Strategic Planning
Part 1 of 7

 The Lean manufacturing, PPT Plus,
"Back-to-Basics" e-Training Package 
Lean Manufacturing Solutions

Increase the effectiveness of your
Lean Manufacturing Training Program
Lean Manufacturing Simulation Game 

This presentation will examine the decline of the U.S. corporate manufacturing function over the last 35 years and the impact of that decline on our competitiveness.

It will provide a clear understanding of the interrelation­ships between a company's corporate strategic plan, its functional strategic-plans, correct systems and technology choices, and an effective competitive posture.
In addition, a strategic planning model that any company can use to create a sound and continuously improving strategic foundation will be illustrated.
Introduction Symptoms of the Problem

Although some parts of U.S. manufacturing are improving, many companies are still struggling to compete in the emerging world competition. They know they are in trouble. Things are not going well. Profit is low or negative, quality is unsatisfactory, delivery lead time is too high, and competitors are "eating their lunch." Nearly all their operational and managerial energy is consumed in the struggle to meet current production and sales targets using some form of "brute force and awkwardness." Overall company performance is not satisfactory. The focus is totally short-term.

Their recent attempts at implementing new systems and technologies have been outright failures or marginal per­formers never delivering the promise that led to their initial selection and funding. Little strategic planning is accomplished because the company does see the value or it thinks it cannot afford to divert the needed time and resources away from the day-to-day struggle to survive.

An Unclear Path out of the Dilemma

Unfortunately, the path out of this dilemma is unclear. There is a staggering array of possible new systems, technologies, organizational structures, and techniques from which to choose. The media is continually bombard­ing us with the latest techniques which promise to solve our problems. Our problem is not too few choices but too many. We could easily create a list of a hundred or more of these potential techniques with new ones being created every day.

This dilemma creates more questions than answers. Which techniques make sense for my company? Which ones are the most critical? Which ones truly make us more competi­tive? In what sequence should they be implemented? What are realistic implementation costs and schedules?

What are the risks associated with each technique? We know some recent new systems and technologies have failed. So even if we could decide which ones to attempt, implementation is as difficult a task as the selection was. Clearly there is some risk if we implement new systems and technologies and their is some risk if we do nothing. We know we need help, but where and how do we start?

Historical Perspective

To adequately understand the current dilemma, we must examine the decline in status and influence of the manufac­turing function in most U.S. companies during the last 35 years. This decline coupled with top management's lack of manufacturing experience is at the heart of our current competitive weakness.
Manufacturing Prior to 1960

Prior to the early 1960's, world demand exceeded manufac­turing capacity. As a result, most companies could sell all the products they manufactured and remain near full capacity. Competition was largely domestic and the rate of change for new products, processes, systems and technolo­gies was relatively low. The scope of the products offered by most companies was relatively narrow. During this period, the manufacturing function maintained consider­able status and influence.

To be Continued