Manufacturing Operations Management (MOM)
Starting Up 2016: A Recap of Our Research Agendas and Focus for the Year
LNS Research lays out our 2016 research agendas and areas of coverage for the new year.
Over the past six weeks, we’ve learned a lot about what challenges manufacturers face in measuring and optimizing business performance. And we’ve gained valuable insight into which metrics, technologies, and processes are driving the most value for organizations today. We’d like to thank everyone who has given us their thoughts and opinions so far through participating in the Metrics that Matter survey.
The survey is closing soon. As always, our goal is to collect the most statistically significant data possible to deliver impactful research, so we’re asking you one more time for 15-20 minutes of your day. You don’t want to miss out on the benefits of participating in this important research project. In addition to receiving the benchmark report in Q1 of next year, you will also gain access to LNS's Performance Management Library for an entire year, as well as a copy of the previous Metrics that Matter benchmark report. Click below to take the survey.
(If you already have an LNS Research account, sign in here to take the survey)
Top Challenges with Manufacturing Metrics and Software
In one of the survey questions, we give respondents space to express what some of their pressing and top-of-mind challenges are around metrics and software. The word cloud below gives an idea of what some of the most cited responses have been. It's clear that decisions around technology and metrics program implementations, culture, performance, and metrics have plenty of mindshare among manufacturing leaders today.
What are some major manufacturing metrics and software roadblocks?
Other less cited, but intruiging and important focus areas for metrics and software challenges include training, legacy systems, attaining buy-in, real-time capabilities, and resistance to change. These issues align with many we've seen in our Manufacturing Operations Management survey data, and we'll touch more on those in the future.
Early Findings: Who’s Benchmarking Manufacturing Performance?
Although we’re still waiting for the final survey results, we couldn’t help but take a quick look at the data to identify top-of-mind issues for today’s manufacturing organizations. One question we ask regards whether or not companies have ever benchmarked manufacturing performance. This question is critical for learning about the way business leaders perceive the value of benchmarking, and how they prioritize such projects relative to others.
Given the high number of inquiries we receive for companies interested in pursuing benchmarking projects, the results for this question were interesting. 43% of respondents indicated that their company has no plans to benchmark its manufacturing performance. That’s a high number considering the competitive and internal analyses that a benchmarking project can deliver.
Early findings from the MTM Survey: 43% of companies have no plans to benchmark manufacturing performance. Tweet this stat!
In contrast, though, we see it as a positive that 37% of companies have benchmarked manufacturing performance, and 19% are planning to do so at some point. From validating that your own efforts are working to comparing performance against close peers and setting higher goals for next year, benchmarking is crucial for manufacturers today.
The Metrics that Matter research study is well-known for delivering detailed benchmark data that’s relevant to manufacturing organizations. By taking the survey, you’ll have the opportunity to compare your performance to several hundred other companies. Don't miss out!
To take the survey, follow the button below:
All entries in this Industrial Transformation blog represent the opinions of the authors based on their industry experience and their view of the information collected using the methods described in our Research Integrity. All product and company names are trademarks™ or registered® trademarks of their respective holders. Use of them does not imply any affiliation with or endorsement by them.