i TOTAL PRODUCTIVE MAINTENANCE FRAMEWORK FOR …eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/77613/1/AdnanBakriPFKM2015.pdf · TPM III ini adalah bermatlamat untuk dijadikan sumber rujukan bagi pihak

i

TOTAL PRODUCTIVE MAINTENANCE FRAMEWORK

FOR AUTOMOTIVE COMPANIES IN MALAYSIA

ADNAN BIN BAKRI

A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the

requirements for the award of the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy (Mechanical Engineering)

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

NOVEMBER 2015

iii

DEDICATION

To my beloved wife, Roslinda and all of my children: Nabil Irsyad, Nureen Najihah,

Muhammad Nabil Ikhwan, Nureen Batrisyia and Nureen Faezatul Sofea, for the doa,

love and endless support.

..And to the memory of my late parents who will forever be my inspiration.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficent and the Most Merciful. It is with

deepest sense of gratitude to the Almighty that gives me strength and ability to

complete this thesis. Throughout the journey, I was in contact with many people,

researchers, academicians and practitioners. They have contributed significantly

towards my understanding and thoughts in this research.

In particular, I would like to take this opportunity to express my solemn thanks and

greatest gratitude to my respected supervisor, Assoc. Professor Dr. Abd. Rahman bin

Abdul Rahim, and to my co-supervisor, Professor Dr. Noordin bin Mohd Yusof for

their invaluable advice, guidance, encouragement, support and motivation throughout

the entire course of this research. My next appreciation goes to the honorable panel

of experts, Professor Dr. Nooh bin Abu Bakar (internal examiner), Assoc. Professor

Dr. Mohd. Nizam bin Abd. Rahman (external examiner) and Professor Ir. Dr. Sha’ri

bin Mohd. Yusof (Chairman of the viva-voce). They have ensured the “validity” of

my research to follow the utmost standard of UTM “The Research

University”...JAZAKUMULLAHU KHAIRAN KATHIRA…The completion of this

thesis could not have been accomplished without your support and guidance.

Lastly, I would also like to convey my gratitude to all of my colleagues and friends

from Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), University Kuala Lumpur (UniKL) and

automotive companies, who assisted me throughout the research journey. Their

invaluable views, supports and tips are useful indeed. Unfortunately, it is not possible

to list all of them in this limited space.

v

ABSTRACT

Total productive maintenance (TPM) is an extensive maintenance management

approach aimed towards improving the overall equipment effectiveness (OEE). A

review on literature revealed that current TPM frameworks are generic and have

inadequate coverage on the critical success factors (CSFs) constructs in its structure.

These frameworks do not address the operational context particularly in providing

the guideline for implementation, thus make it incomplete to be used in adopting

TPM methodology. This research aims to provide a more comprehensive TPM

framework with a set of significant CSFs and guideline for implementation. First, a

conceptual framework (denoted as TPM Framework I) was developed with seven

significant CSFs constructs as its main components, namely: management

commitment and leadership; employee participation; training and education;

effective communication; strategic planning; structured implementation approach,

and; monitoring and evaluation. It was used for data collection through a mixed

method research approach which integrates single-embedded (in-depth) design case

study and survey. A methodological triangulation utilizing both qualitative and

quantitative methods has been used throughout the research, which includes: semi-

structured interview; document analysis; direct and participant observation; analysis

of artifacts, and; exploratory survey. The case study aims at providing an insight of

how the largest automotive company and six of its subsidiaries implement TPM by

exploring “what” and “how” the CSFs constructs are emphasized. Multiple unit of

analysis were explored individually and results are drawn together to yield an overall

picture of the actual TPM practice. Cross-case analysis and descriptive statistics was

used for data analysis. Findings and feedbacks from the case study were synthesized

to develop the improved conceptual framework (denoted as TPM Framework II)

which was then validated through expert validation involving eight respondents from

other automotive companies. The inputs from expert validation were analyzed and

incorporated for the development of final conceptual framework (denoted as Final

TPM Framework III). It filled the gap of previous research by integrating most

aspects of CSFs constructs from both human and operational context. Another

novelty of Final TPM Framework III is the inclusion of extensive implementation

plan and introduction of new additional structures of CSFs such as: address all eight

pillars of TPM; holistic involvement of business stakeholders, and; employees’ skill

development linking with equipment life cycle. Such new characteristics have not

been addressed in previous TPM framework. Final TPM Framework III can be

generalized to automotive companies since it was synthesized from intensive case

study and incorporated other automotive companies’ input mainly through expert

validation exercises. Final TPM Framework III enables the management of

automotive companies to take effective actions in handling issues related to TPM

implementation.

vi

ABSTRAK

Kaedah total productive maintenance (TPM) merupakan kaedah pengurusan

penyelenggaraan yang menekankan kepada peningkatan dalam overall equipment

effectiveness (OEE) sesuatu mesin. Analisa dari literatur menunjukkan kerangka

konseptual TPM yang sedia ada tidak mempunyai konstruk critical success factors

(CSFs) yang lengkap dan tidak menyediakan pelan pelaksanaan, menjadikannnya

tidak sesuai untuk digunakan sebagai sumber rujukan dalam melaksanaan TPM.

Kajian ini bertujuan untuk menghasilkan satu kerangka konseptual TPM yang lebih

holistik, dengan penekanan kepada konstruk CSFs yang signifikan dan penyediaan

panduan untuk pelaksanaan. Untuk tujuan itu, kerangka konseptual (TPM

Framework I) telah diolah dengan tujuh komponen utamanya: kesungguhan dan

kepimpinan pihak pengurusan; penglibatan pekerja; latihan dan pendidikan;

keberkesanan komunikasi; perancangan strategik; pelaksanaan secara terancang, dan;

pemantauan dan penilaian. Kerangka konseptual ini telah digunakan sebagai asas

kepada pengumpulan data bagi kajian melalui kaedah metod campuran yang

mengintegrasikan kajian kes (single-embedded design case study) dan kaedah soal

selidik. Pendekatan triangulasi dengan penggunaan kaedah kualitatif dan kuantitatif

telah digunakan sepanjang proses kajian melibatkan: temu bual soalan terbuka;

analisis kandungan dokumen; pemerhatian; analisis artifak, dan; soal selidik. Kajian

kes bermatlamat untuk meneroka “bagaimana” dan “apakah” konstruk CSFs yang

ditekankan oleh syarikat automotif utama dan tujuh anak syarikatnya dalam

melaksanakan TPM. Segala maklumat dari kajian kes telah dikumpul dan dianalisis

menggunakan kaedah cross-case analysis dan descriptive statistics kearah

perumusan kerangka konseptual TPM II (TPM Framework II). Kerangka konseptual

TPM II ini kemudiannya telah dirujuk kepada lapan pakar dari industri automotif

untuk disahkan. Komen dari pakar-pakar tersebut kemudiannya telah digunakan

untuk merumuskan kerangka konseptual TPM III (Final TPM Framework III).

Kerangka konseptual TPM III ini telah memenuhi lompang dalam kajian-kajian lepas

dengan mengintegrasikan hampir keseluruhan konstruk CSFs dari konteks

kemanusiaan dan operasi (human and operational context). Ianya juga telah

dilengkapi dengan plan pelaksanaan dan penekanan terhadap konstruk tambahan

dalam CSFs: penekanan terhadap lapan asas TPM; penglibatan menyeluruh business

stakeholders, dan; kemahiran pekerja selari dengan machine life cyle. Ciri-ciri khas

ini belum pernah diperkenalkan dalam kerangka konseptual TPM yang sedia ada.

Kerangka konseptual TPM III ini boleh digunakan pada semua kilang automotif

kerana ianya telah diolah hasil kajian kes secara intensif di kilang automotif utama

dan anak-anak syarikatnya. Input dan pandangan pakar-pakar dari kilang-kilang

automotif lain juga telah memperkasakan lagi kerangka ini. Kerangka konseptual

TPM III ini adalah bermatlamat untuk dijadikan sumber rujukan bagi pihak

pengurusan kilang automotif bagi mengambil langkah penambahbaikan dalam

menangani masalah yang berkaitan dengan pelaksanaan TPM.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

DECLARATION ii

DEDICATION iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv

ABSTRACT v

ABSTRAK vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii

LIST OF TABLES xix

LIST OF FIGURES xxii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xxv

LIST OF APPENDICES xxviii

1 INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH 1

1.1 Background of the Research 1

1.2 Problem Statement 3

1.2.1 The Need of In-depth Study in TPM 3

1.2.2 TPM Research in Automotive Industry 3

1.2.3 TPM Research on CSFs Constructs 4

1.2.4 Absence of Comprehensive TPM Framework 5

1.3 Research Questions 5

1.4 Research Objectives 6

1.5 Research Scope 6

1.6 Significance of the Research 7

1.7 Outline of the Thesis 8

viii

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 9

2.1 Introduction 9

2.2 Overview of Quality Improvement Initiatives 9

2.2.1 Maintenance Management in QI Initiatives 11

2.3 Overview of Maintenance Management 14

2.3.1 Breakdown Maintenance 15

2.3.2 Preventive Maintenance 15

2.3.3 Predictive Maintenance 15

2.3.4 Reliability Centered Maintenance 16

2.3.5 Computerized Maintenance Management

System 17

2.3.6 Total Productive Maintenance 17

2.3.7 Comparison of Various Approaches in

Maintenance Management 17

2.3.8 Rationale of TPM as Research Focus 19

2.4 Overview of TPM Methodology 23

2.4.1 Historical Perspective of TPM 23

2.4.2 TPM Philosophy 23

2.4.3 Focus of TPM 24

2.4.4 Benefits of TPM 25

2.5 Operational Approach of TPM 26

2.5.1 TPM Pillar 1: Autonomous Maintenance 28

2.5.2 TPM Pillar 2: Focused Improvement 29

2.5.3 TPM Pillar 3: Planned Maintenance 29

2.5.4 TPM Pillar 4: Quality Maintenance 31

2.5.5 TPM Pillar 5: Training and Education 31

2.5.6 TPM Pillar 6: Early Management 32

2.5.7 TPM Pillar 7: TPM in Administrative and

Support Department 32

2.5.8 TPM Pillar 8: Safety, Health and Environment 33

2.6 Overall Equipment Effectiveness 34

2.7 TPM Implementation Steps 36

2.8 Review of Existing Research in TPM 37

ix

2.8.1 Recent Theme in TPM Research 38

2.8.2 Common Research Theme in Malaysia 39

2.8.3 TPM Research in Malaysian Automotive

Industry 40

2.9 Critical Success Factors 42

2.9.1 Definition of Critical Success Factors 43

2.9.2 CSFs Constructs in TPM 46

2.9.2.1 Management Commitment and

Leadership 45

2.9.2.2 Employee Participation 46

2.9.2.3 Strategic Planning 48

2.9.2.4 Structured Implementation Approach 49

2.9.2.5 Training and Education 51

2.9.2.6 Effective Communication 52

2.9.2.7 Monitoring and Evaluation 53

2.10 Research Framework 53

2.10.1 Review of Existing TPM Frameworks 54

2.10.1.1 Framework by McKone et al. (1999) 55

2.10.1.2 Framework by Park and Han (2001) 56

2.10.1.3 Framework by Ahmed et al. (2004) 57

2.10.1.4 Framework by Seng et al. (2006) 58

2.10.1.5 Framework by Ahuja and

Khamba (2008) 59

2.10.1.6 Framework by Batumalay and

Santhapparaj (2009) 60

2.10.1.7 Framework by Lazim and

Ramayah (2010) 62

2.10.2 Comparative Analysis of Existing TPM

Framework 63

2.10.3 Absence of Comprehensive TPM Framework 67

2.11 Summary 67

x

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 68

3.1 Introduction 68

3.1.1 Overview of the Research Methodology 68

3.2 Phase I of the Research 71

3.2.1 Problem Identification 71

3.2.2 Determine Research Objectives 71

3.2.3 Determine the Research Theme 72

3.2.4 Development of the Research Framework 72

3.2.5 Selection of Research Design 73

3.2.6 Review on Case Study Approach 75

3.2.6.1 Case Study Operational Approach 75

3.2.6.2 Advantages of Case Study Approach 76

3.2.6.3 Review on Research Approach 78

3.2.6.4 Review on Research Approach

Employed by Malaysian Researchers 79

3.2.7 Selection of Case Study Company 80

3.3 Phase II of the Research 80

3.3.1 Case Study Planning and Design 81

3.3.1.1 Case Study Training 81

3.3.1.2 Determine Case and Unit of

Analysis 83

3.3.1.3 Selection of Case Study Design 84

3.3.2 Preparation for Data Collection 90

3.3.2.1 General Case Study Protocol 91

3.3.2.2 Semi-structured Interview Question 93

3.3.2.3 Questionnaire 93

3.3.2.4 Validation of Case Study Protocols 94

3.3.2.5 Pilot Test 95

3.4 Phase III of the Research 96

3.4.1 Data Collection 96

3.4.1.1 Qualitative Data Collection Tools 97

3.4.1.2 Quantitative Data Collection Tools 102

3.4.2 Data Analysis 102

xi

3.4.3 Development of TPM Framework II 104

3.4.4 Framework Validation Protocol 104

3.4.5 Validation of TPM Framework II 105

3.5 Phase IV of the Research 107

3.5.1 Development of Final TPM Framework III 107

3.5.2 Development of Implementation Plan 107

3.6 Discussion: Quality Assurance of the Research 108

3.6.1 Construct Validity 108

3.6.2 Internal Validity 109

3.6.3 External Validity 110

3.6.4 Reliability 110

3.7 Summary 112

4 CASE STUDY RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 113

4.1 Introduction 113

4.2 Research Framework 113

4.3 Case Study Company 115

4.3.1 Background of Unit of Analysis 116

4.3.1.1 Unit of Analysis 1: Main Plant 118

4.3.1.2 Unit of Analysis 2: Multi-Vehicle

Factory 118

4.3.1.3 Unit of Analysis 3: Engine

Transmission Manufacturing 118

4.3.1.4 Unit of Analysis 4: Additional Plant 119

4.3.1.5 Unit of Analysis 5: Plant Services

Department 119

4.3.1.6 Unit of Analysis 6 : Innovation and

Improvement Department 119

4.4 Case Study Results: Qualitative Method 120

4.4.1 CSFs 1: Management Commitment and

Leadership 120

4.4.1.1 Clear Company Policy on TPM 120

4.4.1.2 Recognition of TPM as Part of Vital

xii

Constituent 121

4.4.1.3 Allocation of Sufficient Resources 122

4.4.1.4 Lead TPM Steering Committee 124

4.4.1.5 Offering Rewards and Incentives 125

4.4.2 CSFs 2: Employee Participation 127

4.4.2.1 Change in Working Culture 127

4.4.2.2 Active Participation in AM and SGA 128

4.4.2.3 Equipment Ownership and Teamwork 130

4.4.2.4 Participation of All Employees 130

4.4.3 CSFs 3: Strategic Planning 131

4.4.3.1 Development of Master Plan 131

4.4.3.2 Benchmarking Activities 132

4.4.3.3 Plan for TPM Certification 132

4.4.4 CSFs 4: Structured Implementation Approach 133

4.4.4.1 Follow the Establish TPM

Implementation Framework 133

4.4.4.2 Empowerment of Middle- managers to

Support TPM 136

4.4.4.3 Application of Tools, Techniques and

Technology 137

4.4.4.4 Integration of TPM with Other Quality

Improvement Initiatives 138

4.3.4.5 Involvement of Business Stakeholders 139

4.4.5 CSFs 5: Training and Education 140

4.4.5.1 Structured Training Program 140

4.4.5.2 Development of Employee

Competency 141

4.4.5.3 Inculcate Kaizen Culture 143

4.4.5.4 Trainer Competency 144

4.4.6 CSFs 6: Effective Communication 144

4.4.6.1 Open Communication and Exchange of

Information 144

4.4.6.2 Awareness and Promotional Activities 146

xiii

4.4.6.3 Feedback System 146

4.4.7 CSFs 7: Monitoring and Evaluation 147

4.4.7.1 Scheduled Monitoring and Follow Up 147

4.4.7.2 Measurement Performance Based on

OEE 148

4.4.7.3 Assessment of Employee Competency 149

4.4.7.4 Enforcement by Management 150

4.5 Case Study Results: Quantitative Method 151

4.5.1 Operators Perceptions’ on TPM

Implementation 152

4.5.2 Operators’ Perception on the Role of

Teamwork 154

4.5.3 Operators’ Perception on Management

Commitment and Leadership 155

4.5.4 Assessment on Operators’ Knowledge in TPM 156

4.5.4.1 Question 1 158

4.5.4.2 Question 2 158

4.5.4.3 Question 3 159

4.5.4.4 Question 4 160

4.5.4.5 Question 5 160

4.6 Case Study Analysis 161

4.6.1 Addressing the TPM Framework I 161


Leadership 162



4.6.1.4 Structured Implementation Approach 167




4.6.2 Addressing RQ1 174



xiv


4.6.6 Recommendations for TPM Improvement at

Case Study Company 178

4.6.6.1 Recommendation Related to the

Constructs of Management

Commitment and Leadership 178


Constructs of Employee Participation 179


Constructs of Strategic Planning 179


Constructs of Structured

Implementation Approach 181


Constructs of Training and Education 183


Constructs of Effective

Communication 184


Constructs of Monitoring and

Evaluation 185

4.7 CSFs Constructs Anchored from the Case Study 188

4.7.1 Management Commitment and Leadership 188

4.7.1.1 Understanding TPM Philosophy 189

4.7.2 Employee Participation 189

4.7.3 Strategic Planning 190

4.7.4 Structured Implementation Approach 190

4.7.4.1 Focus on All Eight Pillars of TPM 191

4.7.4.2 Integration of Tools, Techniques and

Technology 191

4.7.4.3 Involvement of External Business

Stakeholders 192

4.7.5 Training and Education 192

xv

4.7.6 Effective Communication 193

4.7.7 Monitoring and Evaluation 193

4.8 Improvement of TPM Framework I 194

4.9 Summary 196

5 DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONCEPTUAL TPM

FRAMEWORK 197


5.2 Level of Framework 197

5.3 Descriptions of TPM Framework II 199

5.4 Summary of Specification for TPM Framework II 203

5.4.1 Simple Structure and Self-explanatory 204

5.4.2 Integration of All Possible CSFs Constructs 204

5.4.3 Implementable 205

5.4.4 Revisable 205

5.4.5 Integrate with Tools, Techniques and

Technology 206

5.5 Validation of TPM Framework II 206

5.5.1 Respondent Demographic 207

5.5.2 Background of Individual Respondent

Company 208

5.5.2.1 Company A 208

5.5.2.2 Company B 208

5.5.2.3 Company C 209

5.5.2.4 Company D 209

5.5.2.5 Company E 210

5.5.2.6 University F 210

5.5.2.7 University G 210

5.5.3 Response to the Framework Attributes 211

5.5.4 Response to the Framework Constructs 213

5.5.4.1 Understanding the philosophy 213


Leadership 214

xvi





5.5.4.7 Focus on All Eight Pillars of TPM 216


Stakeholders 216

5.5.4.9 Integration of Tools, Techniques and

Technology 217


5.5.4.11 Summary of Response to the

Framework Constructs 218

5.5.5 Individual Respondent Review to the TPM

Framework II 224

5.5.5.1 Respondent A1 224

5.5.5.2 Respondent A2 224

5.5.5.3 Respondent B1 225

5.5.5.4 Respondent B2 225

5.5.5.5 Respondent C1 226

5.5.5.6 Respondent C2 226

5.5.5.7 Respondent D1 226

5.5.5.8 Respondent E1 227

5.5.5.9 Respondent F1 227

5.5.5.10 Respondent G1 228

5.6 Improvement Suggestion for TPM Framework II 228

5.7 Development of Final TPM Framework III 230

5.7.1 Core Starting point 232

5.7.1.1 Understanding the TPM Philosophy 232


Leadership 233

5.7.2 Human –Contextual Strategy 234


5.7.2.2 Communication 238

xvii


5.7.3 Operational-Contextual Strategy 240

5.7.3.1 Strategic Planning for TPM

Implementation 240

5.7.3.2 Address All of TPM Pillars 243


Stakeholders 247

5.7.3.4 Integration of Tools, Techniques

and Technology 253


5.8 Proposed Implementation Plan 255

5.8.1 Phase I: Preparatory Stage 258

5.8.1.1 Instill the Top Management

Commitment 258

5.8.1.2 Justification of Implementing the

Final TPM Framework III 258

5.8.1.3 Allocation of Resources 258

5.8.1.4 Establish New Company Policy 259

5.8.1.5 Steering Committee and Champion

Team 259

5.8.1.6 Awareness Training for Steering

Committee and Champion Team 260

5.8.1.7 Benchmarking and Consultation 260

5.8.1.8 Dissemination of Top Management

Decision 260

5.8.1.9 Awareness Training for Stakeholders 261

5.8.2 Phase II: Planning Stage 262

5.8.2.1 Explicit Master Plan 262

5.8.2.2 Plan for Pilot Project 263

5.8.2.3 Training for Pilot Team 263

5.8.2.4 Plan for Monitoring and Evaluation 264

5.8.2.5 Strategy to Entice Total Participation 264

5.8.2.6 Formation of Cross Functional Team 264

xviii

5.8.2.7 Promoting the SGA 265

5.8.3 Phase III: Pilot Project 265

5.8.4 Phase IV: Full Implementation 266

5.9 Summary 266

6 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 267


6.2 Conclusions of the Research 267

6.2.1 Addressing RO1 267





6.3 Research Contributions 271

6.3.1 Development of TPM Framework for

Automotive Company 271

6.3.2 Promotion of CSFs Focus in TPM

Implementation 271

6.3.3 Proposed Measure for Case Study Company 272

6.3.4 Promotion of Case Study Methodology 272

6.3.5 New Body of Knowledge in TPM 272

6.4 Dissemination of Knowledge 273

6.5 Recommendations for Future Research 273

6.5.1 Actual Implementation of the Framework

in Automotive Company 273

6.5.2 Expand the Coverage of the Case Study in

Automotive Industry 273

6.5.3 Improvisation on the CSFs Constructs 274

6.5.4 Further Research on the New Insight of TPM 274

6.6 Closing Remarks 275

REFERENCES 276

Appendices A-P 295 - 349

xix

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE

2.1 Previous studies in TQM, lean manufacturing and JIT 12

2.2 Comparison on the approaches in maintenance

management 18

2.3 TPM research in Malaysia 21

2.4 Priorities and goals of TPM 26

2.5 Seven steps AM 28

2.6 Detail of six major losses related to equipment

maintenance 35

2.7 Twelve-step TPM implementation 36

2.8 Summary of CSFs constructs derived from previous study 44

2.9 Summary of elements emphasized in previous TPM

framework: A comparison based on independent variables 64


framework: A comparison based on dependent variables

and methodology used 65


framework: A comparison based on the CSFs constructs 66

3.1 Selection criteria of research design 74

3.2 Comparison between case study and survey study 78

3.3 Case study boundaries 84

3.4 Four-types of case study design 85

3.5 Selection factors for the single-case study approach 88

3.6 Finalized case study design for the research 90

xx

3.7 Case study protocol developed for this research 92

3.8 Questionnaire and its subdivisions 94

3.9 Selection criteria for expert validation 95

3.10 Selection criteria for the interview respondents 98

3.11 Distribution of respondents for the interview 99

3.12 List of documents to be examined 100

3.13 List of archival records to be checked 101

3.14 Data analysis method from the previous research 103

3.15 Selection criteria for expert validation of TPM Framework

II 105

3.16 Assurance of the validity of the research 111

4.1 Typical data from problem identification activity 129

4.2 Activities in the three-phase TPM implementation program 135

4.3 Summary of the key module for AM training 142

4.4 Type of communication employed for dissemination of

TPM information 145

4.5 Monitoring activities for TPM 148

4.6 Auditing standards for TPM 150

4.7 Work areas for questionnaires distribution 152

4.8 Operators’ perception of TPM program 153

4.9 Operators’ perception on the role of teamwork in TPM 154

4.10 Operators’ perception on management commitment and

leadership in TPM 156

4.11 Assessment to measure the operators’ understanding on

TPM methodology 157

4.12 Five-point Likert scale used for rating of CSFs constructs 161

4.13 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of management

commitment and leadership 163

4.14 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of employee

participation 165

4.15 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of strategic

planning 166

4.16 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of structured 168

xxi

implementation approach

4.17 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of training and

education 170

4.18 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of effective

communication 171

4.19 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of monitoring

and evaluation 173

4.20 TPM pillar emphasis 174

4.21 Summary of the CSFs constructs and level of emphasis 175

4.22 Recommendation to enhance the TPM implementation 186

4.23 Summary of improvement for TPM Framework I 195

5.1 Detail elements in TPM Framework II 200

5.2 Summary of specification for TPM Framework II 203

5.3 Content of the validation protocol for TPM Framework II 206

5.4 Summary of respondent demographic profiles 207

5.5 Summary of respondents’ feedback to TPM Framework II

attributes 212

5.6 Five-point Likert scale used for framework validation 213

5.7 Cross-case comparison on the response to the framework

content 219

5.8 Suggestions for Improvement of TPM Framework II 229

5.9 Improvement for TPM Framework II 230

5.10 Dedicated TPM training 235

5.11 Training for AM 237

5.12 TPM pillars and its key activity 246

5.13 The role of external business stakeholders 249

5.14 Summary of activities involved in the four phases of

implementation plan 257

xxii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE

2.1 Concept in maintenance management 14

2.2 The meaning of total in TPM 24

2.3 TPM with eight pillars approach 27

2.4 TPM with five pillars approach 27

2.5 The activities of specialized maintenance 30

2.6 Six major losses related to equipment maintenance 35

2.7 Framework by McKone et al. (1999) 55

2.8 Framework by Park and Han (2001) 56

2.9 Framework by Ahmed et al. (2004) 57

2.10 Framework by Seng et al. (2006) 59

2.11 Framework by Ahuja and Khamba (2008) 60

2.12 Framework by Batumalay and Santhapparaj (2009) 61

2.13 Framework by Lazim and Ramayah (2010) 62

3.1 Methodology adopted for the research 70

3.2 Identification of problem statement for the research 71

3.3 Classification of research design 73

3.4 The communal between this research aims and Yin’s

assertion on case study 76

3.5 Case study and its sub components 77

3.6 Research methodology applied by the previous

researchers 79

3.7 Typical steps in case study methodology 81

3.8 Summary of stages involved in development of TPM

framework

107

xxiii

4.1 TPM Framework I 114

4.2 Unit of analysis approached in the case study 117

4.3 Relation among the unit of analysis in the case study 117

4.4 Company X quality policy towards business survival 122

4.5 Organization chart of the case study company 123

4.6 Structure for TPM steering committee in company X 125

4.7 Kaizen suggestion flow 126

4.8 Approach in gaining employee participation 128

4.9 Evidences of active employee participation 129

4.10 Basic TPM operational approaches 131

4.11 Typical shop floor manpower planning 137

4.12 Sequence of AM training 141

4.13 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of

management commitment and leadership 163

4.14 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of employee

participation 165

4.15 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of strategic

planning 167

4.16 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of structured

implementation approach 169

4.17 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of training and

education 171

4.18 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of effective

communication 172

4.19 Level of emphasis related to the constructs of monitoring

and evaluation 173

5.1 Level of framework 198

5.2 TPM Framework II 200

5.3 Final TPM Framework III 231

5.4 Relation of skills development and equipment failure rate 236

5.5 Communication item 239

5.6 Five main elements to enhance planning and preparation

works

241

xxiv

5.7 The hierarchy of TPM pillars 245

5.8 Involvement of external business stakeholder towards

achieving the TPM target 248

5.9 Relation of equipment life cycle and EM activity 251

5.10 Involvement of DOSH and equipment supplier towards

zero industrial accident 253

5.11 Integration of tools, techniques and technology towards

improvement in TPM implementation 254

xxv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

4M1E - Man-Machine-Method-Material-Environment

5S - Shop Floor Control

AM - Autonomous Maintenance

BM - Breakdown Maintenance

CAPD - Check-Act-Plan-Do

CBM - Condition Based Maintenance

CLTM - Cleaning-Lubrication-Tightening-Minor repair

CMMS - Computerised Maintenance Management System

CQI - Continual Quality Improvement

CSFs - Critical Success Factors

DIY - Do-it-yourself

DOE - Design of Experiment

DOSH - Department of Safety and Health

EIT - Equipment Improvement Team

EM - Early Management

ETM - Engine Transmission Manufacturing

FI - Focused Improvement

FMEA - Failure Mode and Effect Analysis

FMECA - Failure Mode and Effect Critical Analysis

FTA - Fault Tree Analysis

GRR - Gauge Repeatibility and Reproducibility

HAZOP - Hazard and Operability Analysis

HOQ - House of Quality

ICC - Innovative and Creavitivty Circle

ICT - Information and Communication Technology

IID - Innovation and Improvement Department

xxvi

JIPM - Japan Institute of Plant Maintenance

JIT - Just-In-Time

KPI - Key Performance Index

K-T - Kepner-Tregoe

Lean - Lean Manufacturing

MAI - Malaysia Automotive Institute

MAJAICO - Malaysia-Japan Automotive Industries Corporation

MCSA - Motor Current Signature Analysis

MIDA - Malaysia Industrial Development Authority

MITI - Ministry of International Trade and Industry

MMC - Mitsubishi Motors of Japan

MPC - Malaysian Productivity Corporation

MPV - Multi Purpose Vehicle

MSA - Measurement System Analysis

MVF - Multi-Vehicle Factory

NAP - National Automotive Policy

OA - Organizational Achievement

OEE - Overall Equipment Effectiveness

OEM - Ecology Oriented Manufacturing

OSHA - Occupational Safety and Health Act

PQCDSM - Productivity, Quality, Cost, Delivery, Safety, Morale

PDCA - Plan-Do-Check-Action

PdM - Predictive Maintenance

PM - Planned Maintenance

PrM - Preventive Maintenance

P-M - Phenomenon-Mechanism

PPAP - Production Part Approval Process

QI - Quality improvement

QFD - Quality Function Deployment

QM - Quality Maintenance

RCA - Root Cause Analysis

RCM - Reliability Centered Maintenance

RO - Research Objective

xxvii

RQ - Research Question

SGA - Small Group Activity

SHEM - Safety, Health and Environment Managerment

SIRIM - Standards and Industrial Research Institute of Malaysia

SMIs - Small-Medium Industries

SOP - Standard Operation Procedure

SPC - Statistical Process Control

SWOT - Strength-Weakness-Opportunity-Threat Analysis

TE - Training and Education

TPM - Total Productive Maintenance

TPMAS - TPM in Administrative and Support Department

TPMC - TPM Coordination

TPS - Toyota Production System

TQM - Total Quality Management

xxviii

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX TITLE PAGE

A1 List of Existing Research in TPM 295

A2 Comparison of Single Case vs Multiple Case Study 298

B Sample of E-mail Communication for the Case Study 300

C General Case Study Protocol 301

D Semi-structured Interview Question 304

E Questionnaire for Operators 310

F Assessment Test: Question and Answering Scheme 312

G Respondents Profile 313

H Sample of Responses for the Questionnaire and

Assessment Test 315

H1 Summary of the data collected in the case study through

a qualitative method 318

H2 Summary of the data collected in the case study through

quantitative methods 322

H3 Source of evidences from the case study 324

I Sample of Cover Letter for Framework Validation 325

J Sample of Framework Descriptions 326

K Sample of Question for Framework Validation 331

L Sample of Respondent Feedbacks for the Framework

Validation Exercise 339

M Sample of OEE Data from Company X 345

N Sample of Audit Results from Company X 346

O Sample of Data from Management Walkabout (Gemba)

at Company X 347

P List of Conferences and Publications 348

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH

1.1 Background of the Research

In order to face intense competition in the borderless world, manufacturing

organizations must be supported by efficient maintenance and effective

manufacturing strategies (Dogra et al., 2011; Ahuja and Khamba, 2008; Marquez and

Gupta, 2006). Reliable manufacturing equipment has been considered as significant

contributor to organizational competitiveness (Dogra et al., 2011; Sharma et al.,

2006; Kutucuoglu et al., 2001). With growing dependence on automation and

mechanization, maintenance of manufacturing equipment is becoming more complex

and critical (Pophaley and Vyas, 2010; Ben-Daya and Duffuaa, 1995). Due to such

characteristic, manufacturing industry players are under enormous pressure to

minimize downtime for their business survival (Rolfsen and Langeland, 2012).

Automotive industry is one of the most important manufacturing industries in

Malaysia (Salleh et al., 2012; MIDA, 2012; Wad and Govindaraju, 2011; Mahidin

and Kanageswary, 2004). Economic contribution by the automotive industry to the

overall Malaysian economy by providing employment and attracting capital

investment cannot be neglected (Salleh et al., 2012; Johnson et al., 2007). Rapid

growth in automotive industry has boosted and stimulated the development of auto-

related industry from materials supply to production, sales, service and other auto-

related operations (Rosli, 2006; Chand and Shirvani, 2000; Simpson et al., 1998).

Such development has also contributed to the skill development and advancement of

technological and engineering capabilities in Malaysia (MITI, 2012; Johnson et al.,

2

2007; Rosli, 2006; Mahidin and Kanageswary, 2004; Chand and Shirvani, 2000). The

automotive industry has a linkage with a wide range of related industries such as: iron

and steel, chemical, rubber and plastic, electrical and electronics industry (MIDA,

2012; Rosli, 2006; Simpson et al., 1998). All those industries have formed a huge

supply chain within the automotive industry (Chong et al., 2012; Johnson et al.,

2007). Of significance, the automotive industry requires an innovative approach to

optimize the maintenance of manufacturing equipment to ensure the product supplies

to the end customer have superior, competitive and reliable quality (Sharma et al.,

2012; Dogra et al., 2011; Pophaley and Vyas, 2010; Tsang and Chan, 2000; Ben-

Daya and Duffuaa, 1995). The continuous fascination of the automotive industry and

its significant impact on the global industry growth has attracted many researchers to

contribute the idea and explore potential opportunity for the continual improvement,

particularly in maintenance management (Aspinwall and Elgharib, 2013; Chong et

al., 2012; Rolfsen and Langeland, 2012; Salleh et al., 2011; Harsej and Yusof, 2011;

Pophaley and Vyas, 2010; Lazim et al., 2008; Rosli, 2006; Bamber et al., 1999;

Bohoris et al., 1995).

The automotive industries in the West have adopted total productive

maintenance (TPM) as an effective maintenance strategy for world class performance

beside other branch in maintenance management such as reliability centered-

maintenance (RCM), condition-based maintenance (CBM) and computerized

maintenance management system (CMMS) (Irajpour et al., 2014; Aspinwall and

Elgharib, 2013; Bamber et al., 1999). The adoption of TPM methodology by a careful

consideration on the critical success factors (CSFs) constructs in those automotive

industries has proven to improve the maintenance efficiency (Gates, 2010; Meibodi

and Monavvarian, 2010; Deros, 2004). The effective and efficient equipment

maintenance through TPM methodology would made a significant contribution to the

profitability of the organization through an increased in the production efficiency,

improved in product quality, lower operating cost, timely delivery to customers,

ensured safety of the workplace and improved morale of the employees (Sharma et

al., 2012; Ahuja and Khamba, 2008; Tsahouras, 2007). Such impressive findings in

the West have motivated the researcher to further investigate the extensiveness of

TPM implementation within the Malaysian automotive industry.

3

1.2 Problem Statement

1.2.1 The Need of In-depth Study in TPM

A review on TPM literature revealed that there was insignificant research

done to address the TPM implementation in Malaysian context. Based on the 91

journals reviewed, it was found that there were only 15.4 percent of journals

contributed by Malaysian researchers. Therefore the TPM research in Malaysia is

considered still in its infancy and relatively unsaturated (Chong et al., 2012). Most of

the available TPM researches in Malaysia focus on general review (14.3 percent) and

survey study (50 percent) instead of reporting the actual implementation using case

study approach. Only 35.7 percent of Malaysian researchers employ case study

methodology in their research (Chong et al., 2012; Norddin et al., 2012; Bon and

Karim, 2011; Lazim et al., 2008; Ahmed et al., 2005). The general review and survey

study were mainly aimed at addressing the overall scenario of TPM practice and

obtaining generic empirical evidence on the effect of independent variables towards

successful TPM implementation. The empirical evidences provided by previous

studies are useful as a starting point for further exploration in TPM research. Each of

the variables identified could be further investigated by applying a case study

methodology for an in-depth study (Yin, 2009). This has created a research gap in

investigating in depth various issues in TPM implementation.

1.2.2 TPM Research in Automotive Industry

About 50 percent of TPM researches in Malaysia were conducted in non-

specific industry (Lazim and Ramayah, 2010; Batumalay and Santhapparaj, 2009;

Seng et al., 2006; Ahmed et al., 2004; Ramayah et al., 2002). Another 28.6 percent of

the research portion was conducted in a specific manufacturing industry such as

fertilizer, electrical and electronic industry. The number of research focuses

specifically in automotive industry was 21.4 percent. Apparently there is a lot of

research opportunity related to TPM implementation in Malaysian automotive

industry. The automotive industry has also gained the attention of this research since

4

it is considered as one of the important industries to support the vision of Malaysian

government to be a developed nation by year 2020 (MIDA, 2012; Salleh et al., 2011;

Putri, 2011). This research is expected to provide an insight of the actual practices on

how a Malaysian automotive company adopts TPM methodology.

1.2.3 TPM Research on CSFs Constructs

Previous studies in the West have highlighted the importance of emphasizing

CSFs constructs to ensure the success in TPM implementation. Emphasis on CSFs

would shorten the learning curve in adopting TPM methodology (Poduval et al.,

2013; Majumdar and Manohar, 2012; Ahuja and Khamba, 2008; Bamber et al.,

1999). However a review on the literature revealed that the CSFs constructs have not

been adequately addressed by researchers. Most of the present research in Malaysia

focused on obtaining a broad status of TPM implementation (Ahmed et al., 2004);

investigating the factors that could further improve the overall equipment

effectiveness (OEE) in manufacturing industries (Batumalay and Santhapparaj,

2009); general review on feasibility of integrating TPM with Six Sigma (Harsej and

Yusof, 2011) and study on the possibility of transferring TPM practices to supply

chain (Chong et al., 2012). There was an effort to study the CSFs constructs of TPM

in Malaysian context by Lazim and Ramayah (2010), Seng et al. (2006) and Ramayah

et al. (2002). However those studies were done with incomprehensive coverage of

CSFs constructs. Furthermore, they were conducted through a survey and in a non-

specific industry. Therefore, the questions of “how” the Malaysian automotive

company adopted TPM methodology, “what” are the constructs of CSFs being

emphasized and “what” is the level of its emphasis remained unanswered and

requires an in-depth study. As such, this research aims to close those gaps by

exploring actual practices on how Malaysian automotive company utilize or apply the

CSFs constructs while implementing TPM.

5

1.2.4 Absence of Comprehensive TPM Framework

There have been many frameworks suggested to guide TPM implementation

(Lazim and Ramayah, 2010; Batumalay and Santhapparaj, 2009; Ahuja and Khamba,

2008; Seng et al., 2006; Ahmed et al., 2004; Park and Han, 2001; McKone et al.,

1999). However, a comparative analysis on the published TPM frameworks

uncovered that none of them have an adequate coverage on the CSFs constructs in

their structure, thus make it incomprehensive to be used as a guide in adopting TPM

methodology. A review of literature also revealed that, as of to date, there is no

integrated TPM framework developed for automotive company that address all

constructs of CSFs. This research is aimed to close the gaps by providing a

comprehensive conceptual framework as a guide for TPM implementation in

automotive company.

1.3 Research Questions

The main focus of this research is related to TPM implementation in

Malaysian automotive company. To address that concern, four research questions

were identified and formulated as listed:

1. How the company adopts TPM methodology and what is the adoption

level?

2. What are the constructs of CSFs being emphasized and their level of

emphasis?

3. How CSFs constructs are emphasized? Is there any framework used by

the company in emphasizing the CSFs constructs?

4. What are the areas that can be further improved in TPM

implementation?

6

1.4 Research Objectives

This research will assess the status of TPM implementation based on CSFs

constructs. The CSFs constructs emphasized by the case study company will be

identified and the way the company emphasized those constructs will be explored.

Subsequently, any weakness on the adoption of TPM methodology will be identified

and as an outcome, the research will propose improvement areas through the refined

framework for TPM implementation. The research outlines five objectives, which

are:

1. To assess the status of TPM implementation in an automotive company.

2. To identify the CSFs constructs emphasized in TPM implementation.

3. To explore how CSFs constructs are emphasized.

4. To propose potential improvement areas for TPM implementation.

5. To develop a comprehensive TPM framework for automotive industry.

1.5 Research Scope

In order to ensure the research is effective and manageable within the given

timeframe, below are the scopes for this research:

1. The developed conceptual TPM framework can be used by automotive

company as a guide or roadmap to improve an existing TPM

implementation or to start a new TPM implementation program. The

research provides a guideline on the implementation of the framework and

the actual implementation in any company is beyond the scope of this

research.

2. The expert validation of the framework is done only through experts from

potential user company.

3. The case study company was selected because of its position as a premier

automotive company and its record of TPM implementation. The findings

7

and results of the study might be biased towards the situation of the

company and might not fully represent the situation of other automotive

companies as a whole.

4. The primary data obtained in the research is confined to the data collected

from March 2010 to June 2013 within the case study company. The results

and findings from the research are considered as a snap shot analysis of

the data collected. Thus, it might not precisely reflect the actual situation

at other times.

1.6 Significance of the Research

TPM methodology promised to yield efficient support to the organization

competiveness, in terms of quality product, reasonable operational cost as well as

timely delivery to the customers (Graisa and Al-Habaibeh, 2011; Bamber et al.,

1999). In order to expand and promote TPM implementation in developing country

such as Malaysia, there must be a strategic implementation plan. Further review and

analysis of the current TPM implementation methodology in Malaysian companies

requires in-depth investigation, in order to get a clear understanding of its

implementation status. This research is expected to provide an insight of the current

status of TPM implementation particularly in automotive company. From literature,

as of to date, there is no integrated TPM framework developed for automotive

company that address the entire CSFs constructs. This research will provide a

comprehensive conceptual framework to act as guide for TPM implementation in the

automotive industry. The framework can assist the management of automotive

company to take proactive measure in managing issues related to TPM

implementation. The results from the study would also be beneficial for the case

study company to assess their implementation status and make necessary measures

for continuous quality improvement (CQI). This research can also act as a foundation

for further research in TPM. Each construct of the framework can be further studied

and validated with the actual implementation. Further improvement in TPM will

improve the quality of the product manufactured by the automotive companies.

8

1.7 Outline of the Thesis

This thesis is organized into six chapters. Chapter One explains the research

background, problem statement, research question and research objective. The

research scope and the significance of the research concerning TPM implementation

in automotive industry were described at the end of the chapter. Chapter Two

provides a review of literature on quality improvement initiatives, maintenance

management, rationale on the selection of TPM as the research focus, TPM

philosophy, TPM implementation methodology, CSFs constructs of TPM, previous

study on TPM and comparative study on the existing TPM framework.

Chapter Three outlines the research methodology and procedures. It provides

a description on the case study protocol which includes the development of research

framework, confirmation on data collection method and data analysis used in this

research. Chapter Four explains the development of the research framework (denoted

as TPM Framework I) and reports on the results as well as findings of the case study

carried out to validate the CSFs constructs embedded in TPM Framework I.

Subsequently, Chapter Five discusses the development of the conceptual framework

(denoted as TPM Framework II) from the output of case study and literature review.

The chapter further explains about validation exercise of TPM Framework II. Chapter

Five ended with the explanation on the development of Final TPM Framework III,

description of the framework and proposed implementation plan. The conclusion and

important implications, limitations and directions for future research are summarized

in Chapter Six.

276

REFERENCES

Abdallah, A. B. and Matsui, Y. (2007). JIT and TPM: their relationship and impact

on competitive performances. 9th International DSJ conference.

Agus, A. and Iteng, R. (2013). Lean Production and Business Performance: The

Moderating Effect of the Length of Lean Adoption. Journal Economics and

Bussiness Management. 1(4), 324-328.

Ahmed, S. and Hassan, M. (2002). Action plans for implementation of total

productive maintenance. International Journal of Engineering Science and

Technology. 2(1), 51-68.

Ahmed, S., Hassan, M. and Taha, Z. (2004). State of implementation of TPM in

SMIs: a survey study in Malaysia. Journal of Quality in Maintenance

Engineering. 10(2), 93-106.

Ahmed, S., Hassan, M. and Taha, Z. (2005). TPM can go beyond maintenance:

excerpt from a case implementation. Journal of Quality in Maintenance


Ahuja, I. P. S. and Khamba, J. S. (2008a). Total productive maintenance: Literature

review and directions. International Journal of Quality and Reliability

Management. 25(7), 709-756.

Ahuja, I. P. S. and Khamba, J. S. (2008b). An evaluation of TPM initiatives in Indian

industry for enhanced manufacturing performance. International Journal of

Quality and Reliability Management. 25(2), 147-172.

Ahuja, I. P. S. and Kumar, P. (2009). A case study of total productive maintenance

implementation at precision tube mills. Journal of Quality in Maintenance

Engineering. 15(3), 241-258.

Almeanazel, O. T. R. (2010). Total productive maintenance: Review on overall

equipment effectiveness measurement. Jordan Journal of Mechanical and

Industrial Engineering, 4(4).

277

Al–Refaie, A. and Hanayneh, B. (2014). Influences of TPM, TQM, Six Sigma

practices on firms performance in Jordan. International Journal of Productivity

and Quality Management. 13(2), 219-234.

Arca, J. G. and Prado, J. C. P. (2008). Personnel participation as a key factor for

success in maintenance program implementation: a case study. International

Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. 57(3), 247-258.

Aspinwall, E. and Elgharib, M. (2013). TPM implementation in large and medium

size organisations. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management. 24(5),

688-710.

Albert, H.C. and Tsang, Chan, P. K. (2000). TPM implementation in China: A case

study. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management. 17(2), 141-

157.

Bamber, C. J., Sharp, J. M. and Hides, M. T (1999). Factor affecting successful

implementation of total productive maintenance: a UK manufacturing case study

perspective. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering. 5(3), 162-81.

Bamber, C. J., Sharp, J. M and Castka, P. (2004). Third party assessment: The roles

of the maintenance function in an integrated management system. Journal of

Quality in Maintenance Engineering. 10(1), 26-36.

Bandyopadhyay, J. K. (2004). Implementing Just-in-Time Production and

Procurement Strategies. International Journal of Management. 12(1).

Barratt, M., Choi, T. Y. and Li, M. (2011). Qualitative case studies in operations

management: trends, research outcomes, and future research implications.

Journal of Operations Management. 29(4), 329-342.

Batumalay, K. and Santhapparaj, A. S. (2009). Overall equipment effectiveness

(OEE) through total productive maintenance (TPM) practices –A study across

the Malaysian industries. International Conference for Technical Postgraduates,

TECHPOS 2009. Article no. 5412049.

Baxter, P. and Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and

implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report. 13(4).

Ben-Daya, M. and Duffuaa, S. O. (1995). Maintenance and quality: the missing link.

Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering. 1(1), 20-26.

Blanchard, B.S (1997). An enhanced approach for implementing total productive

maintenance in the manufacturing environment. Journal of Quality in

Maintenance Engineering. 3(2), 69-80.

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/1355-2511.htm


278

Bloom, Neil B. (2005). Reliability centered maintenance: Implementation made

simple. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Bohoris, G. A., Vamvalis, C., Trace, W. and Ignatiadou, K. (1995). TPM

implementation in Land-Rover with the assistance of a CMMS. Journal of


Bon, A. T. and Karim, N. (2011). Total productive maintenance application to reduce

defects of product. Journal of Applied Sciences Research. 7(1), 11-17.

Bossink, B. A. G. and Blauw, J. (2002). Strategic ambitions as drivers of

improvement at DaimlerChrysler. Measuring Business Excellent. 6(4), 6-11.

Bowen, G.A. (2005). Preparing a Qualitative Research-based Dissertation: Lesson

Learned. The Qualitative Report. 10(2).

Bryman, A. (2004). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: how is it

done? Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications.

Burcher, P.G., Lee, G. L. and Sohal, A. S. (2004). The changing roles of production

and operations managers in Britain from the 1970s to the 1990s. International

Journal of Operations and Production Management. 24(4), 409-423.

Burhanuddin, M. A., Ahmad, A. R. and Desa, M. I. (2007). An application of

decision making grid to improve maintenance strategies in small and medium

industries. Second IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications.

Article no 4318450, 455-460.

Chan, F. T. S., Lau, H. C. W., Ip, R. W. L., Chan, H. K. and Kong, S. (2005)

Implementation of total productive maintenance: a case study. International

Journal of Production Economics. 95(1), 71-94.

Chand, G. and Shirvani, B. (2000). Implementation of TPM in cellular manufacturer.

Journal of Materials Processing Technology. 103 (2000), 149-154.

Chen, F. (1994). Benchmarking: Preventive Maintenance Practices at Japanese

Transplants. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management.

11(8), 19-26.

Chinese, D. and Ghirardo, G. (2010). Maintenance management in Italian

manufacturing firms: Matters of size and matters of strategy. Journal of Quality

in Maintenance Engineering. 16(2), 56-180.

Cholasuke, C., Bhardwa, R. and Antony, A. (2004). The status of maintenance

management in UK manufacturing organisations: results from a pilot survey.

Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering. 10(1), 5–15.


279

Chong, M. Y., Chin, J .F. and Hamzah, H. S. (2012). Transfer of TPM practice to

supply chain. Total Quality Management. 23(3), 467-480.

Christie, M., Rowe, P., Perry, C. and Chamard, J. (2000). Implementation of Realism

in Case Study Research Methodology. International Council for Small Business

Annual Conference. Brisbane.

Chua, P. Y. (2006). Asas Statistik Penyelidikan. Kuala Lumpur: McGraw-Hill.

Cigolini, R. and Turco, F. (1997). Total productive maintenance practices: a survey

in Italy. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering. 3(4), 259-272.

Cooke, F. L. (2000). Implementation TPM in plant maintenance: some

organizational barriers. International Journal of Quality and Reliability

Management. 17(9), 1003-1016.

Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A., Huby, G., Avery, A. and Sheikh, A. (2011).

The case study approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 11(1), 100-110.

Cua, K. O, McKone, K. E. and Schroeder, R.G. (2001). Relationships between

implementation of TQM, JIT, and TPM and manufacturing performance.

Journal of Operations Management. 19(1), 675-694.

Darke, P., Shanks, G. and Broadbent, M. (1998) successfully completing case study

research: combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism. Information System

Journal. 8(2), 273-289.

Das, A., Paul, H. and Swierczek, F.W. (2008). Developing and validating total

quality management (TQM) constructs in the context of Thailand's

manufacturing industry. Benchmarking: An International Journal. 15(1), 52-72.

Deros, B. M. (2004). Development of a benchmarking implementation framework for

a small and medium enterprises. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Doctor of

Philosophy Thesis in Mechanical Engineering.

Deros, B.M, Nizam, M., Rahman, A., Jaharah, A. G., Dzuraidah, A. W., Mohd Hazri,

H. and Nor Kamaliana, K. (2009). Role of senior management in TQM

implementation in Malaysian small and medium enterprises. The Institution of

Engineer. 72(3).

Doolen, T. L., Van Aken, E. M., Farris, J. A, Worley, J. J. and Huwe, J. (2008).

Kaizen events and organizational performance: a field study. International

Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. 57(8), 637-658.

Dooley, L. M. (2002). Case study research and theory building. Advances in

Developing Human Resources. 4(3), 335-354.


280

Dogra, M., Shrama, V. S., Sachdeva, A. and Dureja, J.S. (2011). TPM - a key

strategy for productivity improvement in process industry. Journal of

Engineering Science and Technology. 6(1), 1-16.

Eng, E. Q. and Yusof, S. R. (2003). A survey of TQM practices in the Malaysian

electrical and electronic industry. Total Quality Management and Business

Excellence. 14(1), 63-77.

Enaghani, M. R., Arashpour, M. R. and Karimi, M (2009). The relationship between

Lean and TPM. University of Boras: Master of Science Thesis in Industrial

Engineering.

Eisenhart, M. A. (1991). Conceptual framework for research circa 1991: Ideas from a

cultural anthropologist: Implications for mathematics education researchers.

Physology of Mathematics Education –North America meeting. October 16-19,

1991.

Eti, M. C., Ogaji, S. O. T. and Probert, S. D. (2004). Implementing TPM in Nigerian

manufacturing industries. Applied Energy. 79(4), 385-401.

Ferrari, E., Pareschi, A., Regattieri, A. and Persona, A. (2002). TPM: situation and

procedure for a soft introduction in Italian factories. The TQM Magazine. 14(6),

350-358.

Finlow-Bates, T., Visser, B. and Finlow-Bates, C. (2000). An integrated approach to

problem solving: linking K-T, TQM and RCA to TPM, The TQM Magazine.

12(4), 284-289.

Fisher, M. (2007). Strengthening the empirical base of Operations Management.

Manufacturing and Service Operations Management. 9(1), 368-382.

Fraenkel, J. R. and Wallen, N. E (2009). How to Design and Evaluate Research in

Education. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Gates, L. P. (2010). Strategic Planning with Critical Success Factors and Future

Scenarios: An Integrated Strategic Planning Framework. Carnegie-Mellon:

University Pittsburgh.

Gerring, J. (2004). What is a case study and what is it good for?. American Political

Science Review. 98(2), 341-354.

Georgescu (2011). Lean Thinking and Transferring Lean Management - The Best

Defence against an Economic Recession? European Journal of Interdisciplinary

Studies. 3(1), 1-17.

281

Ghrayeb, O., Damodaran, P. and Vohra, P. (2011). Art of triangulation: an effective

assessment validation strategy. Global Journal of Engineering Education. 13(1),

96-112.

Gibbert, M. and Ruigrok, W. (2010). The “what” and “how” of case study rigor:

Three strategies based on published research. Organizational Research

Methods. 13(4), 710-737.

Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research.

The Qualitative Report. 8(4), 597–607.

Graisa, M. and Al-Habaibeh, A. (2011). An investigation into current production

challenges facing the Libyan cement industry and the need for innovative total

productive maintenance (TPM) strategy. Journal of Manufacturing Technology

Management. 22(4), 541-558.

Groenewald, T. (2004). A phenomenological research design illustrated.

International Journal of Qualitative Methods. 3(1).

Grudowski, P. (2008). Quality System Documentation of SMEs in Process

Management Framework. Economics & Organization of Enterprise. 1(1), 77-82.

Gruenberg, T. (2003). A review of improvement method in manufacturings. Work

Study. 52 (2), 89-93.

Gunasekaran, A. and Lyu, J. (1997). Implementation of just-in-time in a small

company: A case study. Production planning and control. 8(4), 406-412.

Haddad, T. H. and Jaaron, A. A. (2012). The Applicability of total productive

maintenance for healthcare facilities: An implementation methodology. International

Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology. 2(2).

HajShirmohammadi, A. and Wedley, W. C (2004). Maintenance management - an

AHP application for centralization/decentralization. Journal of Quality in

Maintenance Engineering. 10(1), 16-25.

Hansson, J., Backlund, F. and Lycke, L. (2003). Managing commitment: increasing

the odds for successful implementation of TQM, TPM or RCM. International

Journal of Quality and Reliability Management. 20(9), 993-1008.

Hartmann, E. (1992). Successfully Installing TPM in a Non-Japanese plant.

Pittsburgh: TPM Press.

Harsej, F. and Sha’ri, M. Y. (2011). Continuous Improvement through an Integrated

Maintenance Model. Contemporary Engineering Sciences. 4(8), 353-362.

282

Ho, S. K. M. and Fung , C .K. H.,(1994). Developing a TQM Excellence Model. The

TQM Magazine. 6(6), 24–30.

Hoang, D. T., Igel, B. and Laosirihongthong, T. (2010). Total quality management

(TQM) strategy and organisational characteristics: Evidence from a recent WTO

member. Total Quality Management. 21(9), 931-951.

Hung, L. N. Q. (2006). Using SWOT Analysis to understand the institutional

environments: A Guide for Can Tho University. Vietnam: Can Tho University.

Hussein, A. (2009). The use of triangulation in social sciences research: Can

qualitative and quantitative methods be combined? Journal of Comparative

Social Work. 1(1), 1-12.

Ilie, G. and Ciocoiu, C. N. (2010). Application of fishbone diagram to determine the

risk of an event with multiple causes. Manag Res Pract. 2(1), 1-20.

Imai, M. (1986). Kaizen: The Key to Japan's Competitive Success. New York:

McGraw-Hill.

Ireland, F. and Dale, B.G. (2001). A study of total productive maintenance

implementation. International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management.

7(3), 183-191.

Jadhav, J. R., Mantha, S. S. and Rane, S. B. (2014). Analysis of interactions among

the barriers to JIT production: Interpretive structural modelling approach.

Journal of Industrial Engineering International. 1-22.

Jain, A., Bhatti, R. and Singh, H. (2014). Total productive maintenance (TPM)

implementation practice: A literature review and directions. International

Journal of Lean Six Sigma. 5(3), 293-323.

Jeong. K. Y. and Phillips. D. T (2001). Operational efficiency and effectiveness

measurement. International Journal of Operations and Production

Management. 21(11), 1404-1416.

Johnson, D. M., Sun, J. and Johnson, M.A (2007). Integrating multiple

manufacturing initiatives: Challenge for automotive suppliers. Measuring

Business Excellent. 11(3), 41-56.

Jostes, R. S. and Helms, M. (1994). Total productive maintenance and its link to total

quality management. Work study. 43(7), 18-20.

Juran, J. M. (1998). Juran’s Quality Handbook, 5th Edition. New York: McGraw-

Hill.

283

Kaur, M., Singh, K. and Ahuja, I. S. (2012). An evaluation of the synergic

implementation of TQM and TPM paradigms on business performance.

International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. 62(1), 4-

14.

Khan, Z., Bali., R. K. and Wickramasinghe, N. (2007). Developing a BPI framework

and PAM for SMEs. Industrial Management and Data Systems. 107(3), 345–

360.

Kheng, S. H., and Yusof, S. R. M. (2003). Development Of TPM implementation

plan in switchgear and engineering company. Proceedings of the International

Conference on Mechanical Engineering. 1-6.

Khanna, V. K (2008). Total productive maintenance experience: A case study.

International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management. 3(1), 12-32.

Kim, D., Kumar, V. and Kumar, U. (2011). A performance realization framework for

implementing ISO 9000. International Journal of Quality and Reliability

Management. 28(4), 383–404.

Kim, C. S., Spahlinger, D. A., Kin, J. M. and Billi, J. E. (2006). Lean health care:

What can hospitals learn from a world‐class automaker?. Journal of Hospital

Medicine. 1(3), 191-199.

Knox, S. and Burkard, A. W. (2009). Qualitative research interviews. Psychotherapy

Research. 19(5), 566-575.

Kodali, R. and Chandra, S. (2001). Analytical hierarchy process for justification of

total productive maintenance. Production Planning and Control. 12(7), 695-

705.

Kodali, R., Mishra, R. P. and Anand, G. (2009). Justification of world-class

maintenance systems using analytic hierarchy constant sum method. Journal of


Kohn, L. T. (1997). Methods in case study analysis, The Center for Studying Health

System Change. Technical Publication No.2, 1-8.

Konecny, P. A. and Thun, J. H. (2011). Do it separately or simultaneously-An

empirical analysis of a conjoint implementation of TQM and TPM on plant

performance. International Journal of Production Economics. 133(2), 496-507.

Kootanaee, J., A., Babu, K. N.,and Talari, H. F. (2013). Just-in-time manufacturing

system: From introduction to implementation. International Journal of

Economics Business and Finance. 1(2), 7-25.

284

Kor. L. K. and Teoh. (2009). From literature review to developing a conceptual

framework to journal writing. Kuala Lumpur: McGraw Hill.

Kulkarni. A. and Dabade. B. M (2013). Investigation of human aspect in total

productive maintenance (TPM): Literature review. International Journal of

Engineering Research and Development. 5(10), 27-36.

Kumar, R. and Kumar, V. (2014) Barriers in implementation of lean manufacturing

system in Indian industry: A survey. International Journal of Latest Trends in

Engineering and Technology. 4(2).

Kumar, P., Varambally, K. V. M. and Rodrigues, L. L. (2013). A Methodology for

implementing total productive maintenance in manufacturing industries: A case

study. International Journal of Engineering Research and Development. 5(2),

32-39.

Kumaravadivel, A., Ilamparithi, C. and Selvam, B. (2012). The performance

measurement of six sigma manufacturing system through overall equipment

effectiveness. Software Engineering and Technology. 4(7), 277-282.

Kutucuoglu, K.Y., Hamali, J., Sharp, J.M (2001). Enabling BPR in maintenance

through a performance measurement system framework. The International

Journal of Flexible Manufacturing System. 14(1), 33-52.

Kwon, O. and Lee, H. (2004). Calculation methodology for contributive managerial

effect by OEE as a result of TPM activities. Journal of Quality in Maintenance

Engineering. 10(4), 263-272.

Labib, A. W (1999). A framework for benchmarking appropriate productive

maintenance. Management Decision. 37(10), 792-799.

Lawrence, J. J. (1999). Use mathematical modeling to give your TPM

implementation effort an extra boost. Journal of Quality in Maintenance


Lazim, H. M., Ramayah, T., Ahmad, N., (2008). Total productive maintenance and

performance: A Malaysian SME experience. International Review of Business

Research Papers. 4(4), 237-250.

Lazim, H. M. and Ramayah, T. (2010). Maintenance strategy in Malaysian

manufacturing companies: A total productive maintenance (TPM) approach.

Business Strategy Series. 11(6), 387-396.

Leflar, J. A. (2001). Practical TPM: Successful Equipment Management at Agilent

Technologies. Portland: Productivity Press.

285

Ljungberg, O. (1998). Measurement of overall equipment effectiveness as a basis for

TPM activities. International Journal of Operations and Production

Management. 18(5), 495-507.

Madu, C. N (2000). Competing through maintenance strategy. International Journal

of Quality and Reliability Management. 17(9), 937-948.

Madu, C. N (2006). House of quality (QFD) in a minute. 2nd edition. USA: Chi

Publishers.

Mahidin, M. U. and Kanageswary, R. (2004). The development of the automobile

industry and the road ahead. Department of Statistics Malaysia.

Mahmood, W. H. W., Rahman, M. N. A., Mazli, H. and Deros, B. M (2009).

Maintenance management system for upstream operations in oil and gas

industry. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology. 60, 413-419.

Majumdar, J. P. and Manohar, B. M. (2012). Implementing TPM programme as a

TQM tool in Indian manufacturing industries. Asian Journal on Quality. 13(2),

185-198.

Mariajayaprakash, A., Senthilvelan, T. and Vivekananthan, K. P. (2013).

Optimisation of shock absorber process parameters using FMEA and genetic

algorithm. Journal of Industrial Engineering International. 9(1), 1-10.

Marquez, A. C. and Gupta, J. N. D. (2006). Contemporary maintenance

management: process, framework and supporting pillars. The Internal Journal of

Management Science. 3(4), 313-326.

Maurer, R. (2004). One small step can change your life: The Kaizen way. New York:

Workman Publishing.

McCarthy, D. and Rich, N. (2004). Lean TPM: A blueprint for change. Amsterdam:

Butterworth-Heinemann.

McKone, K. E., Schroeder, R. G. and Cua, K.O. (1999). TPM: A contextual view.

Journal of Operation Management. 1(7), 123-144.

McKone, K. E., Schroeder, R. G., and Cua, K. O. (2001). The impact of total

productive maintenance practices on manufacturing performance. Journal of

Operations Management. 19(1), 39-58.

Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach.

Washington: Sage Publication.

286

Meibodi, L. A. and Monavvarian, A. (2010). Recognizing critical success factors

(CSF) to achieve the strategic goals of SAIPA Press. Business Strategy Series.

11(2), 124-133.

Meng, J. W. and Yusof, N. M. (2012). Survey results of total productive maintenance

effects on manufacturing performance in Malaysian electrical and electronics

industry. Jurnal Mekanikal. 3(5), 82-99.

Miles, M. B. and Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Newbury Park:

Sage Publications.

Miller, C. C. and Cardinal, L.B. (1994). Strategic planning and firm performance: A

synthesis of more than two decades of research. Academy of Management

Journal. 37(6), 1649-1665.

Min, C. S., Ahmad, R., Kamaruddin, S. and Azid, I.A. (2011). Development of

autonomous maintenance framework for semiconductors industries.

International Journal of Industrial and System Engineering. 9(3), 268-297.

Mishra. R. P., Anand. G. and Kodali. R. (2006). Development of a framework for

world-class maintenance system. Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Systems.

5(2), 141–165.

Misra, K. B. (2008). Maintenance engineering and maintainability: An introduction.

London: Springer.

Moayed, F.A. and Shell, R.L. (2009). Comparison and evaluation of maintenance

operations in lean versus non-lean production systems. Journal of Quality in

Maintenance Engineering. 15(3), 285–296.

Mohamed, O. A. (2005). Identifying the barriers affecting quality in maintenance

within Libyan manufacturing organisations (public sector). University of

Salford: Doctoral Dissertation.

Mosadeghrad, A. M (2013). Obstacles to TQM success in health care systems.

International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance. 26(2), 147-173.

Mostafa, S. A (2004). Implementation of proactive maintenance in Egyptian glass

company. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering. 10(2), 107-122.

Moulton Jr, J. C. (1998). National survey of the perceptions of selected school board

members regarding the quality and condition, maintenance, and improvement

and renovation of existing public school facilities. Virginia Polytechnic Institute

and State University: Doctoral Dissertation.

287

Muthu, S., Devadasan, S. R., Ahmed, S., Suresh, P. and Baladhandayutham, R.

(2000). Benchmarking for strategic maintenance quality improvement.

Benchmarking: An International Journal. 7(4), 292-303.

Murthy D. N., Atrens, P.A. and Eccleston, J. A (2002). Strategic maintenance

management. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering. 8(4), 287–305.

Nakajima, S (1988) . Introduction to TPM. Cambridge: Productivity Press.

Ng, K. C., Chong, K. E., and Goh, G. G. G. (2013). Total productive maintenance

strategy in a semiconductor manufacturer: A case study in industrial engineering

and engineering management (IEEM). IEEE International Conference. 1184-

1188.

Nickols, F. (2011). Strategy, strategic management, strategic planning and strategic

thinking. Distance Consulting. 200(2011), 8.

Norddin, M., Norddin, K. H. and Mat Saman, M. Z. (2012). Implementation of total

productive maintenance concept in a fertilizer process plant. Jurnal Mekanikal.

34, 66-82.

Ohno, T. (1988). Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production.

Portland: Productivity Press.

Ollila, A. and Malmipuro, M. (1999). Maintenance has a role in quality. The TQM

Magazine. 11(1), 17-21.

O.Riis, J., Luxhøj, J. and Thorsteinsson, U. (1997). A situational maintenance model.

International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management. 14(4), 349-366.

Osman, I., Ali, H., Rashid, W. E. W. and Jusoff, K. (2009). TQM in Malaysian

automobile industry. International Business Research. 2(1), 203.

Parida, A. and Kumar, U. (2006). Maintenance performance measurement (MPM):

issues and challenges. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering. 12(30),

239-251.

Park, K. S. and Han, S. W. (2001). Total productive maintenance: Impact on

competitiveness and a framework for successful implementation. Human

Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing. 11(4), 321–338.

Patel, S., Pale, B.G. and Shaw, P. (2001). Set-up time reduction and mistake proofing

methods: An examination in precision component manufacturing. The TQM

Magazine. 13(3), 175–179.

288

Patra, N. K., Tripathy, J. K. and Choudhary, B.K. (2005). Implementing the office

total productive maintenance (‘office TPM’) program: A library case study.

Library Review. 54(7), 415-24.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks:

Sage Publications.

Perry, D. E., Porter, A. A. and Votta, L. G. (2000). Empirical studies of software

engineering: A roadmap. Proceedings of the conference on the future of

software engineering. 345-355.

Poduval, P. S., Pramod, V. R. and Raj, J. V. P. (2013). Barriers in TPM

Implementation in industries. International Journal of Scientific and Technology

Research. 2(5).

Pomorski, T. (2004). Total productive maintenance (TPM): Concepts and literature.

Cincinnati: Union Institute and University.

Pophaley, M. and Vyas, R. K. (2010). Plant maintenance management practices in

automobile industries: a retrospective and literature review. Journal of

Industrial Engineering and Management. 3(3), 512-541.

Pramod, V. R., Devadasan, S. R., Muthu, S., Jagathyraj, V. P. and Moorthy, G. D.

(2006). Integrating TPM and QFD for improving quality in maintenance

engineering. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering. 12(2), 150-171.

Prickett, P. W (1999). An integrated approach to autonomous maintenance

management. Integrated Manufacturing Systems. 10(4), 233–243.

Putri, N. T. (2011). Self-assessment tool for quality engineering in Malaysia and

Indonesia automotive companies. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Doctor of

Philosophy Thesis in Mechanical Engineering.

Rahim, A. R. A. and Baksh, M. S. N. (2003a). Case study method for new product

development in engineer-to-order organizations. Work Study. 52(1), 25-36.

Rahim, A. R. A. and Baksh, M. S. N. (2003b). New Product Development

Framewrok for Engineer-to-Order (ETO) Products. European Journal of

Innovation Management. 6(3), 182-196.

Rahim, A. A. R. (2006). Framework for new product development. Universiti

Teknologi Malaysia: Doctor of Philosophy Thesis in Mechanical Engineering.

Rajput, H. S. and Jayaswal, P. (2012). A total productive maintenance (TPM)

approach to improve overall equipment efficiency. International Journal of

Modern Engineering Research. 2(6).

289

Ramayah, T., Jantan, M. and Hassan, M. M. (2002). Change management and

implementation of total productive maintenance: An exploratory study of

Malaysian manufacturing companies. Utara Management Review. 3(1), 1-17.

Raouf, A. (1994). Improving capital productivity through maintenance. International

Journal of Operations and Production Management. 14(7), 44–52.

Robinson, C. J. and Ginder, A. P. (1995). Implementing TPM: The North American

Experience. Portland: Productivity Press.

Rolfsen, M. and Langeland, C. (2012). Successful maintenance practice through

team autonomy. Employee Relations. 34(3), 306-321.

Rosli, M. (2006). The automobile industry and performance of Malaysian auto

production. Journal of Economic Cooperation. 27(1), 89-114.

Rowley, J. (2002). Using case studies in research. Management Research News.

25(1), 16-27.

Runeson, P. and Höst, M. (2009). Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study

research in software engineering. Empirical Software Eng. 14(2), 131-164.

Saary, M. J. (2008). Radar plots: a useful way for presenting multivariate health care

data. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 61(4), 311-317.

Salleh, N. A. M., Kasolang, S. and Jaafar, H. A. (2012). Review study of developing

an integrated TQM with LM framework model in Malaysian automotive

industry. The TQM Journal. 24(5), 399-417.

Sánchez-Rodríguez, C. and Martínez-Lorente, A. R. (2011). Effect of IT and quality

management on performance. Industrial Management and Data Systems.

111(6), 830–848.

Seng, O. Y., Jantan, M. and Ramayah, T. (2006). Implementing total productive

maintenance (TPM) in Malaysian manufacturing organization: An operational

strategy study. Strategic Maintenance Management. 196-208

Seth, D. and Tripathi, D. (2005). Relationship between TQM and TPM

implementation factors and business performance of manufacturing industry in

Indian context. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management.

22(3), 256-277.

Shafeek. H. (2012). Maintenance Practices in Cement Industry. Asian Transactions

on Engineering. 1(6).

Shah, B. M. Y (2012). Total Productive Maintenance: A Study of Malaysian

Automotive SMEs. Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering (Vol. 3).

290

Sharma, R. K., Kumar, D. and Kumar, P. (2006). Manufacturing excellence through

TPM implementation: a practical analysis. Industrial Management and Data

Systems. 106(2), 256-280.

Sharma, M. and Kodali, R. (2008). TQM implementation elements for manufacturing

excellence. The TQM Journal. 20(6), 599-621.

Sharma, K., Gera, G., Rajender Kumar, R., Chaudhary, H. K. and Gupta, S.K.

(2012). An empirical study approach on TPM implementation in manufacturing

industry. International Journal on Emerging Technologies. 3(1), 18-23.

Shetty, P K. and Rodrigues, L. L. (2010). Total productive maintenance of a diesel

power generating unit of an institution campus. Mechanical and Electrical

Technology International Conference Proceedings. 2nd

IMET, 68-71.

Singh, J. and Singh, H. (2012). Continuous improvement approach: state-of-art

review and future Implications. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma. 3(2),

88–111.

Singh, M., Sachdeva, A. and Bhardwaj, A. (2014). An interpretive structural

modelling approach for analysing barriers in total productive maintenance

implementation. International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering.

16(4), 433-450.

Shingo,N. (2007). TPM in semiconductor plants. Tokyo: JIPM-Solutions.

Shingo, S. (2009). Fundamental Principles of Lean Manufacturing. Vancouver: Enna

Prod.

Simpson, M., Sykes, G. and Abdullah, A. (1998). Case study: transitory JIT at Proton

cars, Malaysia. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics

Management. 28(2), 121–142.

Simoes, J. M., Gomes, C. F. and Yasin, M. M. (2011). A literature review of

maintenance performance measurement: A conceptual framework and directions

for future research. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering. 17(2), 116-

137.

Smyth, R. (2004). Exploring the usefulness of a conceptual framework as a research

tool: A researcher's reflections. Issues in Educational Research. 14(2), 167-180.

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage

Publications.

Steinbacher, H. R. and Steinbacher, N. L. (1993). TPM for America. Portland:

Productivity Press.


291

Sun, H., Yam, R. and Wai-Keung, N. (2003). The implementation and evaluation of

TPM: Case study in a Hong Kong manufacturing company. International

Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 22(3), 224-228.

Suzuki, T. (1994). TPM in Process Industry. Portland: Productivity Press.

Tajiri, M. and Gotoh, E. (1999). TPM Implementation: A Japanese Approach. New

York: McGraw-Hill.

Talib, F., Rahman, Z. and Qureshi, M. N. (2011). A study of total quality

management and supply chain management practices. International Journal of

Productivity and Performance Management. 60(3), 268-288.

Talwar, B., (2011). Comparative study of framework, criteria and criterion weighting

of excellence models. Measuring Business Excellence. 15(1), 49-65.

Tan, O. K. (2012). Framework for new product development for research and

development companies in Malaysia. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Doctor of

Philosophy Thesis in Management.

Teeravaraprug, J., Kitiwanwong, K. and SaeTong, N. (2011). Relationship model

and supporting activities of JIT, TQM and TPM. Sonklanakarin Journal of

Science and Technology. 33(1), 101.

Tellis, W. (1997). Application of a Case Study Methodology. The Qualitative

Report. 3(2).

Thun, J. (2004). Potential of Technology-Integrated Mobile Maintenance for TPM.

Second World Conference on POM. Cancun, Mexico. pp. 1-20.

Thomas, A., Barton, R., Byrad, P. (2008). Developing a Six Sigma maintenance

model. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering. 14(3), 262-271.

Tiwari, A., Turner, C. and Sackett, P (2007). A framework for implementing cost

and quality practices within manufacturing. Journal of Manufacturing

Technology Management. 18(6), 731-760.

Tsarouhas, P. (2007). Implementation of TPM in food industry: A case study.

Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering. 13(1), 5-18.

Tsang, A. H. and Chan, P. K. (2000). TPM implementation in China: a case study.

International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management. 17(2), 144-157.

Urban, W. and Mazurek, A. (2011). The human factor in 5S implementation:

perspectives from Poland. Emerald Emerging Markets Case Studies. Volume

One, Issues 1-4.

292

Vagias, W. M. (2006). Likert-type scale response anchors. Clemson University:

Clemson International Institute for Tourism and Research Development,

Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management.

Van der Wal, R. W. E. and Lynn, D. (2002). TPM in a South African pulp and paper

company: A case study. The TQM Magazine. 14(6), 359-366.

Venkatesh, J. (2007). An introduction to total productive maintenance (TPM). The

Plant Maintenance Resource Center. 3-20.

Wad, P. and Govindaraju, V. C. (2011). Automotive industry in Malaysia: An

assessment of its development. International Journal of Automotive Technology

and Management. 11(2), 152-171.

Waeyenbergh, G. and Pintelon, L. (2009). CIBOCOF : A framework for industrial

maintenance concept development. International Journal of Production

Economics. 121, 633-640.

Wakjira, W. and Singh, M. (2012). Total productive maintenance: A case study in

manufacturing industry. Global Journal of Researches in Engineering. 12(1).

Wang, F. K. and Lee, W. (2001). Learning curve analysis in TPM. Omega

International Journal of Management Science. 29(6), 491-9.

Ward, P. and Zhou, H. (2006). Impact of information technology integration and

lean/just‐in‐time practices on lead‐time performance. Decision Sciences. 37(2),

177-203.

Willmott, P (1994). Total Productive Maintenance: The Western Way. Oxford:

Butterworth-Heinemenn.

Wireman, T. (2004). Total Productive Maintenance – An American Approach. New

York: Industrial Press.

Yamashina, H. (2000). Challenge to world class manufacturing. International

Journal of Quality and Reliability Management. 17(2), 132-143.

Yeasmin, S. and Rahman, K. F. (2012). Triangulation research method as the tool of

social science research. Bangladesh University of Professional Journal. Vol.1

(1).

Yeomans, M. and Millington, P. (1997). Getting maintenance into TPM.

Manufacturing Engineer. 76(4), 170-173.

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research, design and methods.5th edition. Newbury

Park: Sage Publications.

293

Yusof, S. R. M and Aspinwall, E. (2000). TQM implementation issues: Review and

case study. International Journal of Operations and Production Management.

20(6), 634-655.

Yusof, S. R. M. and Aspinwall, E. (2001). Case studies on the implementation of

TQM in the UK automotive SMEs. International Journal of Quality and

Reliability Management. 18(7), 722-744.

Zainal, Z. (2007). Case study as a research method. Jurnal Kemanusiaan. Bil.9,1-6.

Souce from internet

Brereton, P. (2008). Using a Protocol Template for a Case Study Planning.

Available from: <http://www.academia.edu>. Retrieved: September 13, 2011.

Business Dictionary (2013) Definition of critical success factors. Available from:

<http://www.businessdictionary.com/.html>. Retrieved: December 21, 2013.

Balance Score Card Institute (2014). Definition of strategic planning. Available

from: <http://balancedscorecard.org/Resources/Strategic-Planning-Basics>.

Retrieved: November 3, 2014.

Department of Occupational, Safety and Health, Malaysia (DOSH) (2014). Factories

and Machinery Act 1967. Available from:.< http://www.dosh.gov.my/index>.

Retrieved: August 14, 2014.

Evans, M.(2010). Creative professional practice in methods and methodology: Case

study examples from PhD’s in industrial design. Available from:

<http://www.academia.edu>. Retrieved: March 20, 2015.

Gourley, W. (2009). Conceptualising the interface between English further and

higher education. Available from: <https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly>.

Retrieved: March 20, 2015.

Guion, L. A., Diehl, D. C. and McDonald, D. (2011). Triangulation: Establishing the

validity of qualitative studies. Available from: <http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu>.

Retrieved: Jan 21, 2011.

Hallgren, M. (2007). Manufacturing strategy, capabilities and performance.

Linköping Studies in Science and Technology. Available

from:<http://www.diva-portal.org/smash>. Retrieved: Jan 14, 2014.

http://www.academia.edu/

http://www.businessdictionary.com/.html

http://balancedscorecard.org/Resources/Strategic-Planning-Basics

http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/

294

Irajpour, A., Fallahian-Najafabadi, A., Mahbod, M. A. and Karimi, M (2014). A

Framework to determine the effectiveness of maintenance strategies lean

thinking approach. Available from: <http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/Article ID

132140>. Retrieved: September 25, 2014.

Malaysian Automotive Association (MAA) (2010). Information Malaysian

automotive sector. Available from: <http://www.maa.org.my/listing_map.htm>.

Retrieved: August 14, 2010.

Malaysian Industrial Development Authority (MIDA) (2012). Business opportunity:

Malaysia’s automotive industry. Available from: http://www.mida.gov.my/ent3.

Retrieved: December 3, 2013.

Market Watch (2011). The Malaysian automotive and supplier industry.

Available from: <http://malaysia.ahk.de/fileadmin /Automotive_2011>.

Retrieved: December 3, 2013.

Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) ( 2012). Transforming industry:

third industrial master plan (IMP3). Available from: < http://www.miti.gov>.

Retrieved: May 26, 2012.

Neale, P., Thapa, S. and Boyce, C. (2006). Preparing a case study: A guide for

designing and conducting a case study for evaluation input. Available from:

<http://www.pathfind.org>. Retrieved: September 21, 2014.

Tabikh, M. (2014). Downtime cost and reduction analysis: survey results. Master

Thesis, Malardalen University, Sweden. Available from: <:http://www.diva-

portal.org/smash/get/diva>. Retrieved: November 30, 2014.

Thorne, S. (2000). Data analysis in qualitative research. Available from:

<http://ebn.bmj.com/content/3/3/68>. Retrieved: August 14, 2013.

Trochim, W. M. (2006). The Research Methods Knowledge Base. Available from:

<http://www.socialresearchmethods>. Retrieved: August 4, 2013.

Zucker, D. M. (2009). How to Do Case Study Research. Available from:

<http://scholarworks.umass.edu/nursing>. Retrieved: August 21, 2013.

http://www.mida.gov.my/ent3

http://malaysia.ahk.de/fileadmin%20/Automotive_2011

http://www.pathfind.org/

http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva%3e

http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva%3e

Documents

i TOTAL PRODUCTIVE MAINTENANCE FRAMEWORK FOR …eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/77613/1/AdnanBakriPFKM2015.pdf · TPM III ini adalah bermatlamat untuk dijadikan sumber rujukan bagi pihak