conclusions and managerial implications

WCM has emerged as a result of many business drivers. Firstly, the changes in the
driving forces for manufacturing strategy, from an initial push to improve current
business processes to achieve savings and improve efficiency, the companies have
come to be driven by a desire for greater supplier involvement and customer service in
later implementation which lead to the adoption of mass customisation production
philosophy. Secondly, competitors’ use of the WCM techniques and response to
customers also has a strong effect on the adoption of the most advanced WCM
techniques for the production purposes. Thirdly, as a result of its growing ability to
bring new opportunities and to facilitate the development of the new organisational
forms and structures needed to meet the continuously emerging changes in business
imperatives, the WCM importance increases as it becomes involved in each task in
today’s business. Finally, IT developments are also forcing organisations to be
up-to-date in their use of advanced technologies regarding delivery of speedy and high
quality information, as well as facilitating greater degrees of communication and
integration across business units and external partners.
On the other hand, implementing the WCM has many barriers especially in less
developed countries. Lack of employee education and training, resistance to change,
lack of communication, lack of appropriate monitoring, lack of employee motivation
have been found to be the most important barriers to implement the WCM techniques
in Egypt. Therefore, training programmes that increase the awareness of the
manufacturing firms and prepare the employees to the potential change required by
the WCM techniques is a very critical requirement in this stage, if the Egyptian
government needs to achieve success in this important issue.
One of the main objectives of this study was to provide some guidelines that might be of
importance to promote WCM techniques implementation in the Egyptian industrial
sector. Based on the results of this study, the following managerial implications are drawn:
IMDS .
The Egyptian manufacturer should acknowledge that the aim of being
107,4 world-class is not merely a matter of simply reducing costs; it is, in fact, the
ability to link the manufacturing capabilities with market requirements to
enhance the firm’s performance in order to satisfy its customers.
.
Based on the results of this study, lack of employee education and training is the
most important barrier to implement the WCM. Therefore, world-class practices
564 should be implemented through a process of mature learning, and not be used as
a quick fix reaction to a problem.
.
Because, the implementation of WCM techniques takes a long time,
manufacturing firms that are willing to implement them should be patient and
persistent until the expected benefits of WCM techniques implementation are
obtained.
.
The Egyptian manufacturers must think globally. The consequences of not
doing so would be a penetration of their own markets by overseas competition.
They must also expect more complexity in business, products, and process.
. Policy makers in the Egyptian industrial sector should enhance the capability of
manufacturing firms that are willing to implement WCM techniques through
increased funding, grants, incentives, and educational programs.

Recommendations for further research

A logical progression of this study would be to carry out a similar study concerning the
private sector the results of which could be compared with this research. The same
proposed drivers and barriers developed by the current study could be employed in such
a study. Furthermore, more research needed to study how the perceived importance of
these drivers and barriers may differ across each industry such as manufacturing
equipment, chemical and plastics, telecommunications, hardware equipment, textile
industry, home equipment, scientific and medical equipment, management consulting,
and software development. With a better understanding of these issues involved in
WCM, managers will be able to make informed decisions and allocate the necessary
resources to make WCM implementation a success in the long-term.
Moreover, this research could be enhanced by expanding the current driving and
resisting forces. The impact of organizational culture on WCM implementation could be
investigated to add further depth to those forces. Finally, similar studies in
other developing countries could be carried out and comparative studies with other less
developed countries could be also carried out to find out the similarities and
dissimilarities concerning the driving and resisting forces toward WCM
implementation in different contexts.

Note
1. Firms were identified from two sources: the general organization for industrialization (GOFI)
of Egypt and the gyptian industrial chambers.

References
Assiri, A., Zairi, M. and Eid, R. (2006), “How to profit from the balanced scorecard:
an implementation roadmap”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 106 No. 7,
pp. 937-52.
Avlonitis, G.J. and Karayanni, D.A. (2000), “The impact of internet use on business-to-business World class
marketing: examples from American and European companies”, Industrial Marketing
Management, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 441-59. manufacturing
Becker, S.W. (1993), “TQM does work: ten reasons why misguided efforts fail”, Management techniques
Review, Vol. 82 No. 5, pp. 30-4.
Bryman, A. (1989), Research Methods and Organization Studies, Unwin Hyman, London.
Campbell, J.L. (1994), “Recent trends in institutional analysis: bringing culture back into political 565
economy”, Working paper, Harvard University, Boston, MA.
Chan, C. and Swatman, P.M.C. (2000), “From EDI to internet commerce: the BHL steel
experiences”, Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, Vol. 10
No. 1, pp. 72-82.
Crawford, K.M., Blackstone, J.H. Jr and Cox, J.F. (1988), “A study of JIT implementation and
operating problems”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 26 No. 9,
pp. 1561-8.
Cronin, M.J. (1996), The Internet Strategy Handbook: Lessons from the New Frontier of Business,
Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Doyle, K. (1992), “Who’s killing total quality?”, Incentive, Vol. 16 No. 8, pp. 12-19.
Eid, R. and Trueman, M. (2004), “Factors affecting the success of business-to-business
international internet marketing (B-to-B IIM): an empirical study of UK companies”,
Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 104 No. 1, pp. 16-30.
Feldman, S. (1991), “Keeping the customer satisfied: inside and out”, Management Review, Vol. 80
No. 1, pp. 58-60.
Fredendall, L.D., Patterson, J.W., Kennedy, W.J. and Griffin, T. (1997), “Maintenance: modeling
its strategic impact”, Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 440-53.
Gilgeous, V. and Gilgeous, M. (1999), “A framework for manufacturing excellence”, Integrated
Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 33-44.
Green, K.W. Jr and Inman, R.A. (2005), “Does implementation of a JIT-with-customers strategy
change an organization’s structure?”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 106
No. 8, pp. 1077-94.
Greene, A. (1991), “Plant-wide systems: a world class perspective”, Production Inventory
Management, Vol. 11 No. 7, pp. 14-15.
Hair, J., Ralph, A. and Ronald, T. (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th ed., Prentice-Hall,
London.
Hayes, R.H. and Wheelwright, S.C. (1984), Restoring Our Competitive Edge: Competing Through
Manufacturing, Wiley, New York, NY.
Hollensen, S. (2001), Global Marketing: A Market-Responsive Approach, 2nd ed., Pearson
Education Limited, Harlow.
Hsu, L.L. and Lin, T.M. (2006), “The longitudinal literature review on the interaction between
manufacturing and marketing: a multidimensional content analysis”, International Journal
of Management and Enterprise Development, Vol. 3 Nos 1/2, pp. 114-46.
Kasul, R. and Motwani, J. (1995), “Performance measurements in world-class operation”,
Benchmarking for Quality Management & Technology, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 20-36.
Kinni, T. (1996), America’s Best: IndustryWeek’s Guide to World-class Manufacturing Plants,
Wiley, New York, NY.
Kreitner, B. (1995), Management, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.
IMDS Kros, J.F., Falasca, M. and Nadler, S.S. (2006), “Impact of just-in-time inventory systems on OEM
suppliers”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 106 No. 2, pp. 224-41.
107,4 Mistry, J.J. (2005), “Origins of profitability through JIT processes in the supply chain”, Industrial
Management & Data Systems, Vol. 105 Nos 5/6, pp. 752-68.
Nunnally, J. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Ozatalay, S. and Saad, G. (1988), “Productivity and quality measurement in world class
566 manufacturing: synthesis and issues”, Productivity Management Frontiers-II, Inderscience
Publishers Ltd, Geneva.
Patterson, J.W., Kennedy, W.L. and Fredendall, L.D. (1995), “Total productive maintenance is not
for this company”, Production & Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 61-4.
Poon, S. and Jevons, C. (1997), “Internet enabled international marketing: a small business
network perspective”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 13, pp. 29-42.
Porter, M.E. (2001), “Strategy and the internet”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 79 No. 3, pp. 63-78.
Rohan, T. (1990), “In search for speed”, Industry Week, Vol. 239 No. 17, pp. 78-83.
Safayeni, F., Purdy, L., van Engelen, R. and Pal, S. (1991), “Difficulties of just-in-time
implementation: a classification scheme”, International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 11 No. 7, pp. 27-36.
Salaheldin, I.S. (2005), “JIT implementation in Egyptian manufacturing firms: some empirical
evidence”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 4,
pp. 354-70.
Saxena, K. and Sahay, B. (2000), “Managing IT for world-class manufacturing: the Indian
scenario”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 29-57.
Schonberger, R.J. (1986), “The vital elements of world-class manufacturing”, International
Management, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 76-8.
Schonberger, R. (1987), World Class Manufacturing Casebook: Implementing JIT and TQC,
The Free Press, Mankato, MN.
Skinner, S. (1999), Business-to-Business E-Commerce: Investment Perspective, Durlacher Ltd,
London.
Steudel, H.J. (1992), Manufacturing in the Nineties: How to Become a Mean, Lean, World Class
Competitor, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY.
Vokurka, R.F. and Davis, R.A. (2004), “Manufacturing strategic facility types”, Industrial
Management & Data Systems, Vol. 104 Nos 5/6, pp. 490-504.
Westphal, J.D., Gulati, R. and Shortell, S.M. (1997), “Customization or conformity? An
institutional and network perspective on the content and consequences of TQM adoption”,
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 366-94.
Wilson, S.G. and Abel, I. (2002), “So you want to get involved in e-commerce”, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 85-94.

Corresponding author
Riyad Eid can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

View publication stats