AHP에 의한 생산성과 향상기법의 중요도 평가에 관한 연구 : 조선기업의 사례를 중심으로 = A Study on the Evaluation of Priority of Manufacturing Performance Improvement Techniques Using AHP: focused on the case of shipbuilding enterprise

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In order to cope with the pressure of international competition, many manufacturing companies have implemented new philosophies and new technologies. Many companies have responded to these competitive demands by implementing advanced manufacturing technologies(AMT), innovative managerial practices(IMP), and emphasizing quality, delivery, innovation and flexibility to meet customer needs in their corporate objectives.
For several decades, performance measurement(PM) systems in use in manufacturing enterprises have remained unchanged in spite of significant transformations witnessed in management accounting approaches and production processes. The so-called traditional evaluation systems are currently outdated, no longer adequate and compatible to evaluate the new operating methods. As a result, many consultants, academics, and professionals have suggested that the new performance measurement approaches should support the day-to-day operations and provide managers, supervisors, and operators with information that is both timely and relevant.
Innovative managerial practices(IMP) such as TQM, JIT, and TPM have often been referred to as components of "World Class Manufacturing".
While there are many success stories and much research on TQM, JIT, and TPM, there are also documented cases of failure in the implementation of these programs. There has been insufficient research on the relationships between these programs and their combined impact on manufacturing performance. In this study, we identified the interrelationship between the three programs.
The rapid developments in manufacturing technologies such as CAD/CAM, MRPⅡ, FMS, Robotics, and others, known collectively as advanced manufacturing technology(AMT), have changed the concept of competition and manufacturing role in it. Today, manufacturing technology has acquired a strategic significance that is unparalleled in the industrial history so far. The advantages of new manufacturing technologies have been widely proclaimed as part of the factory in the future. These advantages include large flexibility and control of the manufacturing processes.
The objective of this research was to evaluate the priority from AMT and IMP for improving manufacturing performance in shipbuilding enterprises. The research consists of several principal steps. The first step was to design critical criteria in evaluating manufacturing performance in shipbuilding enterprises. The second step was to develop sub-criteria of the critical criteria. The third step was to develop a four level AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) structure using the critical criteria, sub-criteria and techniques from AMT and IMP. The fourth step was to develope the pair-wise comparison matrix by each level of AHP structure, which was based on survey data collected at the H shipbuilding enterprise. And the last step was to evaluate the priority from AMT and IMP by using AHP analysis.
For detail research this study classified three categories ; served year on their job, one's place of duty, age.
The results of AHP analysis did not show clear difference in the priority between 5 techniques of AMT and IMP in terms of manufacturing performance of the shipbuilding enterprise. Thus, each critical criterion was assigned modified weights and examined the priority change of techniques by conducting performance sensitivity analysis.
Findings of this study can be summarized as follows;
First, the result of this study presented bases for production managers of H shipbuilding enterprise to select AMT and IMP techniques in case of production strategy. The result of this study can also present guideline to improve manufacturing performance for the same kind of small and medium shipbuilding enterprises. We identified MRP2/ERP have the operational excellence in priority of manufacturing cost and flexibility ; CAD/CAM have the operational excellence in priority of quality and CAD/CAM is the most important manufacturing performance improvement technique in shipbuilding enterprise.
Second, this study presented basic guidelines to minimize the trial and errors of implementation process and to improve the implementation performance for the shipbuilding enterprise considering or adopting AMT and IMP. Namely, to achieve the manufacturing performance effectively, we need to adopt the IMP based on AMT.
Third, in our empirical study, we identified CAD/CAM and MRP2/ERP have the operational excellence among AMT. TQM and TPM have the operational excellence among IMP.
Forth, in adopting IMP, field managers of 50 years over prefer TPM, while 50 years under TQM. Such evaluation corresponds with benchmarking research report(2005) about operations of IMP, St. Gallen Univ. We identified TPM, TQM, JIT is the best implementing sequence to achieve the manufacturing performance effectively based on preceding researches and our empirical study.
There are several limitations in this study, like most empirical study. The following recommendations were some limitations.
First, as in all survey research, a necessary assumption in data collection was that respondent had sufficient knowledge to answer the items and they answer the questions conscientiously and truthfully. In this study there were some biases of questions, because they take a serious view of their job.
Second, this study selected manufacturing cost, quality, flexibility as evaluation criteria of manufacturing performance improving technique. But in case other financial or non-financial evaluation criteria are selected, a little different results may be found out.
Third, according to this study the competitive strategies of most Korean shipbuilding enterprises were quality, manufacturing cost. We have expected the results but flexibility, one of more important future competitive strategy will be main tasks of the shipbuilding enterprises: how they realize and cope with the importance of it.
The following recommendations are provided for future research:
First, this study has attempted applying the AHP model in world-class shipbuilding enterprise. More researches are needed on the applicability of the proposed AHP model in many manufacturing companies. So we can contribute improving global competitiveness by changing manufacturing performance measurement criteria and alternatives for automobile and electronic industries in our country.
Second, using other multi-criteria decision making methods available, more comparative studies are needed to clarify the numerous methods that might support the development of performance measures and selection of IMP and AMT.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

오늘날과 같이 치열한 국제경쟁에서 많은 제조기업들은 경쟁력 향상의 일환으로 초미세가공기술(microelectronics) 또는 정보기술을 생산과정에 접목시킨 CAD/CAM, FMS, MRPⅡ 등의 AMT(advanced manufacturing technology)와 정보기술 이외의 생산시스템혁신을 위한 생산관리기법인 JIT, TQM, TPM 등의 IMP(innovative managerial practice)를 도입하고 있다. 이는 제조기업의 실무종사자들이 AMT와 IMP를 기업의 경쟁력을 향상시키는 중요한 기법으로 인식하고 있기 때문이라 생각된다. 그러나 이들 생산시스템의 변화프로그램인 AMT와 IMP기법들이 생산성과에 미치는 영향에 대한 연구는 미진하다.
따라서 본 연구는 기업운영에 있어서 생산전략의 중요성을 이해하고 생산성과의 평가요소는 어떤 것이 있으며 이 요소들의 특성을 인지하고 실증적 연구를 통하여 시장경쟁의 전략적 차원에서 생산시스템의 성과향상프로그램인 AMT와 IMP기법들이 생산성과에 미치는 중요도를 평가하기 위하여 연구목적을 다음과 같이 설정하였다.
첫째, 기초연구로서 생산전략의 경쟁수단과 성과평가시스템의 이론적 배경을 통하여 생산성과 평가의 중요성을 인식하고 생산성과평가의 척도들을 조사하고 생산성과평가의 모형을 제시하였다.
둘째, 생산시스템의 성과향상프로그램인 AMT와 IMP가 생산성과 평가요소들에 대하여 어느 정도의 중요도를 지니고 있는지를 실증연구를 통하여 분석하였다.
셋째, 이와 같은 분석을 토대로 급격한 환경변화와 격심한 경쟁에서 지속적인 생산성과향상에 기여할 수 있는 합리적인 대안의 선택방향을 제시하였다. 특히, 조선 산업은 다양한 분야의 엔지니어링기술이 복합적으로 적용되는 산업으로 컴퓨터기술의 이용도가 타 산업분야에 비해 높으며, CAD/CAM을 중심으로 한 선박의 설계 및 생산시스템의 핵심 기술개발이 국제경쟁력 제고에 매우 필요한 기술이다. 따라서 본 논문에서는 조선 기업의 생산시스템의 핵심기술이라 할 수 있는 CAD/CAM, MRP2/ERP의 중요성도 확인해 보았다.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론 = 1
• 1. 연구배경 및 연구목적 = 1
• 2. 연구대상 및 연구방법 = 4
• 3. AHP분석방법의 선정배경 = 5
• 4. 연구의 구성 = 8
• Ⅱ. 문헌연구 = 9
• 1. 생산성과 평가시스템 = 9
• 가. 생산전략의 경쟁수단과 성과평가시스템 = 9
• 나. 성과평가시스템의 정의와 = 목적10
• 다. 전통적 성과평가의 한계 = 11
• 라. 생산성과의 주요평가요소 = 12
• 마. 생산성과의 하위평가요소 = 14
• 2. IMP(innovativemanagerialpractices) = 16
• 가. TQM = 16
• 나. JIT = 18
• 다. TPM = 21
• 라. TQM, JIT, TPM간의 관계 = 24
• 3. AMT = 27
• 가. AMT의 개념과 분류 = 27
• 나. AMT의 특징 = 29
• 다. AMT의 적용효과와 성공요인 = 30
• 라. AMT도입의 타당성평가 = 31
• Ⅲ. AHP의 이론 = 34
• 1 . AHP의 개요 = 34
• 가. AHP의 원리 = 34
• 나. 쌍대비교행렬의 가중치벡터추정 = 35
• 다. 쌍대비교행렬의 일관성검정 = 42
• 라. 대안의 종합적 우선순위평가 = 46
• 마. 그룹의사결정 = 49
• 바. AHP의 적용절차 = 51
• 2. AHP의 장점과 단점 = 53
• 가. AHP의 장점 = 53
• 나. AHP의 단점 = 54
• Ⅳ. AHP에 의한 실증분석 = 55
• 1. 조사 개요 = 55
• 2. 조선기업의 생산운영시스템의 특징 = 56
• 3. 생산성과 향상기법의 평가모형 개발 = 59
• 가. 생산성과 평가요인과 생산성과 향상기법의 선정 = 59
• 나. 생산성과 향상기법의 평가모형 개발 = 61
• 다. 평가요소와 생산성과 향상기법의 쌍대비교행렬 = 62
• 4. 생산성과 향상기법의 평가결과 분석 = 67
• 가. 평가요소와 생산성과 향상기법의 가중치분석 = 67
• (1) 평가요소의 가중치분석 = 67
• (2) 주요평가요소별 생산성과 향상기법의 가중치분석 = 68
• (3) 평가요소의 근속기간별 가중치평균의 차이 분석 = 72
• (4) 평가요소의 근무부서별 가중치평균의 차이 분석 = 73
• (5) 평가요소의 연령별 가중치평균의 차이 분석 = 75
• (6) 분석결과의 종합 = 77
• 나. 민감도분석 = 79
• Ⅴ. 결론 = 82
• 1. 연구결과의 요약 = 82
• 2. 연구의 한계점 및 미래의 연구방향 = 85
• 참고문헌 = 87
• 부록 1 설문지 = 96
• 부록 2 표본별 설문평가 결과 = 109

참고문헌 (Reference)

1. : 경영과학, 이강우, 김정자, , 2006

2. Introduction to TPM, Nakajima, Seiichi, Productivity, , 1984

3. The just-in-time system, Groenevelt, , 1993

4. The Productivity paradox, Skinner, , 1986

5. Managing flexible automation, Adler, , 1988

6. TheAnalyticHierarchyProcess-, Zahedi, The Analytic Hierarchy Process, , 1986

7. Total maintenance management, Blanchard, , 1981

8. 계층분석적 의사결정, 조근태, , 2003

9. Success factors in manufacturing, J.G.Miller, Roth, , 1992

10. TPM: Total productive maintenance, Takahashi, T.Osada, , 1990

11. Flexibility in Manufacturing Systems, Bessant, B.Haywood, , 1986

12. Must CIM be justified by faith alone?, Kaplan, , 1986

13. The Management and control of quality, Evans, James R, South-Western College Pub., , 1999

14. Investment in manufacturing technology, Primrose, , 1991

15. Maintenance modeling,itsstrategicimpact, Fredendall, , 1997

16. TPM implementation, a Japanese approach, Tajiri, Masaji, McGraw-Hill, , 1992

17. Operation Management-Strategy and Analysis, Krajewski Lee J, Larry P.Ritzman, , 1996

18. JIT and TQM: A case of joint implementation, T.Gupta, Vuppalapati, , 1995

19. Performance analysis of manufacturing system, Altiok, , 1997

20. Totalproductivemaintenance: a contextual view, Roger, McKone, , 1999

21. Manufacturing-missing Link in Corporate Strategy, Skinner, Manufacturing - missing link in corporate strategy, , 1969

22. TPM for America : what it is and why you need it, Steinbacher, Herbert R, Productivity Press, , 1993

23. ; "Reliance on Manufacturing Performance Measures, Chenhall, "; ""Reliance on Manufacturing Performance Measures", , 1993

24. ; “생산전략과 성과측정에 관한연구, 윤재홍, 동아대학교 대학원, , 1990

25. Beyond World-Class: The New Manufacturing Strategy, G.P.Pisano, Hayes, , 1994

26. Quality is free : the art of making quality certain, Crosby, Philip B, McGraw-Hill, Quality is free: The art of making quality certain, , 1979

27. A study of JIT implementation and operating problems, J.F.Cox, Crawford, , 1998

28. Will America's corporate theme song be Just in Time?, Imai, , 1998

29. BPR 대상프로세스 선정을 위한 AHP의 적용, 김진수, 김기석, 김현우, , 1997

30. Creating a Comprehensive System toMeasure Performance, Eccles.G, Pyburn.J, , 1992

31. Management initiatives and Just-In-Time Manufacturing, McLachlin, , 1997

32. The shape of twenty-first century global manufacturing, Lei, Goldhar, , 1991

33. Financial Appraisal to support technological investment, Wilkes, J.M.Samuels, , 1991

34. The implementation cube for advanced manufacturing systems, Transfield, Stuard Smith, , 1988

35. World class manufacturing: the next decade: Building Power, Schonberger, , 1996

36. Deciding to Innovate: How firms justify advanced technology, Dean, , 1987

37. Justifying new manufacturing systems: A managerial approach, Hill, Meredith, , 1987

38. Relationship between JIT and TQM: Practices and performance, S.Sakakibara, R.G.Schroeder, Flynn, , 1995

39. World-class manufacturing: The lesson of simplicity applied, Schonberger, , 1986

40. Research in the process and content of manufacturing strategy, Ward, Leong, Snyder, , 1990

41. Quality maintenance: Zero defects through equipment management, Tsuchiya, , 1992

42. Integrated Performance Measurement System : a development guide, Umit S.Bititci, Lian McDevitt, , 1997

43. Determining the critical elements of Just-In-Time Implementation, Mehra, , 1992

44. Overview of TPM in process industries. TPM in Process Industries, Suzuki, , 1994

45. A methodology to measure the performance of manufacturing systems, El Mola, , 2004

46. Top managers and TQM success: One more look after all these years, O.C.Behling, Choi, , 1997

47. Japanese manufacturing techniques: Nine hidden lesson in simplicity, Schonberger, , 1982

48. 예비타당성조사 수행을 위한 다기준분석 방법연구, 한국개발연구원, , 2000

49. Difficulties of just-in-time Implementation: A classification scheme, S.Pal, Safayeni, , 1991

50. : “ 산업유형별 생산전략과 기업성과 : 개념적 모형, 김연민, , 1990

51. A framework and measurement instrument for just-in-time manufacturing, B.B.Flynn, R.G.Schroeder, Sakakibara, , 1993

52. Learning from the quality movement: what did and didn't happen andwhy, Cole, Learning from the quality movement: What did and didn't happen and why?, , 1998

53. 제조경쟁능력 측정모형의 성과평가 적합성 비교연구, 유영목(Yung Mok Yu), 韓日經商學會, , 1998

54. Moving toward manufacturing excellence for future production perspectives, Hitomi, , 1994

55. Implementing manufacturing technology: Amanufacturing strategy perspective, Voss, , 1986

56. Managing Advanced Manufacturing Technology: The Challenge of the Fifth Wave, Bessant, , 1991

57. ; "Reporting Manufacturing Performance Measures to works: An Empirical Study, Potter, Banker, Schroeder, "; ""Reporting Manufacturing Performance Measures to works: An Empirical Study", , 1993

58. A derivation of the underlying constructs of Just-In-Time management systems, Davy, R.E.White, K.Gritzmacher, , 1992

59. Lasting improvement in manufacturing performance : in search of a new theory, A.De Meyer, Ferdows, , 1990

60. 우리나라 조선산업의 국제 경쟁력 제고 방안에 관한 연구, 정은혜, , 2005

61. A survey and taxonomy strategy-related performance measures for manufacturing, White, , 1996

62. : “조선산업에서 데이터 웨어하우스 기반의 비용분석시스템, 이종훈, , 2000

63. : “첨단제조기술 (AMT)의 통합수준이 제조성과에 미치는 영향, 노정구, 영남대학교 대학원, , 1999

64. A comparison of just-in time and batch manufacturing: the role of performance obstacles, Brown, T.R.Mitchell, , 1991

65. International Benchmarking Study: Operational Excellence in the Pharmaceutical Industry, APV, TECTEM, , 2005

66. Measures for manufacturing performance: a new challenge for managerial accounting research, Kaplan, , 1983

67. The Impact of Just-in-Time Manufacturing and Its Infrastructure onManufacturing Performance, Morris, Sakakibara, , 1997

68. An AHPBased Study of Critical Factors for TQM Implementation inShanghaiManufacturing Industries, J.S.F.Chan, Chin, Y.Xu, , 2002

69. World class manufacturing in the 1990s : Integrating JIT, TQC, FA, and TPM with worker participation, Huang, "World class manufacturing in the 1990s : Integrating JIT, , 1991

70. AMT도입에 따른 관리회계 정보시스템의 전략적 활용이 생산성과에 미치는 영향, 장정희, , 2004

71. Toyota production system and kanban system: Materialization of just-in-time and respect for human systems, K.Kusunoki, S.Uchikawa, Sugimori, , 1997

72. The relationship between JIT managerial practice and JIT infrastructure: Implications for plant performance, Ahmad, , 1998

73. 차세대 조선생산시스템(조선CIM) 통합기술 개발에 관한 연구: 2차년도 중간보고서, 통상산업부, , 1996

74. Total quality control: engineering and management the technical and managerial field for improving product quality, Feigenbaum, , 1961

75. Customization orconformity? An institutional and network perspective on the contentand consequences of TQM adoption, S.M.Shortell, Westphal, Customization or conformity? An institutional and network perspective on the content and consequences of TQM adoption, , 1997

76. An empirical study of just-in-time and total quality management principles implementation in manufacturing firms in the USA, Sriparavastu, , 1997

77. Implementation and outcomes of total productive maintenance". "Operations Management: Future Issues and Competitive Responses, P.M.Milling, J.Hasenpusch, Maier, "Implementation and outcomes of total productive maintenance"". ""Operations Management: Future Issues and Competitive Responses", , 1998

78. Does implementing an effective TQM program actually improve operating performance? Empirical evidence from firms that have won quality awards, Hendricks, , 1997