A Survey on Lean Manufacturing Tools Implementation in Malaysian

Food and Beverages Industry using Rasch Model

Nurul Syuhadah Khusaini1, a, Ahmed Jaffar1,b and Noriah Yusoff1,c
1

Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Malaysia

syuhadah86@gmail.com, bahmedjaffar@salam.uitm.edu.my, c noriahyusoff@salam.uitm.edu.my

Keywords: Lean manufacturing, Food and beverages industry, Lean tools, Lean survey, Rasch
model

Abstract. This paper offers a preliminary study on Lean Tools (LT) implementation in Malaysian
Food and Beverages Industry. A survey was carried out to determine the most common LT that are
currently being implemented in this industry. Out of 1309, a total of 300 organizations have been
randomly selected as respondents. The results were analyzed using Rasch Model, and the findings
show that the organizations apply only six out of eighteen LT. From the variable map, Kaizen is the
most preferable LT, while Single Minute Exchange of Die (SMED) is the least favorable LT. LT
such as Just-In-Time (JIT), Value Stream Mapping (VSM) and Poka Yoke is still unfamiliar in
current practice in this industry. This shows that, even though the organizations claim that they are
Lean Manufacturing (LM) implementers, they are still at the infancy level. Finally, this is perhaps
the first attempt in identifying the extent of LT implementation in Malaysian Food and Beverages
Industry using Rasch Model.
Introduction
Companies in Malaysian Food and Beverages industry (FB) have been given vast opportunities to
promote their products locally, as well as globally. The initiative by the Malaysian government in
Industrial Master Plan 3 (IMP3) for Malaysia to be a global Halal hub has encouraged Small
Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Malaysia to be part of the plan, since they are the majority and hold
80% of the total establishment in this industry [1].
Lean Manufacturing (LM) is one of the world class manufacturing practices that have been
accepted worldwide. Inspired by Toyota Production System (TPS), LM emphasized the importance
of waste reduction and pull production [2]. A lot of organizations have benefitted from LM, thus it
is believed that by implementing LM, an organization will be able to sustain and stay competitive. In
LM, there are methods and techniques that an organization must embrace, for them to be a LM
organization. However the level of LM implementation in Malaysian FB industry is very scarce,
especially on the LM tools application.
Thus, the purpose of this study is to identify the LM tools used and classify them according to
their level of implementation difficulties in Malaysian FB industry. This study is important as it
provides preliminary guidelines in terms of implementation hierarchy in Malaysian FB industry. The
analysis chosen for this purpose is Rasch Model. This is perchance the first attempt to classify LM
tools using Rasch Model in Malaysian FB industry.
Literature Review
Lean Manufacturing. The term Lean Manufacturing (LM) is the outcome of Womacks 5 years
research with Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Japan [2]. LM focuses on improving
the process, ensuring quality at its best at all time. A lot of organizations have witnessed the
improvement that LM could offer; however changing the way how things were is not easy. Studies
have shown that organizations might suffer from the failure in implementing LM [3] [4]. Womack
stressed that superimposing LM into the current management system will result in disturbance and

confusion [2]. It turned out to be true, from a study done by Cheng in China [5]. Briefly, five
principles in LM are [6];
Specify value.
Identify value stream and eradicate waste.
Ensure smooth flow for value.
Make only what is pull.
Seek perfection by eliminating waste continuously.
In order to comply with the principles, a set of tools in LM is a helping hand for organizations to
change towards a leaner process management. In Malaysia, LM has been implemented in the
automotive, as well as electrical and electronics industry based on the previous studies conducted
[7] [8]. There may be studies on LM implementation in Malaysian FB industry but the overall view
on the acceptance of LM in Malaysian FB industry is very scarce and should be investigated.
Lean Tools. Lean tools (LT) can be defined as techniques or method to assist organizations in
achieving the five principles of LM. Interestingly, Pavnaskar has identified over 101 LM tools
which have been introduced and implemented in various area [9]. However in Malaysia, the
common LT that have been cited in recent studies are 5S, Cellular Layout, Heijunka, Jidoka, Pokayoke, Kaizen, Kanban, Standardized Work, Group Technology, Just-In-Time (JIT), One Piece Flow,
Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA), Andon, Single Minute Exchange of Die (SMED), Value Stream
Mapping (VSM), Total Preventive Maintenance (TPM), Root Cause Analysis and Takt Time [7]
[8]. However, these tools have been proven to be implemented only in Malaysian automotive, as
well as electrical and electronics industry. The overall level of LT implementation in Malaysian FB
industry is still unknown therefore this study is important because LT are meant to complement each
other, and not to be used in isolation.
Rasch Model. Rasch Model (RM) is a probabilistic model, which measures the latent traits, such as
ability and attitude [10]. Initially, RM has been applied in educational studies. However, recent
studies have proven that RM can be applied in other fields such as medical, psychology and
Information Technology (IT). The best feature in RM is that, it measures both the interaction
between the person and the item concurrently using an established scale with a unit called Logit
[11]. In RM, there are two underpinning principles [10];
A high ability person will most likely be able to complete any given task;
An easy task can be done without difficulties by a person, with any given ability.
To suit RM principles with this study, it can be said that;
A high ability LM implementer will most likely be able to implement any LT;
An easy LT can be implemented without any difficulties by any given ability of a LM
implementer.
Research Methodology
The participants were selected from the FMM MATRADE Industry Directory: Food and Beverage
4th Edition. The population identified was 1309 and they were then stratified to two stratums,
namely SMEs and Large. The final sample was then randomly chosen for survey participation. A
minimum number of 297 were needed as a sample size, as recommended by Umasekaran [12].
Thus, a total of 300 survey questionnaires, were sent to the selected organizations, together with a
pre-paid envelopes and cash vouchers to encourage participation. The survey questionnaires consist
of questions related to organizational background information and LT that are currently being
implemented. They were asked to rate the level of LT implementation from 4 Complete

Implementation to 0 No Implementation. Up to 18 LT (as mentioned earlier) have been listed in

the survey questionnaires. The questions on LT were adapted from Wong and Norani [7][8]. A total
of 60 responses received, however only 53 were valid for further analysis. Hence, the response rate
is 17.7%. The data were then recorded in the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) v.21
software and later transferred to Winstep software version 3.72.3 to perform Rasch Model analysis.
Result and Discussion
Variable Map. In RM, the most exclusive feature is the Variable Map (VM). VM shows the
distribution of both respondent and the item along one continuum. In laymans term, VM works just
like a ruler : (i) have numbers and ordered (ii) equal interval (iii) have a unit of measurement [13].
In RM, the unit of measurement is Logit. As shown in Fig.1, the VM consists of one vertical
dashed line, which separates the respondent (on the left) and the item (on the right).With respect to
this study, the left side represents the organizations that implement LT, according to their level of
implementation. The organization that implements the most LT is ranked at the top, while the
opposite is ranked at the bottom. While on the right side, the most difficult LT has been
implemented is at the top, and the easiest LT that has been implemented is at the bottom of the map.
The letter M at the dashed line denotes the item mean and the person mean. While the letter S and T
signifies one standard deviation and two standard deviations away from the mean, respectively. The
item mean is calibrated at zero Logit, since the likelihood of implementing each item is 50:50 [10].
The person mean depends heavily on the response towards LT implementation.

Fig. 1. Variable Map Summary

From Fig.1, we can see that the person mean is at -0.67 Logit. It can be said that on average,
organizations in Malaysian FB industry are not familiar with LT. Based on the survey responses;
LT6 (-1.19 Logit) is the most implemented LT, whilst LT14 (+2.11 Logit) is the least implemented
LT. Surprisingly, out of eighteen LT, only six LT are recognizable and are implemented within the
respondents organization namely LT6 (Kaizen Continuous Improvement), LT1 (5S), LT8

(Standardized work), LT16 (Total Preventive Maintenance), LT17 (Root Cause Analysis) and LT12
(Plan Do Check Act PDCA). As we can see, organizations in this industry prefer Kaizen as their
first LT, compared to 5S, which is quite shocking. 5S should be the starting point of all effort
towards quality improvement program, including LM, as documented by Warwood [14] because it
is a practice that will nurture the sense of responsibility. 5S represents five ways of organizing
namely;
Seiri structure, sort, sift, clean up, and clear out.
Seiton straighten, simplify, set (in order), configure.
Seiso sanitize, scrub, shine, sweep, clean and check.
Seiketsu standardize, sustain, systemize, and conform.
Shitsuke self-discipline, custom and practice.
This proves that organizations in Malaysian FB industry consider 5S as a trivial step towards
improving the current system, and could not see how it complements other LT. Other LT are not
implemented in the current circumstances. Those LT are;

LT5 (Poka-Yoke)
LT10 (Just-In-Time)
LT13 (Andon Lighting Signal)
LT7 (Kanban)
LT11 (One piece flow)
LT18 (Takt time)

LT4 (Jidoka Autonomation)

LT9 (Group technology)
LT15 (Value Stream Mapping)
LT2 (Cellular layout)
LT3 (Heijunka Level schedule)
LT14 (Single Minute Exchange of
Die)

From the outcomes, clearly we can see that the LT implementation in Malaysian FB industry is not
at par with that of the automotive, as well as electric and electronics industry. Relating this result
with LM principles (as mentioned above), clearly these organizations is not yet Lean, since vital
LT such as the well-known Value Stream Mapping and Just-In-Time are not being practiced at all.
This might be because of the nature of the industry itself. Fawwaz in his study pointed out that
processing industry has been characterized by three aspects; namely inflexible processes, high
volume and low variety products. Due to that reasons, transforming to LM is very expensive, in
terms to changing the equipment to cellular arrangement. Moreover, setup time in process industry
tends to be lengthy and shutting down processes for changeover is believed to be costly [15].
Despite that fact, it is not impossible for food processing industries to implement LM, as proven by
Lehtinen [16] and Illija [17] through their studies in the same industry.
Summary
FB industry in Malaysia, specifically in the processing sector still has a long journey to go to change
towards LM. Based on the results, only six LT are being implemented. Hence, organizations in
Malaysian FB industry should put more effort towards LM. Looking back to the LM principles,
every process must be thoroughly examined to eliminate waste and non added value practice before
implementing the pull production. They should also change their perception of LM, by educating
themselves with the importance of 5S. They must understand why 5S should be the first step,
compare to the LT that are currently being practice which is Kaizen. To make LM work, LM should
be embraced by everyone in the organizations, and it is the duty of the top management to ensure
that LM is known by heart, not known by part.

Acknowledgment
The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support received from Ministry of Higher Education
(MOHE) and Research Management Institute (RMI), under Research Intensive Faculty Grant (600RMI/DANA 5/3/RIF (321/2012), Universiti Teknologi MARA Malaysia as research grant.
References
[1]

[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]

[8]

[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]

[16]

[17]

MALAYSIA, "Third Industrial Master Plan," Ministry of International Trade and Industry,
[Online]. Available:
http://www.miti.gov.my/cms/content.jsp?id=com.tms.cms.article.Article_81cde187-c0a8157311c011c0-5bae8b76. [Accessed 28 May 2013].
J. P. Womack, D. T. Jones and D. Roos, The Machine That Changed The World, New York:
Harper Perennial, 1990.
M. Taleghani, "Key factors for implementing the lean manufacturing system," Journal of
American Science, vol. 6, no. 7, pp. 287-291, 2010.
M. Scherrer-Rathje, T. A. Boyle and P. Deflorin, "Lean, take two! Reflections from second
attempt at lean implementation," Business Horizons, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 79-88, 2009.
L. Cheng and B. Meng, "Why Most Chinese Enterprises Fail in Deploying Lean Production,"
Asian Social Science, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 52-57, 2010.
J. P. Womack and D. T. Jones, Lean Thinking, Free Press, 1996.
N. Nordin, B. M. Deros and D. A. Wahab, "A Survey on Lean Manufacturing Implementation
in Malaysian Automotive Industry," International Journal of Innovation, Management and
Technology, pp. 374-380, 2010.
W. Y. Cheng, W. K. Yew and A. Ali, "A study on lean manufacturing implementation in the
Malaysian Electrical and Electronic Industry," European Journal of Scientific Research, vol.
38, no. 4, pp. 521-535, 2009.
S. Pavnaskar, J. Gershenson and A. Jambekar, "Classification scheme for lean manufacturing
tools," International Journal of Production Research, vol. 41, no. 13, pp. 3075-3090, 2003.
T. G. Bond and C. M. Fox, Applying the Rasch Model 2nd Edition, New York, London:
Routledge, 2012.
S. Masodi, Introduction to Rasch Model Analysis Workshop, Shah Alam: Universiti Teknologi
Mara, 2013.
U. Sekaran, Research Methods for Business: A skill building approach : Fourth Edition,
Singapore: John Wiley and Sons, 2005.
S. Masodi, Rasch Model Workshop, Bangi, January 2013.
S. J. Warwood and G. Knowles, "Emerald Article :An investigation into Japanese 5-S practice
in UK industry," The TQM Magazine, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 347-353, 2004.
F. A. Abdulmalek, J. Rajgopal and K. L. Needy, "A Classification Scheme for the Process
Industry to Guide the Implementation of Lean," Engineering Management Journal, vol. 18, no.
2, pp. 15-26, 2006.
U. Lehtinen and M. Torkko, "The Lean Concept in the Food Industry: A Case Study of
Contract a Manufacturer," Journal of Food Distribution Research, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 57-67,
2005.
I. Dekic, "Lean Manufacturing in Two Serbian Food Companies - Case Studies," International
Journal of Quality Research, vol. 3, pp. 657-663, 2012.