Implementing total productive maintenance in a manufacturing small or medium-sized enterprise

Zhang Tian Xiang; Chin, Jeng Feng Article Implementing total productive maintenance in a manufacturing small or medium-sized enterprise Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management (JIEM) Provided in Cooperation with: The School of Industrial, Aerospace and Audiovisual Engineering of Terrassa (ESEIAAT), Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) Suggested Citation: Zhang Tian Xiang; Chin, Jeng Feng (2021) : Implementing total productive maintenance in a manufacturing small or medium-sized enterprise, Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management (JIEM), ISSN 2013-0953, OmniaScience, Barcelona, Vol. 14, Iss. 2, pp. 152-175, https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/261746 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management JIEM, 2021 – 14(2): 152-175 – Online ISSN: 2013-0953 – Print ISSN: 2013-8423 https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 Implementing Total Productive Maintenance in a Manufacturing Small or Medium-Sized Enterprise Zhang Tian Xiang , Chin Jeng Feng School of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia (Malaysia) [email protected], [email protected] Received: August 2020 Accepted: December 2020 Abstract: Purpose: This paper develops a ‘light’ total productive maintenance (TPM) model suitable for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). By design, the system is rudimentary, using a relatively small sum of capital investment and resources. The model recommends TPM implementation in three stages, namely plan, improve and sustain. Design/methodology/approach: Literature review provides the inputs to the model development. Action research is used to demonstrate and verify the effectiveness and practicability of the framework, in a SME manufacturing hydraulic parts in China. Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) and awareness of employees were studied before and after the implementation. Findings: The case study shows a significantly improved production efficiency of equipment. The framework structuralizes TPM deployment and binding different levels of organization into the program, from planning, implementation to sustaining the practices. To break the barrier of shop floor resistance, leader must drive many activities unassisted, it therefore necessitates an open endorsement of authority by the steering committee composed of top management. Prudent pilot run of TPM helped to accelerate the implementation at critical equipment, in addition to cultivating experience and hence confidence among staff. Research limitations/implications: This study provides a pragmatic reference to other researches and practitioners to promote a light TPM model in SMEs, without losing the essences of TPM. Being an action research with the case study in a specific manufacturing industry, the resultant evidence therefore is anecdotal. Originality/value: The model adopts a phased method to implement TPM, without aggravating the financial and human resource burden of the enterprise. It promotes the cultivation of employees’ TPM awareness and active involvement, which can lay a solid foundation for the wide implementation of TPM in SMEs. Keywords: Total Productive Maintenance (TPM), Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) To cite this article: Tian Xiang, Z,, & Jeng Feng, C. (2021). Implementing total productive maintenance in a manufacturing small or medium-sized enterprise. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 14(2), 152-175. https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 -152- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 1. Introduction In the context of economic globalization, SMEs face multiple challenges (Nallusamy, 2016), such as global economic downturn, low production efficiency, insufficient management capacity and financial resources and pressure from peer competitors. In order to meet these challenges, effective equipment management is essential, especially in SMEs (Dhillon, 2006). With the development of technology, the degree of automation and precision of production equipment has gradually improved, and of course the technological cost has become more significant. The production equipment represents most invested capital in SMEs, and the deterioration of these equipment leads to increased production costs, lower product quality, and longer delivery cycles (Baglee, Gorostegui, Jantunen, Sharma & Campos, 2017; Renna, 2016; Nallusamy & Majumdar, 2017; Singh, Singh & Sharma, 2018). Introducing advanced maintenance strategies can effectively alleviate this situation, Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) is one of them (Mukhedkar, 2020). TPM is a widely used equipment maintenance plan in the manufacturing industry to reduce losses in production activities, increase equipment life, and ensure effective utilization of equipment (Nallusamy & Majumdar, 2017), reduce the number of accidents and increase morale of the employees (Sharma, Singh & Rastogi, 2018). TPM is defined as a tool to maintain equipment efficiency, reduce failures and increase the initiative of workers. it showcases a new equipment maintenance culture, philosophy and attitude (Candra, Susilawati, Herisiswanto & Setiady, 2017). The implementation of TPM has a high success rate among many large enterprises (Joshi & Bhatt, 2018). Nevertheless, SMEs have size weakness to acquire mass production technologies (Yang, Hong & Modi, 2011), such TPM to reduce production cost. They largely adopt a conservative capital investment which prioritizes short-term benefits (Jain, Bhatti & Singh, 2014; Baker, Kumar & Singh, 2019). For many SMEs, TPM is difficult to implement and maintain (Elwardi, Meddaoui, Mouchtachi & En-nhaili, 2018). These enterprises gave preference to breakdown maintenance system instead of developing a preventive and productive maintenance system. Baglee and Knowles (2010) interviewed the managers of some SMEs, and 87% of the enterprises still adopted reactive maintenance strategy. The main reasons for this situation are that these enterprises are rather comfortable with the strategy and doubt the benefits of introducing advanced maintenance strategy to the enterprise. Meanwhile, study by Graisa and Al-Habaibeh (2011) show lack of TPM model for SMEs. The motivation of research is to propose a light TPM model aimed for SME and to validate usability of the model in a SME through a case study. The model utilizes limited resources of the enterprise, focusing to key pillars of TPM. To fit the common constraints of SMEs, the system is rudimentary, using a relatively small sum of capital investment and resources. The model recommends TPM implementation in three stages, namely plan, improve and sustain. As research contribution, the research also intends to fill several research gaps in literature, as explained in the next section. This model would serve as a practical reference to other researchers who want to implement TPM in SMEs. This research was carried out in two stages. The first stage involves model development. Literature review provides the necessary inputs, where literatures are obtained primarily from peer-reviewed scientific publications for the past ten years, with more attention given to the recent publications. The main sources of publications include Scopus, ScienceDirect and ResearchGate. These literatures were organized into two categories: general TPM and TPM in SMEs. The first category examines the current development of concept, and the second category explores the implementation methods and their key features proposed for SME. These key features were adopted into framework, in conjunction to several new ideas. The second stage involves case study implementation to verify the usability of the model by measuring the changes in OEE and other aspects. The first stage and second stage overlapped in some degrees to revise inductively the model during the case study; this enables realignment of theme, incorporating changes suggested by the case study enterprise and removing nonessential elements. As the main researcher participates directly in both stages, this makes the work an action research methodology, a subbranch of case study. The methodology is effective when the goal is to explore the connection between theory and practice (Eden & Ackermann, 2018). This improves practitioners' reasoning skills and help to develop self-monitoring measures to improve performance efficiency (McNiff & Whitehead, 2011). The research base of practitioner augments with the participation. All these elements were crucial to this case study where the success relied on a blend of leadership, exercise of authority and staff rapport. To mitigate the risk of bias, case study was assessed through hard data, e.g. overall equipment efficiency (OEE) and the researcher assumed the role of -153- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 mediator in key decision making. The interim and final reports were verified by the company and the researcher. The model was only verified in a manufacturing SME, which according to Stake (2013), is enough when the aim is not for comparison. Nevertheless, the evidence by nature would be circumstantial. Whether the model can achieve the same effect as in other types of enterprises needs verification in future research. The paper is outlined as follow. Section 2 is a systematic discussion of TPM, including the definition of TPM, the eight pillars and OEE. In addition, this section also focuses on the review of other research works implementing TPM in SME. Section 3 presents the developed model and describes the flow of information on each stage of the model. In Section 4, the model is verified by explaining the specific steps of the TPM model deployment in the referred enterprise. In the final section, the result of the current research and future research direction are discussed. 2. Literature Review 2.1. Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) The TPM is based on the principles of 5S and is defined by Nakajima (1986). Under TPM, device maintenance is changed from passive to active (Mileham, Culley, Mclntosh, Gest & Owen, 1997). The tenets are to ultimately achieve zero defects, zero faults and zero accidents in all processes of the enterprise, involving the top management to the front-line operators; reduce the incidence of defects and equipment maintenance by establishing different teams and activities running as a system (Venkatesh, 2007). Therefore, TPM is not a temporary activity, but a continuous implementation and improvement program (Díaz-Reza, García-Alcaraz, Avelar-Sosa, Mendoza-Fong, Diez-Muro & Blanco-Fernández, 2018). The concept is later expanded to the maintenance and improvement of the production quality system, through the equipment, process and operator, and increases the commercial value of the product (Sharma & Singh, 2015; Parikh & Mahamuni, 2015). TPM implementation, which brings short and long-term improvements to the enterprise, including overall equipment efficiency (OEE) (Méndez & Rodríguez, 2017; Amorim, Hatakeyama & Rojas-Lema, 2018; Bataineh, Al-Hawari, Alshraideh & Dalalah, 2019). TPM minimizes the probability of equipment failure, manufacturing a non-conforming product and the occurrence of a safety accident (Patil & Raut, 2019). Other benefits include employee output and efficiency (Ali, 2019), absenteeism and overtime reduction (Li, 2013), reduced changeover time (Bon & Lim, 2015), boost in confidence (Maran, Thiagarajan, Manikandan & Sarukesi, 2016), harnessed maintenance ability (Singh & Ahuja, 2015). TPM is widely applied in large enterprises, such as spinning plant (Paropate & Sambhe, 2013), automotive (Li, 2013; Bon & Lim, 2015; Pacaiova & Izarlkova, 2019), semi-automated manufacturing (Rahman, Hoque & Uddin, 2014), auto-part machining (Méndez & Rodríguez, 2017; Sutoni, Setyawan & Munandar, 2019), service organization (Ali, 2019). Arguably, TPM is multi-faceted and best represented as a House of TPM (Nakajima, 1988), as shown in Figure 1. The key constructs include a 5S foundation and eight pillars of maintenance-relevant activities, namely autonomous maintenance (AM), focused maintenance, planned maintenance (PM), quality maintenance, education and training, early management, office kaizen, safety and environment. Not all pillars can be implemented in an enterprise (Chong, Chin & Hamzah, 2012; Madanhire, Mugwindiri, Ndlovu & Mbohwa, 2018). Some cases only involve a single or selective pillars, e.g. AM (Ferreira & Leite, 2016; Guariente, Antoniolli, Ferreira, Pereira & Silva, 2017; Sukanta, Maulana & Sari, 2018), PM (Kar, 2016), AM and focused maintenance (Joochim & Meekaew, 2016) among others. Fundamental to TPM (Sharma & Yadav, 2016), 5S is a system of organizing workplace to achieve stable performance, involving with the employees (Singh, 2017). It revolves around five basic tasks: Sort, Set in Order, Shine, Standardize, and Sustain (Harun Habidin & Latip, 2019). Sort means removing unneeded items from the work area and clean up the work area (Rizkya, Syahputri, Sari & Siregar, 2019). Set in order is to determine the location and quantity of needed items (Filip & Marascu-Klein, 2015). Shine involves cleaning and improving the workplace, identifying irregularities (Veres, Marian, Moica & Al-Akel, 2018). Standardize documents and standardizes the work method, using standard tools and procedures (Patel & Thakkar, 2014). Sustain is to maintain improvement, enabling employees to develop good work habits, and finally integrating 5S into the corporate culture (Gupta & Chandna, 2020). -154- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 Figure 1. House of TPM (Pacaiova & Izarlkova, 2019) In Autonomous maintenance (AM), equipment operators are given the responsibilities and powers in daily equipment maintenance, including 5S (Ferreira & Leite, 2016). This directly improves the skill of these operators to manage and improve the equipment (Wakjira & Iyengar, 2014). AM demands a cultural change to the way maintenance is done (Mugwindiri & Mbohwa, 2013). It can be divided into two themes (Farnsworth, Bell, Khan & Tomiyama, 2015). The first theme is the concept of ‘self’, focusing on incorporating ‘self-healing’, ‘self-monitoring’, ‘self-aware’, ‘self-configure’ and ‘self-protect’ technologies or characteristics; The second theme focuses on automating maintenance practices within enterprises, through autonomous robotics to assist or guide maintenance tasks. Guariente et al. (2017) implemented AM in air-conditioning tubes manufacturing line, which positively increased machine availability. When Sukanta, Maulana & Sari (2018) introduced AM to a sachet production line, the frequency of minor stoppages drops as much as 79.52%. Focus maintenance or Kobetsu Kaizen underlines kaizen projects to identify and eliminate the major losses (Shinde & Prasad, 2017). Dave and Sohani (2015) reduced electronic breakdown frequency of hobbing machine through focused maintenance. Joochim and Meekaew (2016) introduced AM and focused maintenance in producing aluminium stranded conductors, and reduced equipment downtime and increased OEE. Planned maintenance (PM) is to measure the failure rate of the equipment and then formulate a corresponding maintenance plan (Agustiady & Cudney, 2018). The method of PM includes preventive maintenance, breakdown maintenance, corrective maintenance and maintenace prevention (Kigsirisin, Pussawiro & Noohawm, 2016). Briefly explained, preventive maintenance maintains the equipment before failure and abnormal occurrence in the process (Yang, Ye, Lee, Yang & Peng, 2019). Breakdown maintenance involves equipment repair and restoration to operational state after the equipment failure (Poor, Zenisek & Basl, 2019). Corrective maintenance aims to improve the reliability and maintainability of equipment by improving equipment and components (Venkatesh, 2007). Maintenance prevention is to give equipment higher maintenance and reliability during the design phase of the equipment, to radically prevents the occurrence of equipment failure (Kodali & Chandra, 2001). Kar (2016) successfully increased the availability of the equipment in a bicycle tyre manufacturing company through planned maintenance. Quality maintenance (QM) aims towards delighting customers by providing defect-free products (Vardhan, Gupta & Gangwar, 2015), achieving and sustaining customer complaints at zero (Ngadiman, Hussin & Majid, 2012). Quality maintenance specifically focuses on quality issues and cultivate such mentality, with improvement to eliminate defects from the beginning (Agustiady & Cudney, 2018). QM can be implemented through seven major practices (Asif & Vries, 2014): 1. Customer satisfaction management. 2. Process management. 3. Supplier management. 4. Data and information analysis. 5. Employee training and development. 6. Employee empowerment. -155- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 7. Quality circles. Kharub and Sharma (2015) consider strategic quality planning, supplier quality, process monitoring and control and strategic QM as key activities to implement QM. Vardhan et al. (2015) introduced QM in a food enterprise manufacturing potato chips, reduced the customer complaints to zero, the manufacturing defects by 83% and production costs by 46%. Education and training is critical to TPM (Méndez & Rodríguez, 2017), with the aim to improve employee morale and experience by skills and technical training, bridge of the skills and knowledge gap (Adesta, Prabowo & Agusman, 2018). Through the pillar, employees transcend through the different phases of skills to be competent (Venkatesh, 2007). The training system needs to check status of education and training, in order to decide a suitable training module and schedule (Jain et al., 2014). Training could be varying, for example equipment operators learn how to identify abnormalities during their daily and periodic inspection activities, while equipment maintenance personnel learn maintenance principles and techniques, and develop specialized maintenance skills (Alsubaie & Yang, 2017). Safety, health and environment pillar is to identify and eliminate corresponding incidents, to achieve ideal working place (Méndez & Rodríguez, 2017; Adesta et al., 2018). This pillar requires a safety committee, composed of business leaders and worker representatives, to regularly organize safety related activities such as safety slogan, safety competition and safety poster to raise the safety awareness of employees (Jain et al., 2014). In addition, regularly held security promoting activities such as security month, celebration of the week, poetry competition would improve safety in the workplace (Ahuja, 2009). The mission of Office TPM is to identify and eliminate losses in administrative functions (Bhawarkar & Dhamande, 2013). Twelve major losses are targeted (Nithiyanandhan & Kumar, 2016), such as processing loss, communication loss, idling, accuracy loss, office equipment breakdown, customer complaints, emergency expenses etc. Patra, Tripathy and Choudhary (2005) implemented office TPM in a library to improve services, filing systems and office automation. Development management applies the knowledge and experience gained from maintaining existing equipment to the design of new equipment (Adesta et al., 2018). It helps to reduce the time it takes to receive, install, and set up newly purchased equipment (Kumar, Singh & Khan, 2016). Dogra, Sharma, Sachdeva and Dureja (2011) built a development management system for equipment/products that are easy to use in implementing TPM. Only a handful of literatures place TPM implementation into the context of SMEs (Eugen, 2010; Sharma & Sharma, 2013; Jain et al., 2014; Jain, Bhatti & Singh, 2015; Raut & Raut, 2017; Chukwutoo & Nkemakonam, 2018; Nallusamy, Kumar, Yadav, Prasad & Suman, 2018; Amorim et al., 2018; Elwardi et al., 2018). Eugen (2010) divided TPM implementation into four phases: preparatory stage, introduction stage, implementation stage and institutionalizing stage. Kumar Sharma and Gopal Sharma (2013)’s model was based on DMAIC methodology. Jain et al. (2014) introduced a rather comprehensive TPM method extended from Nakajima (1988)’s twelve implementation steps. The steps start from proper announcement of TPM, education, support structure, policies and goals setting, deployment plan, implementation of different pillars and finally continuous improvement. A comparatively simpler model was proposed by them (Jain et al., 2015) a year later, consists of six steps: data collection, staff training through technical seminars, trial runs, fine-tuning and final implementation. On the other hand, Raut and Raut (2017)’s work directly focuses on critical equipment at the outset, with the implementation of 5S, AM, PM, focused improvement, then following by education and training as well as OEE monitoring. Chukwutoo and Nkemakonam (2018) differentiated three stages of TPM, first being the introductory stage involving top management; second being the preparatory stage for employees training and preparation of implementation plan, and finally the execution stage, to carry out the eight pillars of TPM. In Nallusamy et al. (2018), a five steps method to implement TPM starts with data collection, OEE calculation before root cause analysis, AM, PM, Kobetsu Kaizen and finally result verification on OEE. Amorim et al. (2018) also adapted to the classic 12-step TPM implementation by Nakajima (1988). Elwardi et al. (2018) proposed DDAIE model covering a series of stages to define, diagnose, analyze, implement and check for effectiveness. Another novelty of their work stemmed from a TPM maturity grading system to allow the enterprise understands their current standing in TPM program. These literatures explore TPM in SMEs, focusing generally on development of steps. Not all however offer a case study for verification (Jain et al., 2014). Most researchers (Eugen, 2010; Jain et al., 2014; Amorim et al., 2018) have -156- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 applied the classical 12 implementation steps of TPM in SMEs, which was introduced 30 years ago, without much alteration to suit the context. Some researchers (Jain et al., 2015; Raut & Raut, 2017; Nallusamy et al., 2018; Elwardi et al., 2018) do not discuss how to maintain improved results, hence overlook the issue of sustaining the relevant practice. Furthermore, most researchers did not make goal setting explicit, which plays an important role in organizational performance and success (Skinner, 2018). Kleingeld, Van Mierlo and Arends (2011) contended that goals help to motivate teams to succeed. Additionally, little information is revealed in literature on costing and resource utilization as both are considered critical constraints to SMEs. Finally, not much emphasis is being placed on human element in these TPM implementations, compared to general TPM literatures. For instances, human elements include cooperation and corporate culture (Park & Han, 2001), training employees to master the necessary knowledge and skills (Ramayah, Jantan & Hassan, 2002), changing the minds of operators (Sun, Yam & WaiKeung, 2003) etc. Han and Yang (2006) promoted TPM in Polish iron and steel enterprises and believed that the independent management of employees was the key to the activity. The participation of operators in the daily maintenance of the equipment is conducive to the promotion of TPM (Lazim & Ramayah, 2010). Singh and Ahuja (2015) believe that the internal factors of the enterprise, such as the education level of workers and the service life of equipment, will affect the promotion of TPM. Jain, Bhatti and singh (2017) opinioned that effective top management leadership will improve TPM success. Prashanth Pai, Ramachandra, Srinivas and Raghavendra (2018) believed that reasonable plans and proper understanding positively affects implementation of TPM. Manihalla, Gopal, Rao and Javaraiah (2019) opinioned that appropriate rewards for employees are conducive to the implementation of TPM within the organization. 2.2. Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) Proposed by Nakajima (1988), OEE is an independent measuring tool to show the ratio of the actual production capacity of the equipment to the theoretical production capacity. It is an important performance and machine health indicators in manufacturing (Saleem, Nisar, Khan, Khan & Sheikh, 2017), and to determine the success of TPM (Logesh, Kuppuraj & Augustine, 2017). Rather than efficiency, OEE measures machine's effectiveness comprehensively (Wudhikarn, 2016) and intuitively reveals production problems (Singh, Clements & Sonwaney, 2018). OEE identifies six major losses of equipment (Muchiri & Pintelon, 2008), that consume resources within the enterprise (Garza-Reyes, Eldridge, Barber & Soriano-Meier, 2010) and include breakdowns, setup and adjustment, idling and minor stoppages, speed losses, defect and rework and startup losses. OEE is obtained by the product of three factors: availability(A), performance(P), and quality(Q) (Tsarouhas, 2019). The relationship between OEE and these three factors (Hedman, Subramaniyan & Almström, 2016), are shown in follows: OEE = Availability(A) · Performance(P) · Quality(Q) (1) Availability refers to the ratio of loading time minus downtime and loading time. Performance refers to the ratio of processed amount times theoretical cycle time and operating time. Quality refers to the ratio of processed amount minus defect amount and processed amount. The calculation of Availability, Performance and Quality is as follows: Availability(A) = (Loading time - Down time) / Loading time · 100% (2) Loading time refers to the running time after the removal of planned activities that affect production (Garza-Reyes et al., 2010). Performance(P) = (Processed amount · Theoretical cycle time) / Operating time · 100% (3) Theoretical cycle time refers to the shortest cycle time that can be achieved under optimal conditions (Singh et al., 2018). Quality(Q) = (Processed amount - Defect amount) / Processed amount · 100% (4) -157- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 Khan and Quazi (2014) urged training employees to acquire ability for loss identification and prioritization, through practical session involving seven steps. The steps start with normal OEE data collection, followed by further investigation and narrowing of focus into the equipment with least OEE as well as the critically affected products. Finally, kaizen was performed to improve the situation. 3. Model Description The TPM model is presented in Figure 2. The model aims to improve equipment performances through proactive maintenance plan in SME. At a higher level, the model underlines an organization learning in the SME adopting a new practice to implement TPM, eventually forms a part of the organization culture. Several principles underpin the model. First the model must improve the availability, performance, reliability and quality of the equipment, reduce production waste and ultimately increase the OEE of the equipment. Second is the emphasis of cost saving. Resources are saved through recycling of material available in the company or public domain (e.g. information). Simple analysis methods are added to the model, which does not require the enterprise to purchase complex analysis software. In addition, idle resources within the enterprise can be fully used during the improvement process. Second, cascading planning is exercised so that there is a clear connection, role definition and distribution of task from top to bottom of the organization. There must be a logical and standardized deployment and flow of TPM. Focus and pilot run on critical equipment to conserve resources and to build experience and confidence among staff. A regulation system of AM and PM which involves schedule, leader standard walk and audit. Finally, the model can be easily emulated. In other words, after the selected equipment has been improved, the application can be extended to other equipment using the same format.The three interdependent stages are explained briefly. Plan indicates a general study on the current situation of the enterprise. Preliminary assessment indicates the causes underlying the current situation backed with quantitative and qualitative evidence, and goalsetting is the determination of improvement goals which are divided into long-term and short-term goal. Improve involves a systematic execution of steps to reach the goal. Sustain indicates institutionalizing of steps to maintain the improved effects. The detailed introduction of the model is as follows. Figure 2. TPM implementation model in SMEs -158- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 3.1. Plan In order to get the support of top management and facilitate the implementation of TPM, a steering committee made up of top management personnel is established and regularly meet to drive TPM. A suitable candidate from the middle management is appointed to lead the implementation. The leader should possess the enthusiasm and adequate knowledge in TPM and soft skills. Formal authority delegation to the leader aids to secure cross-departmental cooperation in implementation. Preliminary assessment and alignment are the initial steps in the stage. Leader determines product families and their sales volumes. The value stream of the top runner is mapped, to trace the entire process flow and lean wastes (non-value-added activities) along the value stream. The undertaking should be the effort of a team, as the step aims to gradually set the mindset of the team members. OEE of equipment operates at this value stream is collected based on historical data, such as defect records and machine logs. In circumstance where reliable data is not available, estimate must be made prudently to best capture the reality. At this stage, equipment or a cluster of equipment with relatively low OEE (hence critical equipment) is determined to pilot run TPM. Other selection criteria would be the production criticality, team capacity and resource allocation. At this juncture, the steering committee meets to review the data and findings collected. Given enough justification, the choice of equipment would encounter little objection. Meanwhile, basic long-term goals are deliberated, potentially in the form of roadmap to outline organization strategy and commitment in the pursuit of TPM; as well as the expectation normally linked to OEE and competitive strengths of the enterprise. Equally forthcoming would be the consensus on the readiness to adopt TPM pillars and their preferred depths in time. Short-term goals are then cascaded from these long-term goals and roadmap to materialize TPM on the shop floor. 3.2. Improve Establishing a kaizen team is the first step, which is composed of operators, maintenance personnel, managers and leader. Relevant training on TPM is necessary at the beginning of kaizen especially for team members fresh to the concept. AM and PM always start with an initial 5S jointly in the presence of operators and maintenance personnel. Potential defects of equipment are detected and rectified. A brainstorming session immediately after the initial 5S aims to identify parts of the equipment to be cleaned to facilitate the establishment of sustaining system discussed later. Next, focused maintenance is a targeted improvement of the factors affecting the equipment OEE. A low OEE could stem from the six major losses. Study from value stream mapping would be valuable information. For example, operator actions, the equipment adjustment time is prolonged, thereby reducing the OEE of the equipment. When the reason for low OEE is not apparent, a more thorough study such as root cause analysis (e.g. pareto analysis, fishbone diagram or five why analysis) could be deployed. Pareto analysis identify the vital few causes that significantly contribute to low OEE. Fishbone diagram is a tool to identify the root cause of problems which represents the effect and the factors or causes influencing it (Shinde, Ahirrao & Prasad, 2018). In SMEs, focused maintenance is itself a kaizen project. Priority should be given to “low hanging fruits”, impactful projects demanding little resources and executable in short cycle. For example, TPM heavily applies visual system to enhance personnel’s grasp and hence swiftly response to the condition through visual sensory contact. This includes the installation of shadow board for tool and adequate labelling of essential components in AM and PM activities. 3.3. Sustain The sustaining system prevents return to the state before improvement. It has four related constituents: standardization, routinization, visualization and patrol system. Standards underline desirable results benchmarked against and to develop desirable working habits. Generally, details to an AM standard should include precautions, required tools, cleaning positions, steps, frequency and the person in charge. It discerns abnormal condition to normal condition. Experience from equipment maintenance personnel and equipment operation manual would be the sources of information. As standard development is a continuous process, proper dating and documentation should be kept in mind. Applied to AM and PM, checkpoint table details inspection by equipment operators/maintenance personnel into equipment conditions and to detect early sign of equipment failures. Items -159- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 Figure 11. The checkpoint record for Quench_A (The actual display is in Mandarin) Patrol system: To develop the patrol system, workshop supervisor was assigned to carry out random inspection on AM/PM, following the details in cleaning standards and checkpoint. A loose OEE monitoring system was installed where operator fills in breakdown incidents and units produced weekly whereby defects information would be fed by quality control department. The information would be compiled by manager. Continuous improvement: A TPM circle of 4 members was formed with monthly review of the TPM program. The executive level staff chaired the circle meeting in rotation. The meeting was organized after normal shift and lasted not more than 1 hour. It is intended to be casual, rapport building and knowledge sharing. Several feedbacks were brought out, including improvement on checkpoints and facilities. For examples, a more durable PVC plastic was recommended by the operator of Quench_A and Quench_B. The equipment maintenance personnel proposed regular case sharing sessions. 5. Discussion and Conclusion The first stage of the model, plan, is considered the foundation of the model, because the steps in the following stages were based on the data collected in this stage. Short-term and long-term goals would set pace and target for the future decision making and action. The second stage, improve, involved shop floor execution carrying out by the operators of equipment. Through leadership, the resistance of the operators was overcome, and the resulting impact to build a right TPM culture would be long-term. The final stage, sustain, involved the establishment of a new regulation system to maintain the results obtained, which includes standardization, routinization, visualization and patrol system. To reduce the burden on human and financial resources of the enterprise, the model narrows down equipment selection as early as possible and builds a practical equipment maintenance program around the key equipment, moreover, the model makes full use of the wisdom of team members, and most of the improvement methods are the results of brainstorming of team members. Resources utilization and expenditure were kept to minimum and most ideas were derived through public free sources and internet. For example, the total expenditure for improving these equipment was 889.8 RMB, or 178 RMB per equipment. Many material and resources, such as sander and visual board were spare material to be reused. Summary of the TPM implementation in the case study is shown in Table 3. The OEE was 66.90%, improved from 54.23%, hence meeting the target for 2020. Nevertheless, further improvements were planned on Quench_A and Quench_B to lift their OEE to the baseline of 65%. Of the six major losses, equipment setup was tackled through focused improvement, contributing significant improvement to -166- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 OEE. The short-term goal was achieved. Moreover, a simple survey was performed to obtain employee feedback about TPM concepts, steps and benefits. Figure 12 shows that before the improvement, the proportion of employees in know nothing is 88.89%, and after the improvement, the proportion is reduced by 1.39%. Based on the feedback from the questionnaire, TPM helped top management and equipment operators to gain confidence in and enthusiasm for the project. Table 3. Summary of TPM implementation in the case study Figure 12. Comparison of TPM awareness before and after improvement Comparing with other TPM models in existing studies (Eugen, 2010; Sharma & Sharma, 2013; Jain et al., 2014; Jain et al., 2015; Raut & Raut, 2017; Chukwutoo & Nkemakonam, 2018; Nallusamy et al., 2018; Amorim et al., 2018; Elwardi et al., 2018), the model has two advantages. First, the model minimizes implementation cost as the methods -167- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 used are not complex and utilized spare resources in the improvement. Second, the model can be easily emulated. After key equipment has been improved, the application can be extended to other equipment using the format. In this research, a ‘light’ TPM has been developed and described. The feasibility of the model was verified by implementation within a manufacturing SME in China. Compared with previously practiced breakdown maintenance, TPM has advantages in improving equipment manufacturing performance and preventing equipment degradation. This research reveals that employee awareness needs to be nurtured early on, through education, training and brainstorming sessions and pilot is a trial run of implementation to help employee to accumulate relevant experiences and refine strategy before system propagation, which are significantly improved their acceptance level. Initial cleaning is effective to introduce 5S and focus improvement to the equipment, as well as establish the groundwork for AM and PM. In addition, the implementation of TPM should be a continuous and incremental process to broaden the coverage of TPM as well as improve the OEE level at each round. The leader and the management of enterprise play a key role in process. It is necessary to have a sustained system to prevents the operator from returning to the state before improving. Research results show that implement TPM within SMEs in accordance with the model can effectively improve the OEE value, make them more competitive in the dynamic market. In this research, a ‘light’ TPM has been developed and described. The feasibility of the model was verified by implementation within a manufacturing SME in China. Compared with previously practiced breakdown maintenance, TPM has advantages in improving equipment manufacturing performance and preventing equipment degradation. Roadmap and short-term goals set the tempo and shared focus in the organization to install and align TPM activities. This allowed smooth transition of one stage to the other. This research reveals that employee awareness needs to be nurtured early on, through education, training and brainstorming sessions and pilot is a trial run of implementation to help employee to accumulate relevant experiences and refine strategy before system propagation, which are significantly improved their acceptance level. Educational and technical information are aplenty, in various formats and easily accessible on public domain (e.g. internet), often at no cost. Through accessing these materials, the implementation was benefited considerably in training, preparation of templates and planning of activities. A case in point is the demonstration video of AM in actual workplace, captured from a social media portal, was found far more effective to impart the procedural knowledge to the staff in the training, as compared to slide presentation. Initial cleaning is effective to introduce 5S and focus improvement to the equipment, as well as establish the groundwork for AM and PM. In addition, the implementation of TPM should be a continuous and incremental process to broaden the coverage of TPM as well as improve the OEE level at each round. The leader and the management of enterprise play a key role in process. It is necessary to have a sustained system to prevents the operator from returning to the state before improving. The sustained system is holistic by emphasizing in establishing standards, visualization, routinization, patrol system and continuous improvement. Execution level staffs were given the opportunity to contribute ideas and improve the system. Research results show that implement TPM within SMEs in accordance with the model can effectively improve the OEE value, make them more competitive in the dynamic market. Change is a constant. The business status, equipment structure, working environment and working methods of an enterprise will change with the progress of technology and time. To increase the competitiveness of an enterprise, the authors believe that future research should consider combining TPM with advanced manufacturing concepts, such as Lean production. Lean production focuses on the production process to reduce wastes related to production and establish a customer-demand-oriented pull production. On the other hand, TPM focuses on production equipment to reduce waste related to equipment. The combination of the two is not direct application of their tools and methods arbitrarily. Instead, a rigorous study is required to examine the appropriateness of these tools and methods, considering the contextual factors of the enterprise and to plan a suitable deployment strategy that helps to synergize the combined effect when they are integrated as a system. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. -168- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 Funding The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. References Adesta, E.Y.T., Prabowo, H.A., & Agusman, D. (2018). Evaluating 8 pillars of Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) implementation and their contribution to manufacturing performance. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/290/1/012024 Agustiady, T.K., & Cudney, E.A. (2018). Total productive maintenance. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2018.1438843 Ahuja, I.P.S. (2009). Total Productive Maintenance. In Ben-Daya, M., Duffuaa, S.O., Raouf, A., Knezevic, J., & Ait-Kadi, D. (Eds.), Handbook of Maintenance Management and Engineering (417-459). London: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-472-0_17 Ali, A.Y. (2019). Application of Total Productive Maintenance in Service Organization. International Journal of Research in Industrial Engineering, 8(2), 176-186. Alsubaie, B., & Yang, Q. (2017). Maintenance Process Improvement Model by Integrating LSS and TPM for Service Organizations. Engineering Asset Management, 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62274-3_2 Amorim, G., Hatakeyama, K., & Rojas-Lema, X. (2018). Implantation of Total Productive Maintenance: A Case Study in the Manufacturing Industry. New Global Perspectives on Industrial Engineering and Management, 259-267. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93488-4_29 Asif, M., & Vries, H.J. (2014). Creating ambidexterity through quality management. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 26(11-12), 1226-1241. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2014.926609 Baglee, D., Gorostegui, U., Jantunen, E., Sharma, P., & Campos, J. (2017). How can SMEs adopt a new method to advanced maintenance strategies? A Case study approach. Proceedings of 30th International Congress & Exhibition on Condition Monitoring and Diagnostic Engineering Management. Preston, UK. Baglee, D., & Knowles, M. (2010). Maintenance strategy development within SMEs: the development of an integrated approach. Control and Cybernetics, 39(1), 275-303. Baker, H.K., Kumar, S., & Singh, H.P. (2019). Working capital management: evidence from Indian SMEs. Small Enterprise Research, 26(2), 143-163. https://doi.org/10.1080/13215906.2019.1624386 Bataineh, O., Al-Hawari, T., Alshraideh, H., & Dalalah, D. (2019). A sequential TPM-based scheme for improving production effectiveness presented with a case study. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 25(1), 144-161. https://doi.org/10.1108/JQME-07-2017-0045 Bhawarkar, R.M., & Dhamande, L.P. (2013). A Framework for the Implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) to Improve the Performance of Business. International Journal of Research in Advent Technology, 1(5), 1-9. Bon, A.T., & Lim, M. (2015). Total Productive Maintenance in Automotive Industry: Issues and Effectiveness. Proceedings of International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management. Dubai (UAE). https://doi.org/10.1109/IEOM.2015.7093837 Candra, N.E., Susilawati, A., Herisiswanto, & Setiady, W. (2017). Implementation of Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) to Improve Sheeter Machine Performance. 8th International Conference on Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering. Malaysia. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201713500028 Chong, M.Y., Chin, J.F., & Hamzah, H.S. (2012). Transfer of total productive maintenance practice to supply chain, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 23(3-4), 467-488. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2011.637788 Chukwutoo, C.I., & Nkemakonam, C.I. (2018). Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) as a Business Strategy in Manufacturing Small and Medium Enterprises in Nigeria. Advances in Research, 15(5), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.9734/AIR/2018/41330 -169- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 Dave, Y., & Sohani, N. (2015). Solving the Issue of Electronic Breakdown of Hobbing Machine through Kobetsu Kaizen Methodology: A Case Study. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 789, 592-596. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.789-790.592 Dhillon, B.S. (2006). Maintainability, Maintenance, and Reliability for Engineers. Boca Raton: CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420006780 Díaz-Reza, J.R., García-Alcaraz, J.L., Avelar-Sosa, L., Mendoza-Fong, J.R., Diez-Muro, J.C.S., & Blanco-Fernández, J. (2018). The Role of Managerial Commitment and TPM Implementation Strategies in Productivity Benefits. Applied Sciences, 8(7), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/app8071153 Dogra, M., Sharma, V.S., Sachdeva, A., & Dureja, J.S. (2011). TPM–a key strategy for productivity improvement in process industry. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 6(1), 1-16. Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. (2018). Theory into practice, practice to theory: Action research in method development. European Journal of Operational Research, 271(3), 1145-1155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2018.05.061 Elwardi, B., Meddaoui, A., Mouchtachi, A., & En-nhaili, A. (2018). New Maturity model of industrial performance for SMEs: A case study of TPM implementation in a Moroccan industrial SME. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Smart Applications and Data Analysis for Smart Cities. Casablanca, Morocco. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3186313 Eugen, P. (2010). Implementation Results of Total Productive Maintenance in A SME. Fascicle of Management and Technological Engineering, 9(19), 167-172. https://doi.org/10.15660/AUOFMTE.2010-2.1924 Farnsworth, M., Bell, C., Khan, S., & Tomiyama, T. (2015). Autonomous Maintenance for Through-Life Engineering. In Redding, L., & Roy, R. (Eds.), Through-life Engineering Services (395-419), Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12111-6_23 Ferreira, C.W.T., & Leite, J.C. (2016). Applied autonomous maintenance in the improvement of production quality: A case study. Journal of engineering and technology for industrial applications, 2(7), 17-27. https://doi.org/10.5935/24470228.20160026 Filip, F.C., & Marascu-Klein, V. (2015). The 5S lean method as a tool of industrial management performances. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 95, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/95/1/012127 Garza-Reyes, J.A., Eldridge, S., Barber, K.D., & Soriano-Meier, H. (2010). Overall equipment effectiveness and process capability measures. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 27(1), 48-62. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656711011009308 Graisa, M., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410381111126445 Guariente, P., Antoniolli, I., Ferreira, L.P., Pereira, T., & Silva, F.J.G. (2017). Implementing autonomous maintenance in an automotive components manufacturer. Proceedings of Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference, Vigo, Spain. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.09.174 Gupta, S., & Chandna, P. (2020). A case study concerning the 5S lean technique in a scientific equipment manufacturing company. Grey Systems: Theory and Application, 10(3), 339-357. https://doi.org/10.1108/GS-01-20200004 Han, T., & Yang, B.S. (2006). Development of an e-maintenance system integrating advanced techniques. Computers in Industry, 57(6), 569-580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2006.02.009 Harun, M.F., Habidin, N.F., & Latip, N.A.M. (2019). 5S Lean Tool, Value Stream Mapping and Warehouse Performance: Conceptual Framework. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 8(3), 605-608. Hedman, R., Subramaniyan, M. & Almström, P. (2016). Analysis of critical factors for automatic measurement of OEE. Procedia CIRP, 57, 128-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.023 -170- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 Jain, A., Bhatti, R.S., & Singh, H. (2017). An ISM approach to identify key success factors behind the TPM implementation in Indian SMEs. International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, 22(1), 42-58. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPQM.2017.085846 Jain, A., Bhatti, R.S., & Singh, H. (2015). OEE enhancement in SMEs through mobile maintenance: a TPM concept. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 32(5), 503-516. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-052013-0088 Jain, A., Bhatti, R.S., & Singh, H. (2014). Total productive maintenance (TPM): a proposed model for Indian SMEs. International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering Research and Development, 4(1), 1-22. Joochim, O., & Meekaew, J. (2016). Application of TPM in Production Process of Aluminium Stranded Conductors. Proceedings of International Conference on Industrial Engineering, Management Science and Application. Jeju, Korea. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIMSA.2016.7503996 Joshi, K.M., & Bhatt, D.V. (2018). A modified TPM framework for Indian SMEs. International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology, 9(6), 1-14. Kar, M.K. (2016). Implementation of Planned Maintenance Using TPM Methodology for A Bi-Cycle Manufacturing Industry. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 7(6), 253-270. Khan, F.J., & Quazi, T.Z. (2014). Implementation of Kobetsu Kaizen pillar in Improving Overall Equipment Effectiveness of Machine. International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology, 3(7), 562-570. Kharub, M., & Sharma, R.K. (2015). Investigating the role of CSF’s for successful implementation of quality management practices in MSMEs. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, 7(1), 247-273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-015-0394-y Kigsirisin, S., Pussawiro, S., & Noohawm, O. (2016). Approach for Total Productive Maintenance Evaluation in Water Productivity: A Case Study at Mahasawat Water Treatment Plant. Procedia Engineering, 154, 260-267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.07.472 Kleingeld, A, Van Mierlo, H., & Arends, L. (2011). The effect of goal setting on group performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(6), 1289-1304. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024315 Kodali, R., & Chandra, S. (2001). Analytical hierarchy process for justification of total productive maintenance. Production Planning & Control, 12(7), 695-705. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537280010024045 Kumar, A., Singh, R.K., & Khan, T.A. (2016). Development of Framework for Analyzing the Barriers in Total Productive Maintenance. International Journal of Advance Research and Innovation, 4(4), 742-748. Lazim, H.M., & Ramayah, T. (2010). Maintenance strategy in Malaysian manufacturing companies: a total productive maintenance (TPM) approach. Business Strategy Series, 11(6), 387-396. https://doi.org/10.1108/17515631011093098 Li, K.G. (2013). The study on the management of TPM in the foundry of Dongfeng motor. Master thesis. University of science and technology Wuhan. Logesh, B., Kuppuraj, R., & Augustine, A. (2017). Experimental Investigation to Deploy Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) In CNC Machining Line of an Automobile Component Production Industry Using TPM. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 3(8), 99-105. Madanhire, I., Mugwindiri, K., Ndlovu, S., & Mbohwa, C. (2018). Adjudging the Efficacy of Total Productive Maintenance: Case Study. Proceedings of International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management. Pretoria, South Africa. Manihalla, P.P., Gopal, R.C., Rao, S.T., & Javaraiah, R.M. (2019). A survey on factors affecting total productive maintenance (TPM) in service industries. AIP Conference Proceedings (1-9). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5092940 -171- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 Maran, M., Thiagarajan, K., Manikandan, G., & Sarukesi, K. (2016). Competency enhancement and employee empowerment in a TPM organization-an empirical study. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology, 7(2), 40-47. McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2011). All you need to know about action research. Calif: SAGE Publications. Méndez, J.D.M., & Rodríguez, R.S. (2017). Total productive maintenance (TPM) as a tool for improving productivity: a case study of application in the bottleneck of an auto-parts machining line. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 92(1), 1013-1026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-0052-4 Mileham, A.R., Culley, S.J., Mclntosh, R.I., Gest, G.B., & Owen, G.W. (1997). Set-up reduction (SUR) beyond total productive maintenance (TPM). Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 211(4), 253-260. https://doi.org/10.1243/0954405971516248 Muchiri, P., & Pintelon, L. (2008). Performance measurement using overall equipment effectiveness (OEE): literature review and practical application discussion. International Journal of Production Research, 46(13), 3517-3535. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540601142645 Mugwindiri, K., & Mbohwa, C. (2013). Availability performance improvement by using autonomous maintenance– the case of a developing country, Zimbabwe. Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering. London, UK. Mukhedkar, D.K. (2020). Impact of TPM Implementation on Organizations' Competitiveness. International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews, 7(1), 791-796. Nallusamy, S., & Majumdar, G. (2017). Enhancement of Overall Equipment Effectiveness using Total Productive Maintenance in a Manufacturing Industry. International Journal of Performability Engineering, 13(2), 173-188. https://doi.org/10.23940/ijpe.17.02.p7.173188 Nallusamy, S. (2016). Enhancement of Productivity and Efficiency of CNC Machines in a Small-Scale Industry Using Total Productive Maintenance. International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa, 25, 119-126. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/JERA.25.119 Nallusamy, S., Kumar, V., Yadav, V., Prasad, U.K., & Suman, S.K. (2018). Implementation of total productive maintenance to enhance the overall equipment effectiveness in medium scale industries. International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering Research and Development, 8(1), 1027-1038. https://doi.org/10.24247/ijmperdfeb2018123 Nakajima, S. (1988). Introduction to TPM: total productive maintenance. Cambridge: Productivity Press. Nakajima, S. (1986). TPM - challenge to the improvement of productivity by small group activities. Maintenance Manage International, 6(2), 73-83. Ngadiman, Y., Hussin, B., & Majid, I.A. (2012). A study of total productive maintenance implementation in manufacturing industry for generating greater profits. Proceedings of International Conference of Technology Management, Business and Entrepreneurship. Melaka, Malaysia. Nithiyanandhan, V., & Kumar, K.M.S. (2016). Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) Implementation Process in Machining Line. Journal on Science Engineering & Technology, 3(1), 17-24. Pacaiova, H., & Izarlkova, G. (2019). Base Principles and Practices for Implementation of Total Productive Maintenance in Automotive Industry. Quality Innovation Prosperity, 23(1), 45-59. https://doi.org/10.12776/qip.v23i1.1203 Parikh, Y., & Mahamuni, P. (2015). Total Productive Maintenance: Need & Framework. International Journal of Innovative Research in Advanced Engineering, 2(2), 126-130. Park, K.S., & Han, S.W. (2001). TPM – Total Productive Maintenance: Impact on Competitiveness and a Framework for Successful Implementation. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 11(4), 321-338. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.1017 -172- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 Paropate, R.V., & Sambhe, R. (2013). The Implementation and Evaluation of Total Productive Maintenance – A Case Study of midsized Indian Enterprise. International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management, 2(10), 120-125. Patel, V.C., & Thakkar, H. (2014). Review on Implementation of 5S in Various Organization. International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications, 4(3), 774-779. Patil, L., & Raut, N. (2019). Study of total productive maintenance and improving the production. International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews, 6(1), 519-522. Patra, N.K., Tripathy, J.K., & Choudhary, B.K. (2005). Implementing the office total productive maintenance (“office TPM”) program: a library case study. Library Review, 54(7), 415-424. https://doi.org/10.1108/00242530510611910 Poor, P., Zenisek, D., & Basl, J. (2019). Historical Overview of Maintenance Management Strategies: Development from Breakdown Maintenance to Predictive Maintenance in Accordance with Four Industrial Revolutions. Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management. Pilsen, Czech Republic. Prashanth Pai, M., Ramachandra, C.G., Srinivas, T.R., & Raghavendra, M.J. (2018). A Study on Usage of Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) in Selected SMEs. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 376, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/376/1/012117 Rahman, C.M., Hoque, M.A., & Uddin, S.M. (2014). Assessment of Total Productive Maintenance Implementation through Downtime and Mean Downtime Analysis. IOSR Journal of Engineering, 4(9), 38-47. https://doi.org/10.9790/3021-04943847 Ramayah, T., Jantan, M., & Hassan, M.M. (2002). Change Management and Implementation of Total Productive Maintenance: An Exploratory Study of Malaysian Manufacturing Companies. Utara Management Review, 3(1), 35-49. Raut, S., & Raut, N. (2017). Implementation of TPM to enhance OEE in a medium scale industry. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, 4(5), 1035-1041. Renna, P. (2016). Maintenance policy in job-shop manufacturing systems with reminder cell. International Journal of Services and Operations Management, 24(4), 459-483. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSOM.2016.077783 Rizkya, I., Syahputri, K., Sari, R.M., & Siregar, I. (2019). 5S Implementation in Welding Workshop – a Lean Tool in Waste Minimization. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 505, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757899X/505/1/012018 Saleem, F., Nisar, S., Khan, M.A., Khan, S.Z., & Sheikh, M.A. (2017). Overall equipment effectiveness of tyre curing press: a case study. Journal of quality in maintenance engineering, 23(1), 39-56. https://doi.org/10.1108/JQME-062015-0021 Sharma, R., & Singh, J. (2015). Impact of Implementing Japanese 5S Practices on Total Productive Maintenance. International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology, 5(2), 818-825. Sharma, R., Singh, J., & Rastogi, V. (2018). The impact of total productive maintenance on key performance indicators (PQCDSM): a case study of automobile manufacturing sector. International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, 24(2), 267-283. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPQM.2018.091794 Sharma, R.K., & Sharma, R.G. (2013). Integrating Six Sigma Culture and TPM Framework to Improve Manufacturing Performance in SMEs. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 30 (5), 745-765. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.1525 Sharma, V.K., & Yadav, V. (2016). Analysis of TPM implimentation in auto sector-a case study. International Journal of Engineering Research & Management Technology, 3(4), 68-78. -173- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 Shinde, D.D., Ahirrao, S., & Prasad, R. (2018). Fishbone Diagram: Application to Identify the Root Causes of Student–Staff Problems in Technical Education. Wireless Personal Communications, 100(2), 653-664. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-018-5344-y Shinde, D.D., & Prasad, R. (2017). Application of AHP for Ranking of Total Productive Maintenance Pillars. Wireless Personal Communications, 100(2), 449-462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-017-5084-4 Singh, J., Singh, H., & Sharma, V. (2018). Success of TPM concept in a manufacturing unit – a case study. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 6 (3), 536-549. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-01-20170003 Singh, P. (2017). Total Productive Maintenance-A Tool for World Class Manufacturing. International Journal of Advanced Production and Industrial Engineering, 20-23. Singh, R.K., Clements, E.J., & Sonwaney, V. (2018). Measurement of overall equipment effectiveness to improve operational efficiency. International Journal of Process Management and Benchmarking, 8(2), 246-261. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPMB.2018.090798 Singh, U., & Ahuja, I.S. (2015). Evaluating the contributions of total productive maintenance on manufacturing performance. International Journal of Process Management and Benchmarking, 5(4), 425-455. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPMB.2015.072324 Skinner, S. (2018). An Investigation of Organizational Goal Setting: What processes do organizations of varying sizes utilize when setting goals. Master thesis. Faculty of Business Administration Memorial University. Stake, R.E. (2013). Multiple-case study analysis. New York: Guilford Press. Sukanta, S., Maulana, R., & Sari, D.A. (2018). Implementations of Autonomous Maintenance to Relieve Stoppages on PT NIKF - Sachet Packaging Chain. The Journal for Technology and Science, 29(3), 65-71. https://doi.org/10.12962/j20882033.v29i2.3569 Sun, H., Yam, R., & Wai-Keung, N.G. (2003). The implementation and evaluation of Total Productive Maintenance(TPM) – an action case study in a Hong Kong manufacturing company. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 22, 224-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-002-1463-3 Sutoni, A., Setyawan, W., & Munandar, T. (2019). Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) Analysis on Lathe Machines using the Overall Equipment Effectiveness Method and Six Big Losses. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1179, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1179/1/012089 Tsarouhas, P. (2019). Improving operation of the croissant production line through overall equipment effectiveness (OEE). International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 68(1), 88-108. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM02-2018-0060 Vardhan, S., Gupta, P., & Gangwar, V. (2015). The impact of Quality Maintenance Pillar of TPM on manufacturing performance. Proceedings of International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management. Dubai (UAE). https://doi.org/10.1109/IEOM.2015.7093741 Venkatesh, J. (2007). An introduction to total productive maintenance (TPM). Available at: www.plant-maintenance.com (Accessed: April 2020) Veres, C., Marian, L., Moica, S., & Al-Akel, K. (2018). Case study concerning 5S method impact in an automotive company. Procedia Manufacturing, 22, 900-905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.03.127 Wakjira, M.W., & Iyengar, A.S. (2014). Autonomous Maintenance: A Case Study on Assela Malt Factory. Bonfring International Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management Science, 4(4), 170-178. https://doi.org/10.9756/BIJIEMS.10364 Wudhikarn, R. (2016). Implementation of the overall equipment cost loss (OECL) methodology for comparison with overall equipment effectiveness (OEE). Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 22(1), 81-93. https://doi.org/10.1108/JQME-12-2011-0001 -174- Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management – https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3286 Yang, L., Ye, Z., Lee, C.G., Yang, S., & Peng, R. (2019). A two-phase preventive maintenance policy considering imperfect repair and postponed replacement. European Journal of Operational Research, 274(3), 966-977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2018.10.049 Yang, M.G., Hong, P., & Modi, S.B. (2011). Impact of lean manufacturing and environmental management on business performance: An empirical study of manufacturing firms. International Journal of Production Economics, 192(2), 251-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.10.017 Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 2021 (www.jiem.org) Article’s contents are provided on an Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 Creative commons International License. Readers are allowed to copy, distribute and communicate article’s contents, provided the author’s and Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management’s names are included. It must not be used for commercial purposes. To see the complete license contents, please visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. -175-