Editorial

Citation

(2006), "Editorial", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 26 No. 9. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijopm.2006.02426iaa.001

Editorial

In this issue of the journal, we include a variety of papers that give evidence of the breadth of questions that operations management research addresses and methodologies by which it is carried out. The differences in the environments in which the empirical work reported in the papers has been undertaken, are indicative both of the variety of contexts in which operations management research can have an influence on practice, and of the global nature of our subject.

Before introducing the papers individually, it is apposite to acknowledge the contribution made by reviewers, who have an essential role in shaping papers to the standard and quality needed for publication. Their task is to be constructively critical, whilst providing support for authors and editors. Without this input, IJOPM would not be the journal that it is. We would like to take this opportunity to thank all of our reviewers and in particular, on this occasion, those who have worked with us on the papers in this issue.

The quality of the first paper by Wasti, Kozan and Kuman is a testament to the skills and diligence of the authors and to the conscientious input of its independent reviewers. It explores the relationships between buyers and suppliers in the Turkish automotive industry. This is an emerging market with an increasingly important global presence. Turkey is expected to play a pivotal role in future world trade because of its geographic position linking Europe, the Middle East and the Soviet Union. Its automotive industry is its third largest sector and one of its most innovative. There has been a wealth of international research into the automotive sector generally, which makes it an ideal environment for comparative studies. The empirical investigation is based on a tool, previously used to study buyer-supplier relationships in the automotive sector in the USA, and its findings allow for comparison between emerging and developed markets. The data from the Turkish survey shows the existence in the sector of three principal relationship types – captive supplier, market exchange and strategic partnership. A fourth type, identified previously in the USA – that of the captive buyer – was not found in Turkey, possibly indicative of differences relating to the stage of market development. The findings in the paper suggest that there are clear opportunities for further research into trading relationships in emerging markets, with the potential to benefit both academia and practice.

The second paper takes a different research approach in presenting the most recent findings from a longitudinal study of material planning methods used by companies. It is also based around a different business environment, surveying companies in Sweden, which is an example of a developed Northern European economy. Data has been collected and reported at intervals since 1993, with this paper incorporating the findings from a survey in 2005. In the paper, Jonsson and Mattsson suggest that material requirements planning has increased in popularity since the start of their study in 1993 and now represents the most commonly used method of managing materials in manufacturing companies. They further found that, over the same time period, planning frequency has increased, with daily planning now being typical. The parameters used within materials planning systems, such as order quantities and safety stock levels, tend to be determined using judgement. A worrying outcome of this research, and one with significant practical and managerial implications, is the relative infrequency with which companies seem to review their planning parameters. We are often reminded of the increasing need for organisations to be responsive in the face of global competition. This would suggest that companies should review their planning systems and the parameters used within them more frequently than ever. Thus, relying on variables that were set for past business conditions would seem to be counter-intuitive.

The third paper, by Buxey, is different again in its approach and is somewhat unusual for IJOPM, being based largely on conceptual research. In it he explains and critiques established models for inventory management, which tend to revolve around the purchaser, and which try to balance ordering costs against the cost of carrying goods in stock. In the practical environment of companies holding thousands of different items in stock, he suggests that these approaches are confusing. The models, he further argues, neglect the impact of different ordering policies for suppliers, where objectives typically relate to cost effective and responsive warehousing and transport operations. He, therefore, proposes an alternative top-down approach to inventory management which has, as its primary objective, the efficient deployment of a transport fleet, and with the aim of providing robust guidelines that will benefit both suppliers and purchasers. In another departure from the other papers in this issue, Buxey's research approach involved the study of inventory management and supply chain practices taken from secondary sources rather than through direct empirical investigation.

The final two papers consider the human side of operations, recognising the critical resource that humans represent in most organisations.

Conti, Angelis, Cooper, Faragher and Gill present research that has investigated the relationship between lean production and worker job stress. In studying the effects of the extent of implementation of lean production, they made use of an established job stress model (the Karasek model), which incorporates the physical and psychological demands of a job, and the levels of job control and social support in the workplace. The model was applied through an extensive survey of workers and managers at 21 sites in four different UK industry sectors. The research found that lean production is not inherently stressful, but that stress levels are significantly related to management decisions in designing and operating lean systems. Thus, there are clear lessons for operations and business managers, who should choose operator-friendly methods of lean implementation in order to minimise worker stress levels.

Employee involvement in decision-making forms part of the “job control” variable used within Conti et al.'s research, and is also the topic of our final paper by Karuppan and Kepes. They argue that employee involvement in decision-making contributes to the achievement of mix flexibility for an organisation. They further suggest that the delegation of responsibility for making decisions, combined with the use of flexible resources, is necessary for organisations that operate in fast-paced, hyper-competitive environments, such as exists in the electronics industrial sector. The achievement of mix flexibility – the capability to adjust quickly and economically to changes in the demand mix – has been suggested to be directly influenced by the flexibility of both machine and labour resources. Labour flexibility has been said to incorporate task variety, job rotation and the operation of multiple machines. The findings of Karuppan and Kepes' study, which is based on detailed investigation within a single organisation in the electronics sector, suggest that labour flexibility should more appropriately also include job enrichment (i.e. involvement in decision-making).

In concluding, we re-state a key theme of this editorial – our aim to celebrate the diversity of research approaches and topics that give IJOPM its distinctive character. As many of us enter another academic year, may we continue to value and respect the richness of our research base and not feel shoe-horned into rigid or mechanistic stereotypes.