The Lean Enterprise In Aerospace

Marketing Essay
For assignment help please contact
at help@hndassignmenthelp.co.uk or hndassignmenthelp@gmail.com
Today most people identify lean with reducing waste, which is to take a very narrow
view of this exciting idea. Reduction of waste isn't the sole focus of lean. In lean,
waste reduction and value creation are two parallel concepts which must be executed
simultaneously to meet the demands of the end customer.
Womack, Jones and Roos argue in their book, The Machine That Changed the
World- How Lean Production Revolutionized the Global Car Wars, that while lean
thinking can be applied by any company anywhere in the world, its fullest potential is
only realized when it is applied across the spectrum of the enterprise. And they called
such an enterprise as Lean Enterprise.
'Lean Enterprise is an integrated entity that efficiently creates value for its multiple
stakeholders by employing lean principles and practices.' (Murman et al, 2002)
Lean enterprise is a firm that embraces lean principles. The organizational structure
of a lean enterprise is intolerant of waste and every member of the organization
proactively seeks improvement in the existing processes. Lean enterprise prioritizes
customer value and every activity within the organization aligns itself to achieve that
goal. Another trait of a lean enterprise is its outreach. As Womack et al points out in
their work, Toyota reached out to its suppliers and not only involved them in the
design process but also encouraged them to come up with their own innovations.
They encouraged their big suppliers to consolidate the smaller suppliers to cope with
the high demand from emerging markets. Toyota itself holds an equity stake in its
major suppliers.

The Toyota success story points out the importance of cooperation and co-ordination
between the firm and its various suppliers. In increasingly complex world of
Aerospace, most of the aircraft manufacturers are acting as system integrators and
rely on their first tier suppliers for manufacturing individual parts of an aircraft and

these lessons from Toyota story are invaluable to the aerospace industry to
understand the firm and supplier relationship.
In this context, lean enterprise's definition needs to be extended to include the
phenomenon of outreach. Therefore, lean enterprise can be defined as a collective
group of organizations working together to achieve a set of common goals. This
collective group formulates a common strategy to manage the value streams
extending from one organization to another, share gains and profit, manage targets
for improvement, and eliminate waste.
Murman et al in their book, Lean Enterprise Value, identify five principles of Lean
Enterprise Value. They fuse together the words lean and value to emphasize the
importance of simultaneously eliminating waste and creating value in a lean
enterprise. Enterprise represents a firm centric approach rather than factory floor
approach. An organization can truly become lean only when the principles of
eliminating waste and value creation are applied across the spectrum of the firm.
Five principles of Lean Enterprise Value are,
Principle 1: Create Lean value by doing the job right and by doing the right job.
This argues for a dynamic approach where exists a constructive relationship between
doing the job right and doing the right job.
Principle 2: Deliver value only after identifying stakeholder value and constructing
robust value propositions.
Value delivery is facilitated by a well structure value proposition and of course, a
solid value proposition can't be structure around poorly identified value.
Principle 3: Fully realize lean value only by adopting an enterprise perspective.
It is very important that lean is implemented at the enterprise level otherwise overall
net gain would be limited. A study conducted by Cook and Graser for RAND
Corporation suggests that all aerospace manufacturers in the United States have
adopted lean to a certain degree. The problem is that these adoptions tend to be
localized and as a consequence there benefits. This creates isolated success stories of
'lean projects.' Murman et al call these success stories as 'islands of success.'
Principle 4: Address the interdependencies across enterprise levels to increase lean
value.

There are different levels of enterprise and they are all interdependent. Detail
discussion of the various levels of enterprises follows.
Principle 5: People, not just processes, effectuate lean value.
In order to eliminate waste and create value, knowledge and capability must exist at
three distinct levels of enterprise, value identification, value proposition and value
delivery. For this to happen, people working an enterprise to understand and
facilitate lean principles. Talking about Toyota Production Systems, Sugimori et al
highlight the central role of people.
"'respect for human' systems where the workers are allowed to display in full their
capabilities through active participation in running and improving their own
workshops." (Sugimori et al, 1977)

Value Stream
Second step in formulation of research question is to define value stream.
Value Stream is broadening of Porter's concept of value chain. Porter defines value
chain as a basic tool for conducting a systemic analysis of all of the activities (and
their interactions) that a firm performs, in order to understand the sources of
competitive advantage.
Womack and Jones in their book Lean Thinking define value stream as the set of all
specific end-to-end and linked actions and processes and functions necessary in
transforming raw materials into a finished product delivered to the customer, and
then in providing post-sales customer support. They argue that when value stream is
mapped it gives a very clear indication of processes and activities that a) create value,
b) create no value but are unavoidable and c) create no value and are avoidable. This
process of mapping the value stream facilitates the elimination of waste and helps in
implementation of lean principles.
Evolution of value stream is result of progress made in the sphere of technology. In
response to increasing technological complexity in recent times, corporations have
begun to concentrate all their efforts on their core competency while outsourcing
activities in the external periphery of their value adding activities. While this
approach creates a specialist organization, it also results in loss of breadth of
expertise. Johns, Crute, and Graves (2006) argue that as a consequence, we find
customers seeking broad systemic offerings while suppliers are moving in opposite

direction of specialisation in narrow band of core competence. This creates a vacuum

which can be filled by organisations that can forge strong supplier relationships and
bring together a wide array of specialists to develop a systemic offering and create
value streams in the process. . Aerospace Innovation and Growth Team (AIGT), a UK
government agency, reported in 2003:

"The nature of UK Aerospace Industries 2022 will have changed considerably, driven
primarily by globalisation. The business model of the future will be value chain
competing against value chain, not just single company versus single company as we
witness predominantly today. Supply chains will have evolved to include the enduser or consumer in value creation and through this will have become known as
value chains."
While AIGT uses the phrase 'value chain', in author's opinion it corresponds more
closely with Womack and Jones' 'value stream' than Porter's value chain! Johns,
Crute and Graves' also comment on value stream in their paper on lean supply,
"to realise the full advantages, Lean practitioners in UK aerospace must move
beyond the current primary focus on manufacturing techniques and optimising only
their own company's part in the supply chain as an isolated process, toward
embracing a Value Stream perspective."
This is not only true for UK but the entire industry as a whole. One instance of failure
on part of a manufacturer to involve suppliers in the development and decision
making process would be Boeing's attempt to increase production of the 737 and 747
jumbo jets in 1997. Neither its factories nor its suppliers could cope up with the
production target and Boeing had to shut down the production of the concerned
aircrafts for a month. This, in parts was responsible for the first net loss recorded by
Boeing in more than 50 years! Today when both big player in aerospace, Boeing and
Airbus are targeting an ambitious 40% increase in production of single and twin aisle
passenger aircraft by 2015, principles of lean enterprise and value streams are more
relevant and crucial to the success of the industry than ever.

Lean Enterprise in Aerospace

Discussion of lean principle in context of aerospace presents its own challenges. Lean
philosophy, as discussed earlier, was developed by Toyota in post-World War II
Japan with focus on creating maximum value with least investment of the resources

whereas the rest of aerospace industry, particularly the United States which 'was' also
the unchallenged leader in the field, had Cold War priorities. Implementing a new
business philosophy, which worked in the very dynamic market of automobiles, in
aerospace industries with its higher degree of complexity and lower volumes is
nothing short of introducing a new paradigm.
To continue the discussion further one must understand the evolution of lean. Lean
is a way of thinking and not a set of theoretical steps. Lean philosophy was observed
to work in practice and only then it was codified into theory. This evolutionary curve
provides lean it's 'legitimacy'.
Murman et al in their book, Lean Enterprise Value: Insights from MIT's Lean
Advancement Initiative put forward implications of lean thinking for the aerospace
industries. They point out the peculiar nature of aerospace; industries are highly
interdependent with a very wide supplier base. They are both a source and importer
of technological innovation, and have a rich intellectual capital base and highly
skilled workforce. Also, failure is not an option in aerospace, the products and
systems must operate with zero failures! Another aspect of aerospace industries
which is poles apart from automobile is the lifecycle of products. Aerospace systems
and platforms have life cycles spanning over decades with continuous evolution of
the subsystems and components. For instance, Boeing B-52 Stratofortress, a long
range strategic bomber first manufactured by Boeing in 1950s, is still in service with
the United States Air Force!
Murman et al argue for a broader and more holistic view of lean thinking, centred on
the enterprise, to be implemented in aerospace. Most of the value addition in
aerospace lies in upstream design and development phase, which can last for years as
oppose to months in case of automobiles, and in downstream sustainment operations
which typically last for decades. These particular traits demand that lean enterprise
should be focus of the efforts of aerospace industries in implementing lean thinking.
Johns et al argue for the proliferation of value streams in aerospace and that is
another essential step in transforming aerospace industries into 'lean enterprise'.
Aerospace thrives on technological innovation and lean's philosophy of Kaizen or
continuous improvement sits well with that trait. One can conclude on the basis of
arguments laid that lean thinking offers lots of incentives for aerospace.

Vision 2016

'People working together as a global enterprise for aerospace leadership'

Boeing - Forever New Frontiers

Values
Leadership
Integrity
Quality
Customer Satisfaction
People working together
A diverse and involved team
Good corporate citizenship
Enhancing shareholder value

Core Competencies
Detailed customer knowledge and focus
We will seek to understand, anticipate and be
responsive to our customers' needs.
Large-scale systems integration
We will continuously develop, advance and
protect the technical excellence that allows us to
integrate effectively the systems we design and
produce.
Lean Enterprise
Our entire enterprise will be a Lean operation,
characterized by the efficient use of assets, high

inventory turns, excellent supplier

management, short cycle times, high quality and
low transaction costs.
Figure 1 Boeing's Vision 2016 (Source: The Boeing Company)
Members of MIT's Lean Advancement Initiative consortium developed generic
process architecture for lean enterprise.

Lifecycle Processes
Business Acquisition and Program Management
Requirement Definition
Product/Process Development
Supply Chain Management
Production
Distribution and Support

Enabling Infrastructure Processes

Finance
Information Technology
Human Resources
Quality Assurance
Facilities and Services
Environment, Health, and Safety

Enterprise Leadership Processes

Strategic Planning
Business Models

Managing Business Growth

Strategic Partnering
Organizational Structure and Integration
Transformation Management
Figure 2 Enterprise Process Architecture
Processes under the label 'Lifecycle Processes' comprises of value stream activities
which directly contribute towards revenue generation through creation of products,
systems and services for the customer. The next set of processes, 'Enabling
Infrastructure Processes' provide support for 'Lifecycle Processes'. 'Enterprise
Leadership Processes' deal with the human aspect of the lean enterprise and plays a
critical role in the transformation to lean.
At Toyota, manufacturing and supply chain operations were main focus of the
transformation to lean (Womack et al, 2007). But in aerospace, manufacturing
contributes a much smaller proportion to the value associated with a product. The
challenge, therefore is, how to apply lessons from automobile industry to aerospace
with its greater product and technological complexity, much lower production
volumes, very different (and small) customer base and business practices which
directly contradict principles of continuous improvement?
In 1995, Lean Advancement Initiative at MIT developed a Lean Enterprise Model
(LEM) to better understand these challenges.
"The LEM is a synthesis of principles and practices, a hypothetical model of a generic
lean enterprise." (Murman et al, 2002)

Principles
Overarching Practices
Enabling Practices
Supporting Practices
Figure 3 Lean Enterprise Model Architecture (Source: Murman et al, 2002)

Figure 3 represents the architecture of the Lean Enterprise Model developed by MIT
researchers and LAI consortium members. First in this hierarchy are principles of a
lean enterprise.
Waste Minimization
Responsiveness to change
Right thing at right place, at right time, and in right quantity
Effective relationships within the value stream
Continuous improvement
Quality from the beginning
Figure 4 Principle of a lean enterprise (Source: Murman et al, 2002)
First principle of lean enterprise is at the very core of lean thinking. Eliminate waste,
completely eradicate non-value adding activities. Second guiding rule for lean
enterprise is its agility in responding to changing market demand and in case of
aerospace, the evolving challenges to national defence. Third principle of lean
enterprise has its roots in 'Just-in Time' (JIT) theory. JIT corresponds to a single
piece flow at factory floor where a part is delivered at its point of need without
creating inventory or shortage. This approach should be implemented across the
spectrum of enterprise, from human resources to finance to sales. Effective
relationships within the value stream highlight the importance of honest
communication and mutual respect within various stakeholders in a lean enterprise.
Continuous improvement, like first principle, is part of the core structure of lean.
Pursue perfection, always strive for something better. The last principle again reflects
one of the fundamental aspects of lean thinking, reduce rework, and build the best
you can from the very outset. Quality should be already built into the product.
Some of the overarching practices of lean enterprise which support the principle of
lean enterprise are listed in figure 5.

Human-Oriented Practices
Promote Lean Leadership at all Levels: Align and involve all stakeholders to achieve
the enterprise's lean vision.

Relationships Based on Mutual Trust and Commitment: Establish stable and ongoing relationships within the extended enterprise encompassing both customers
and suppliers.
Make Decisions at Lowest Possible Level: Design the organizational structure and
management systems to accelerate and enhance decision making at the point of
knowledge, application and need.
Optimize Capability and Utilization of People: Ensure that properly trained people
are available when needed.
Continuous Focus on the Customer: Proactively understand and respond to the
needs of the internal and external customers.
Nurture a learning environment: Provide for development and growth of both
organizations' and individuals' support of attaining lean enterprise goals.

Process-Oriented Practices
Identify and Optimize Enterprise Flow: Optimize the flow of products and services
either affecting or within the process from concept design through point of use.
Assure Seamless Information Flow: Provide processes for seamless and timely
transfer of and access to pertinent information.
Implement integrated product and process development (IPPD): Create products
through an integrated team effort of people and organizations that knowledgeable of
and responsible for all phases of the product's life cycle from concept definition
through development, production, deployment, operations and support.
Ensure process capability and maturation: Establish and maintain processes capable
of consistently designing and producing the key characteristics of the product or
service.
Maintain Challenges of Existing Processes: Ensure a culture and systems that use
quantitative measurement and analysis to improve processes continuously.
Maintain Stability in Changing Environment: Establish strategies to maintain
program stability in a changing customer-driven environment.
Figure 5 Overarching Practices of Lean Enterprise(Source: Murman et al, 2002)

These practices are interdependent and interconnected. Each must be adapted to

some extent. For instance, mutual trust is essential for seamless flow of information
and for implementation of integrated product and process development, a seamless
flow of information is paramount.

Integrated Entities
Nightingale defines three levels of enterprise based on the entity being considered.
This is the next element in the definition of enterprise.
Program Enterprises
'A program is collection of activities that produces a particular product, system, or
service that is delivered to the customer and generates revenue.' (Nightingale, 2003)
Program is the most basic unit of a business activity. A program enterprise
encompasses the Lifecycle processes in generic process architecture for lean
enterprise (figure 2). Most program enterprises feature one core value stream.
In aerospace, programs can range from billions of dollars, like Joint Strike Fighter
(JSF) program of United States Air Force (USAF), to those of a few million dollars.
Largest program enterprises, such as JSF are substantial enterprise in themselves.
JSF is jointly funded by the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Italy,
Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, and Turkey. Its development is spread
over last two decades and organisations and people involve in JSF program would
continue to work in enterprise through the lifecycle of aircrafts produced under JSF.
Multi Program Enterprises
Organisations involve in execution of multiple programs are multi-program
enterprises. Multi-program enterprises provide leadership and enabling
infrastructure in generic process architecture of lean enterprise (figure 2).
Multi-program enterprises contain multiple value streams that are part of several
program enterprises. At the risk of simplification, multi-program enterprises can also
be treated as a program enterprise comprised of many product lines. For instance;
Airbus could be considered an enterprise with many product lines. But 'fuselage'
manufacturing division/unit at Airbus is an enterprise in itself.
National and International Enterprise

'the collection of all entities that contribute to the creation and use of products,
systems, or services comprise a national or an international enterprise. This would
include not only the products or service providers but also their customers, suppliers,
end users, government regulators, etc.' (Nightingale, 2003)
For example, the United Kingdom Aerospace Enterprise includes all customers
(British Airways, Royal Air Forces, Satellite service providers etc.), government end
users, manufacturers ( BAE Systems, Rolls Royce, domestic and international
suppliers etc.) , infrastructure (civilian and military airports, maintenance depots, air
traffic management), and other related institutions and civil bodies (universities,
R&D laboratories etc.)
Enterprises are global entities now with military systems being sold all over the
world. Few countries, such as India, specifically ask for some portion of the hardware
to be manufactured in their countries through transfer of technology agreements.
This creates a larger international aerospace enterprise comprising of various
countries and organisations working in the field of aerospace, and the UK aerospace
enterprise, a national enterprise, is part of this larger international aerospace
enterprise.

Core and Extended Enterprises

Each of these three distinct levels further have distinct core and extended
enterprises.
'The core enterprise consists of entities tightly integrated through direct or
partnering relationships. Less tightly coupled customers, suppliers, and government
agencies encompass the extended enterprise all the entities along an organization's
value chain, from its customer's customers to its supplier's suppliers, that are
involved with the design, development, manufacture, certification, distribution, and
support of a product or family of products. In this definition, products include all of
the goods and services that satisfy the customer's, and ultimately the end user's,
needs.' (Nightingale, 2003)
This definition suggests that extended enterprise essential acts as a base for core
enterprise. And for an enterprise to become lean, both core and extended enterprise
have to transform into lean at all three levels of the enterprise, program, multiprogram and national and international. All these levels of enterprises are

interconnected and interdependent and lean transformation must be across these

levels otherwise it would just lead to 'islands of success.'
Enterprise Stakeholders
Nightingale argues about the importance of stakeholders in lean enterprise. Lean has
always been focused on customer pull and as such is customer driven. But in today's
world, and aerospace industries, a much broader vision is required to balance the
needs of all the stakeholders. This is not depreciating customer to a secondary role,
quite contrary to that, Lean Enterprise encourages a focus on customer to driver up
the revenue, which ultimately satisfies all the stakeholders!
Value Creation
As discussed earlier, focus of lean enterprise should be two forked, eliminate waste
and create value. Elimination of waste and creation of value are the driving forces in
a lean enterprise. Murman et al describes value creation for stakeholders as a three
phased framework.
Value
Identification
Value
Delivery
Value
Proposition
Find Stockholder Value
Execute on the promise
Agree to and develop the approach
Figure 6 Value Creation Framework (Source: Murman et al, 2002)
First phase of this framework involves identifying the stakeholders and part/s of
project adds value to their investment. Next step involve value proposition where
enterprise structures 'value exchanges', creating a clear picture of how stakeholder

values are being met and how stakeholders are contributing towards enterprises
value. Third phase is focussed on delivering the value to various stakeholders as well
as the customers. This phase has been focus of lean and most widely discussed in the
context of lean enterprise.
One important aspect of this framework is interconnectedness and interdependence
of each phase. Nightingale suggests that each phase should be revisited at different
phases of the product life cycle, and iteration must take place among levels of
program enterprises, as well as between the program enterprise and multi-program
and national enterprises.

Value Phases
Enterprises
Value Identification
Value Proposition
Value Delivery
Program
Opportunities
Opportunities
Most lean principles and practices have been focussed here
Multi-program
Opportunities
Opportunities
Most lean principles and practices have been focussed here
National and International
Opportunities
Opportunities

Most lean principles and practices have been focussed here

Table 1 Opportunities for Extension of Enterprise Value Creation (Source:
Nightingale, 2003)
Table 1 shows that there are many opportunities for extending the focus of lean
enterprise from just value delivery to the entire spectrum of value creation phases.

Case Studies
Introduction
Islands of Success
Case A
An Engineering Support Island: The F-16 Build-To-Package Centre
When problems are found on a typical aircraft production line, the solutions usually
are included in the official product definition - the Build-To-Package (BTP). Even
minor changes can considerably delay the engineering check and result in expensive
rework.
To tackle this problem, engineers at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics (LMA) created the
F-16 Build-To-Package Support Centre. Before the F-16 BTP support centre, changes
had to pass through several stations- engineering design, manufacturing planning,
manufacturing engineering, tool planning, tool design, tool manufacturing, and
various support group - before the final approval. This used to be a time consuming
process with lots of paperwork. This state of affairs was in conflict with all lean
principles.
LMA's solution employed classic value stream approach. LMA first mapped the
existing flow by following the paperwork, identifying where it went and who touched
it. They developed this flow with several iterations to create a new and more 'lean'
flow. Figure 7 shows the BTP centre created on the factory floor.
BTP support centre works by pulling out the technical expertise to the centre when
required. Centre is arranged in a series of engineering cells. Each package passes
through the cells in single piece flow without waiting and supports modification with
the possibility that some tasks can be performed in parallel, allowing scheduling

improvement without the dangerous elimination of necessary steps, checks, or

reviews. Communication is face-to-face with co-located personnel to minimize delays
and miscommunication.
LMA's approach has resulted in consistent, sustainable improvements: 40% fewer
steps, 75% fewer handoffs, and a 90% reduction in travel distance. Also, there has
been a 75% cycle-time reduction, greatly easing the paperwork pressure on
operations personnel.
The biggest barrier to BTP's success has been the struggle for over stretched
personnel to function at full efficiency. For all its achievements, BTP Support Centre
remains an island of success as traditional functional organisation goals from the
outside tend to subvert the value stream and functional interactions, it struggles to
maintain critical personnel and it's costly to implement.
While these isolated islands of success demonstrate suitability and pragmatic
advantages of lean, they still remain isolate in the enterprise. And that is the
strongest argument in support of lean enterprise. Only when the entire enterprise is
transformed to lean, and all these isolate islands are linked that enterprise would be
able to truly exploit the benefit of lean practices.
Production Problem Release BTP, Available at Point of Use
BTP Support Centre
Computer
Tools
Pull on Demand
* Canopy *Fuel Sys. *Fire Control Sys. *Harness Def. *Avionics *Elect Planner *TMP
*MRP Planner
*Propulsion *Coproduction *Buyer *NC Programmer *Tool Design *Wiring Instl.
*CRB *ECS Insti.
*Life Suppt. *Process Control *Structure *Labs *M&P *Ldg Gear *PP&C *Parts Engrg
*Escape Sys. *Safety*Customers *DCMC *Stress *ECS Sys. *Arm Sys. *Scheduling
*Hydraulics

*Equip Instl. *Program *PQA *Planner *Frac.& Fat. *Maintainability *Tool Mfg
Figure 7 BTP Support Centre (Source: Murman et al, 2002; Garry Goodman,
Presentation to LAI Product Development Workshop, 2000)

Case B
Integrating Supplier and Material Management at GE Lynn
At the LAI 1998 Plenary workshop, Ernie Oliveira, the GE Lynn leader of
manufacturing initiatives, gave a presentation on lean transformation at the GE
aircraft engine plan in Lynn, Massachusetts. This lean transformation was enabled
by the changes to the manufacturing and assembly facilities, the material
management system and the supply chain.
One of the fundamental changes implemented at Lynn plant involved scrapping the
functional department approach where one department deals with many product
lines. Instead a linear process approach was established. Resources were grouped,
according to requirement for assembly of a particular engine to constitute one linear
flow. These linear flow lines were shorter and more linear (!), which meant that
product moved a shorter distance. Also, since there were fewer units in the product
line, it was easier to identify the delayed assemblies and rectify them. All these
improvements lead to a reduction in work-in progress.
Furthermore, GE developed an electronic data exchange system to facilitate open
and real time communication with suppliers and customers. This electronic data
exchange system also provided GE with a medium to signal suppliers for parts and
financial transactions. GE also managed to establish a replenishment system with
suppliers of highest-cost parts which bear close resemblance to Toyota's supplier
arrangements.
GE developed a kanban system with the supplier for 100 percent on time delivery.
Factory also committed to freeze requirements two weeks prior to the actual date
parts are needed. GE managed to solve the parts shortage - the most pressing
problem at the plant - through this kanban system of pull linkages with the internal
and external supplier base.
C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\MEDIA\CAGCAT10\j0240695.wmf

C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\MEDIA\CAGCAT10\j0187423.wmf

C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office\MEDIA\CAGCAT10\j0285360.wmf

MRP
CustomerC:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft
Office\MEDIA\CAGCAT10\j0199549.wmf
This system helped GE to achieve 100 percent deliveries to customer's schedule.
Engines are completed, tested and loaded directly into a customer truck every three
days to match assembly requirements at the customer site.
GE Lynn is a success story because of its lean approach to system transformation and
supplier relationship. Ernie Oliveira, who headed the lean initiative at Lynn, also
managed to involve critical stakeholders - workforce and suppliers. The results of
this transformation were astounding as detailed in the table 2.
Performance Metric
Improvement (Actual Average)
Inventory Turnover
33%
Throughpput Time
35%
Quality (Internal -DPU's/engine)
28%
Human Effort per engine
17%
Table 2 Lean Manufacturing results at GE Lynn (Source: Murman et al 2002; LAI
Plenary Workshop proceedings and presentation by Ernie Oliveira, 'The transition to
Lean Manufacturing in Lynn Engine Assembly Operation, GE Aircraft Engines' 1998)

Case C

The Pratt & Whitney Story

During late 1992, Pratt & Whitney (P&W) refocused its energies to reduce costs,
improve manufacturing performance, and increase competitiveness.
In 1993, in accordance with lean principles, P&W was trying to transform its General
Machining Product Centre in East Hartford, Connecticut from a departmental layout
to a series of manufacturing cells. Result of this transformation was dramatic. Top
performing cell's lead time saw a huge reduction from eight to three weeks; average
number of pieces in process dropped from 233 to 77; travel distance went from
13,670 to 5800 feet; and average setup time shrank from 6 hour to 30 minutes.

Reference Profile ()
Cook C. R., and Graser J.C., 'Military Airframe Acquisitions Costs: The Effects of
Lean Manufacturing' (Santa Monica, CA:RAND, 2001), RAND Study MR-1325-A.
Johns R, Crute V and Graves, A. Working across the Value Chain: Understanding the
Challenges. School of Management, University of Bath May, 2006.
Johns R., Crute V., and Graves A., Lean Supply: Cost Reduction or Waste Reduction,
A preliminary study of Lean initiatives and lower tier suppliers in the Aerospace
Sector. School of Management, University of Bath October, 2002.
Murman E, Allen T, Bozdogan K, Cutcher-Gershenfeld J, McManus H, Nightingale
D, Rebentisch E, Shield T, Stahl F, Walton M, Warmkessel J, Weiss S and Widnall S.
Lean Enterprise Value: Insights from MIT's Lean Advancement Initiative. Palgrave
Macmillan. 2002.
Nightingale D., 'Lean Enterprises - A Systems Perspective', Engineering Systems
Division Working Paper Series, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 2003.
Ohno T, Toyota Production System-Beyond Large Scale Production. Cambridge, MA:
Productivity Inc. Published in Japanese in 1978; in English in 1988.
Porter M E, Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance.
New York: The Free Press, 1985.
The Interim Report of the Aerospace Innovation and Growth Team 2003.
"What is Lean?" Lean Enterprise Institute, http://www.lean.org/WhatsLean/

Womack J P and Jones D T, Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your
Corporation. Free Press; New Edition. 2003.
Womack J, Jones D, Roos D, The Machine That Changed the World- How Lean
Production Revolutionized the Global Car Wars. Simon & Schuster Ltd; New
Edition , 2007.
Y. Sugimori, K. Kusunoki, F. Cho, and S. Uchikawa, 'Toyota Production System and
Kanban Systems - Materialization of Just-In-Time and Respect-for-Human Systems',
International Journal of Production Research 15:6 (1977), 553-64