The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/1463-5771.htm

TPM
Identification of key enablers implementation
for total productive in Indian SMEs

maintenance (TPM)
implementation in Indian SMEs 2611

A graph theoretic approach Received 8 February 2016

Revised 2 August 2017
Accepted 7 August 2017
Abhishek Jain
Amity University Jaipur, Jaipur, India
Harwinder Singh
Guru Nanak Dev Engineering College, Ludhiana, India, and
Rajbir S. Bhatti
Mount Royal University, Calgary, Canada

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify the key enabler for total productive maintenance (TPM)
implementation in Indian small and medium enterprises (SMEs) by using graph theoretic approach (GTA).
There are certain enablers for TPM implementation which helps the organization to implement it
successfully. It is very essential to identify the nature and impact of these key enablers.
Design/methodology/approach – A large number of the enablers (27) have identified for TPM
implementation in Indian SMEs from the available literature, questionnaire survey and expert opinion. These
TPM enablers have categorized into six major categories.
Findings – In this research work, the intensity of identifying enablers has been calculated to show their
impact or influence in TPM implementation. The value of intensity of TPM enablers shows the role or impact
of individual enabler in the implementation of TPM in Indian SMEs.
Practical implications – This study provides an easy-to-use methodology for the practical decision makers
in the manufacturing industry to improve their performance by implementing TPM in Indian SMEs.
A detailed methodology has prepared to identify the enablers for TPM implementation in Indian SMEs by
using GTA. This study also explains that how to check the feasibility of an organization to implement TPM in
Indian SMEs successfully.
Originality/value – TPM is an improvement concept which holds the potential to improve manufacturing
organizations, but its implementation is not easy in Indian SMEs. The reason behind the unsuccessful
implementation of TPM in most of the organizations is the ignorance of impact of innumerable enablers
and barriers.
Keywords SME, Matrix, TPM, Digraph, GTA, PF
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The Indian small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are operating in an unsupportive environment
(Singh et al., 2006). The competition among Indian SMEs in this competitive scenario has put the
organizations under paramount pressure to review their traditional system. However, Brah and
Chang (2004) highlighted the importance of total productive maintenance (TPM) to survive in
this increased global competition. The study of Jutla et al. (2002) also concluded that SMEs
account for more than 75 percent of global economic growth in all countries. These SMEs
provides employment to a lot of people and, globally, they constitute approximately 70 percent
Benchmarking: An International
of gross national product (Ammenberg and Hjelm, 2003). The ability of an organization (SMEs Journal
or large) to survive in this global competition depends on how well the organization adapts Vol. 25 No. 8, 2018
pp. 2611-2634
market demands imposed by a changing market scenario to satisfy their customers. © Emerald Publishing Limited
1463-5771
The customer requirement is endless. The satisfaction of customer depends on how the DOI 10.1108/BIJ-02-2016-0019
BIJ organization works. Due to the following reasons, Indian Manufacturing organizations need to
25,8 adopt the improvement technique in SMEs also. There are so many techniques available to
adopt by organizations to survive in this high competition. TPM implementation is also one
important approach to adopt by either large organization or SMEs to improve the performance
of maintenance activities (Ahuja and Kumar, 2009).
In 1971, this term TPM basically originated in Japan as a method for the improvement of
manufacturing performance, maintenance operations and quality of product and services.
2612 One of the renowned researchers in the field of TPM is Nakajima (1988), after his extensive
research has identified TPM as the optimal tool for better maintenance strategies that can be
used to optimize equipment effectiveness, eliminates breakdowns and promotes
autonomous maintenance by total employee’s participation. TPM motivates top
management to take the concept of zero defects, zero breakdowns and minimal
production losses with maximizing equipment effectiveness and stepping up the skills of
operators and maintenance personnel (Kigsirisin et al., 2016).
In most of the cases, production operators are not considered as integral members of the
maintenance team in Indian manufacturing organizations. But in the concept of TPM, the
machine operators should be trained to enhance their skills, so that they can perform basic
simple maintenance or routine maintenance tasks on their machines. Although TPM
implementation gives a drastic improvement in overall manufacturing performance, still
Indian manufacturing industries are facing a lot of challenges in TPM implementation
(Tripathi, 2005; Ahuja and Khamba, 2007, 2008a; Shahanaghi and Yazdian, 2009;
Almeanazel, 2010; Amin et al., 2013; Jain et al., 2015).
The complete knowledge of key Enablers for the top management of an organization is
pre-requisite in the successful implementation of TPM. A questionnaire-based survey was
conducted in the targeted Indian SMEs in north and central India to know about their opinions
and explore their views regarding the key enablers for the successful TPM implementation.
The questionnaire was written in simple English, which can be easily understood by
respondents. In India, the procedure of sending questionnaires and receiving responses
through e-mail is not adequate. To get the reliable responses through questionnaires, the
authors have personally visited each company and explain the purpose of this questionnaire. In
this study, 200 organizations covering electronic/electrical, machine component, textile, food,
printing and packaging industry, and oil industry, chemical industry, rolled product, sugar
mill, fasteners and plastic industry and others have been approached for the evaluation of TPM
strategies in Indian SMEs. This study has included only small and medium manufacturing
organizations of north and central India, not service industries. Total 141 Indian SMEs has
personally visited and received 129 filled questionnaires from the respondents. Out of 129 filled
questionnaires, 114 responses are useful for this study as shown in Table I. These usable
responses have classified on the basis of product manufactured as shown in Table II.
The main objectives of this paper are as follows:
(1) to identify and categorize enablers for TPM implementation in Indian SMEs;
(2) to express enablers in the form of mathematical equations to understand their
impact and influence by using graph theoretic approach (GTA);

S. No. Items Numbers

1. Numbers of organizations approached 200

2. Numbers of organizations visited 141
3. Total responses received 129
Table I. 4. Unusable responses 15
Survey response rate 5. Useful responses 114
 Small-scale Medium-scale
TPM
organization organization implementation
S. No. Type of organization (70/114 ¼ 61.40%) (44/114 ¼ 38.60%) Total SMEs in Indian SMEs
1 Food industry 13/114 ¼ 11.4% 0 13/114 ¼ 11.4%
2 Auto/M/c component Industry 8/114 ¼ 7% 9/114 ¼ 7.9% 17/114 ¼ 14.9%
3 Printing/packaging industry 7/114 ¼ 6.1% 1/114 ¼ 0.9% 8/114 ¼ 7%
4 Oil industry 7/114 ¼ 6.1% 8/114 ¼ 7% 15/114 ¼ 13.1% 2613
5 Textile industry 2/114 ¼ 1.75% 3/114 ¼ 2.6% 5/114 ¼ 4.35%
6 Electronics/electrical industry 11/114 ¼ 9.6% 4/114 ¼ 3.5% 15/114 ¼ 13.1%
7 Chemical industry/tire plant 5/114 ¼ 4.4% 4/114 ¼ 3.5% 9/114 ¼ 7.9%
8 Rolled product/plastic industry 5/114 ¼ 4.4% 2/114 ¼ 1.75% 7/114 ¼ 6.15%
9 Fasteners 1/114 ¼ 0.9% 6/114 ¼ 5.2% 7/114 ¼ 6.1%
10 Casting component/stone 1/114 ¼ 0.9% 2/114 ¼ 1.75% 3/114 ¼ 2.65% Table II.
industry Breakdown of
11 Sugar mill 1/114 ¼ 0.9% 2/114 ¼ 1.75% 3/114 ¼ 2.65% responses given by
12 Other 9/114 ¼ 7.9% 3/114 ¼ 2.6% 12/114 ¼ 10.5% the organizations

(3) to develop a single index representing the strength of these enablers; and
(4) to calculate PF for each enablers to represent key enabler for the considered organization.
Further, in this paper, literature review is presented in Section 2 which describes the study
conducted on identification of enablers for TPM implementation. Methodology, the GTA
approach which includes Digraph representation, matrix preparation, PF calculation and
intensity of TPM enablers (IOETPM) is represented in Sections 3 and 4, respectively. The
results of this research are followed by discussion and conclusions in the last sections.

2. Literature review
The GTA is a technique used for identifying, analyzing and modeling of various kinds of
systems. It is a systematic and logical approach which incorporates the interrelationship
among various elements or sub-system elements and provides a single score for the
evaluation of the entire system. A digraph represents the overall structure of the system and
consist nodes and edges representing characteristics measurement and characteristics
dependencies respectively. Matrix representation is a one-to-one representation of the
digraph. Ahuja and Khamba (2008b) discussed numerous success factors which are
contributing to overcome the challenges posed by global competition in TPM
implementation. The GTA methodology has its versatile applications in so many fields.
The literature regarding the application of GTA in different fields is given in Table III.
The study conducted by Raj et al. (2010b) and Attri et al. (2013) has discussed that the
judging of directional relationship and interrelationship among various enablers can be
made by GTA. These enablers not only help in TPM implementation, but also help each
other to achieve. However, available literature has discussed various barriers, enablers and
benefits of TPM implementation, but no study has attempted to find the intensity of
enablers for TPM implementation in Indian SMEs. The quantification of these enablers by
GTA was also not discussed in the literature. The IOETPM indicates the strength of the
success of TPM implementation.

2.1 Identification and categorization of enablers for TPM implementation

The implementation of TPM in Indian SMEs as well as in large organizations is not an easy
task, but it is an art and needs time, money, resources, confidence and commitment of all
employees. Mora (2002) has reported that only less than 10 percent organizations have got
BIJ S. No. Application field References
25,8
1 Quality Grover et al. (2004, 2005, 2006), Kulkarni (2005), Raj and Attri
(2010), Singh et al. (2012)
2 Flexible manufacturing system Raj et al. (2010a, b)
3 Power plant Mohan et al. (2003, 2004, 2007, 2008), Garg et al. (2006, 2007),
Dev et al. (2012, 2013)
2614 4 Structural modeling Prabhakaran et al. (2006), Singh and Agrawal (2008), Kumar
et al. (2010)
5 Mechatronic system Kiran et al. (2011, 2012)
6 Supply chain management (SCM) Faisal et al. (2006, 2007a, b, c, d), Kaur et al. (2006), Arshinder and
Deshmukh (2009), Anbanandam et al. (2011), Anand and
Bahinipati (2012), Joshi et al. (2012), Muduli et al. (2013)
7 Buyer–supplier relationships Thakkar et al. (2007)
8 Manufacturing environment Venkatesh and Smith (2003), Rao (2004, 2006a, b), Rao and
Padmanabhan (2006, 2007, 2010), Chakladar et al. (2009), Gadakh
and Shinde (2011), Koulouriotis and Ketipi (2011); Paramasivam
et al. (2011); Singh et al. (2011), Vinodh et al. (2013)
9 Failure cause analysis (FCA) Gandhi and Agrawal (1996)
Table III. 10 FMEA Gandhi and Agrawal (1992)
Application of GTA 11 Electroplating system Kumar et al. (2011a, b)
methodology in 12 Maintenance Kumar and Gandhi
different fields 13 Service provider Qureshi et al. (2009)

success in the TPM implementation. Further, Hartmann (2000) has also reported that every
second attempt of TPM implementation is failing. Therefore, associated enablers or barriers
have to be found and analyzed before TPM implementation in order to get success. The
researchers (Attri et al., 2014; Poduval et al., 2015) have analyzed the barriers inhibiting
TPM implementation and the researchers (Raj et al., 2008, 2010b) analyzed enablers for
modeling of flexible manufacturing system. Haleem et al. (2012) also analyzed critical
success factors for world class manufacturing practices, but no study was conducted for
analyzing enablers intensity for TPM implementation.
From the questionnaire survey, literature review and expert decision (discussed with
production and maintenance managers and academicians) a large number of enablers (27)
have identified which helps the implementation of TPM in Indian SMEs successfully. These
enablers are large in number so their quantification is difficult by GTA. To avoid any
difficulty in analyzing, these enablers should be categorize into groups to find their
intensity. Hence, these TPM enablers have categorized into six major categories on the basis
of their effect. Many researchers (Grover et al., 2004, 2005, 2006; Raj and Attri, 2010; Raj
et al., 2010a, b; Anand and Bahinipati, 2012; Muduli et al., 2013) also categorized some factors
into grouped in their work to find the intensity of these factors. The categorization of these
six major enablers and their sub-enablers are as shown in Figure 1.
Moreover the mean (m), standard deviation (SD) and Cronbach’s α (CA) calculations are
used to test the reliability and validity of collecting data for these considered six major
enablers. The values of CA for these enablers are found in the range of 0.692–0.950
(according to Black and Porter, 1996; Nunnally, 1978, the significant value of CA ⩾ 0.65)
which represents the reliability of data is significantly higher. Table IV illustrates the results
of statistical analysis for major enablers. SPSS software is used for this calculation.
The identification of these major enablers is explained in detail as follows.
2.1.1 Human-related TPM enablers (HRTE). These enablers are basically pertaining to
the human resources management in an organization. It includes five sub-enablers as top
management leadership, motivation, total employee involvement, coordination between
departments and employees, and employees empowerment. For the successful
 WRTE (E2) TPM
• Computerized
Maintenance
implementation
Management System in Indian SMEs
(CMMS) (E21)
• Team Spirit (E22)
• Work Culture (E23)
• Work Place
Environment (E24) 2615
HRTE (E1) • Attitude Change (E25) MRTE (E3)
• Top Management • Preventive
Leadership (E11) Maintenance (E31)
2 • Autonomous
• Motivation (E12)
• Total Employees Maintenance (E32)
Involvement (E13) • Mobile Maintenance
• Coordination b/w (E33)
1 3 • Availability of tools
Departments (E14)
• Employees and instruments (E34)
Empowerment (E15) • Maintenance
TPM Management (E35)
Enablers
CRTE (E6)
KRTE (E4)
• Quality (E61)
• Educated work force
• Safety, Health and 6 4 (E41)
Environment(E62)
• Education and
• Continuous
Training of
Improvement (E63) 5 Employees (E42)
• Customer
• Long term Planning
Satisfaction (E64)
(E43)
ORTE (E5) • Knowledge about
• Organizational Policy TPM programme
(E51) (E44)
• Availability of space
for work (E52)
• Availability of Figure 1.
Resources (E53)
Key enablers for
• Rewards and
TPM implementation
Incentives (E54)

Major enablers HRTE WRTE MRTE KRTE ORTE CRTE

Number of factors considered 11 9 8 10 9 7 Table IV.

Mean (m) 2.96 3.45 3.53 3.08 3.23 3.61 Calculation of
Standard deviation (SD) 0.94 0.81 1.04 0.87 0.79 0.89 Cronbach’s α (CA)
Cronbach’s α (CA) 0.7425 0.7168 0.7078 0.7719 0.6833 0.8288 for major enablers

implementation of TPM, top management leadership plays a crucial role (Panneerselvam,

2012; Attri et al., 2012b; Poduval et al., 2013). Commitment of top management should be
strongly demonstrated toward TPM implementation and they should explain the
significance and benefits of it (Panneerselvam, 2012; Okpala and Onyekachi, 2016). The
culture of an organization should be like that in which employees can feel motivated and
free to give their maximum (Poduval et al., 2015). Employee empowerment and motivation
can improve the willingness of employees to take part in TPM implementation. Lazim et al.
(2008) discussed in their study that the total employee involvement helps to accomplish the
goals which has been set by top management. Total employee involvement for a long time
continuously is also one critical factor for TPM implementation (Poduval et al., 2015). It is
BIJ the duty of the top management to retain their employees for a long time by providing some
25,8 remuneration and other benefits. The coordination between maintenance and production
department should be high for the TPM implementation in Indian manufacturing
organizations successfully (Ahuja and Khamba, 2008b, c). Mwanza and Mbohwa (2015)
have said that the operators and maintenance personnel can empower through training.
This should be conducted in a sustainable manner to maximize the efficiency of the
2616 equipment in order to eliminate the operators’ mistakes and improper repair.
2.1.2 Work-related TPM enablers (WRTR). These enablers are related to the work
performed in an organization. It also includes five sub-enablers as computerized
maintenance management system (CMMS), team and team spirit, work culture, workplace
environment and attitude change. The absence of CMMS in an organization acts as a critical
barrier in the TPM implementation (Ahuja and Khamba, 2008b). CMMS has now become the
standard for planning and tracking maintenance activities (Lamendola, 2003). Poduval et al.
(2015) have formed a committee by comprising employees from different departments
including production, maintenance, quality, engineering. These teams must be trained in the
design, operation and maintenance to get success in TPM implementation. These cross-
functional teams can solve the problems and find their root cause which is very essential for
any improvement in the organization (Ahuja and Khamba, 2008b, c). The work culture of an
organization is playing a vital role in the TPM implementation (Lawrence, 1999). The top
management should emphasis on work culture among employees and their perception for
the implementation of TPM effectively. Attri et al. (2012a) reported in their study that the
cultural resistance is the main barrier to TPM implementation. Work culture also referred as
the climate or atmosphere in an organization may also be another critical enabler of
improvement concept (Grover et al., 2006). An employee empowerment in any organization
promotes the sense of belongingness among operators and treats them with dignity and due
respect (Kulkarni and Dabade, 2013). Change in the attitude of an employee is difficult as
compared to providing knowledge about any issue, but not impossible, sometimes by
empowering the employees can change the attitude (Grover et al., 2006).
2.1.3 Maintenance-related TPM enablers (MRTE). These enablers are related to
maintenance performed in an organization. It also includes five sub-enablers as preventive
maintenance, autonomous maintenance, mobile maintenance, availability of tools and
instruments, and maintenance management. According to Poduval et al. (2015), the routine
maintenance task like cleaning, greasing and lubrication, tightening of nuts and replacing
oil should be done by operating personnel while the maintenance personnel is busy with
some other maintenance tasks. It is known as autonomous maintenance, one of the most
important pillars of TPM. Mobile maintenance is also one of the most important pillars of
the TPM model for SMEs. Jain et al. (2015) implemented this concept in a small-scale
industry producing irrigation pipe and found a drastic change in OEE of machines becomes
60–70 percent, which was less than 50 percent of all the machines. Lamendola (2003) told
that always use the right tool for any job while doing maintenance work. Many
organizations invest a lot of money on purchasing and taking care of tools and instruments
which are used in their organization (Poduval et al., 2013).
2.1.4 Knowledge-related TPM enablers (KRTE). These enablers are related to the
knowledge which the employees have in an organization. It includes four sub-enablers as
educated workforce, education and training of employees, long-term planning and
knowledge about TPM program. A number of researchers as Rodrigues and Hatakeyama
(2006), Ahuja and Khamba (2008c) and Attri et al. (2012a) reported in their study about the
role of education and training on TPM implementation. Top management of an
organization should design a training program, according to the type of training their
employees needed (Suzuki, 1994). According to Poduval et al. (2013), the organization
should spend on training and education of their employees because the cost incurred on TPM
training is very less as compared to the benefits achieved. Educated workforce is regarded implementation
as valuable asset of any organization (Grover et al., 2006). A centralized steering in Indian SMEs
committee should be formed for providing training to employees in all the functional areas
for making multiskilled employees (Ahuja and Khamba, 2007). Sufficient knowledge of
TPM concept and educated workforce will result toward the successful TPM
implementation (Poduval et al., 2013). All the employees must be aware about the 2617
concept of TPM and its benefits. Poduval et al. (2015) identified a “communication gap”
between top management and employees as the main reason for unsuccessful TPM
implementation in many organizations. Poduval et al. (2013) reported in their study that
organizations must send their senior personnel to get knowledge about TPM
implementation in that industry in which TPM has been successfully implemented
before announcing its implementation in their own industry.
2.1.5 Organization-related TPM enablers (ORTE). These enablers are related to various
organizational issues. It also includes four sub-enablers as organizational policy, availability
of sufficient space for work, availability of resources and rewards and incentives. The
organizational objectives and policies toward the TPM implementation program should be
clearly defined to all the employees to get success in its implementation (Attri et al., 2014).
These sub-enablers are the result of discussion with experts.
2.1.6 Customer-related enablers. These enablers are related to customers. It also includes
four sub-enablers as quality, safety, health and environment, continuous improvement and
customer satisfaction. Equipment failures in the production line may decrease product
quality and production rate also (Tsarouhas, 2007). Continuous improvement, which is also
called Kaizen, is the small steps of improvement for achieving employee ownership in the
process. Manufactured product that does not satisfy the customers’ expectations will be
considered as total waste for an organization (Dean and Bowen, 1994).

3. Methodology
In this study, the GTA methodology is used to calculate the IOETPM for TPM
implementation in Indian SMEs. The flow chart of main steps used in this methodology to
find the intensity of Enablers by using GTA is as shown in Figure 2.

4. Graph theoretic approach (GTA)

GTA consists of three stages: diagraph representation, making matrix and permanent
function (PF) calculation (Attri et al., 2013). Digraph is a graphical representation of
enablers and is used for visual analysis. Matrix is a mathematical representation of
these digraphs and is used to calculate the value of PF. This PF value represents the effect
of enablers by a single index. This single index is very useful for ranking of factors,
comparing two units and optimum selection of factors. The detailed procedure of
GTA is discussed by calculating the intensity of these enablers for the considered
organization in this paper. For completing the above task, a medium-size organization (say
A situated in Madhya Pradesh) has considered for checking the feasibility/suitability of
TPM implementation.

4.1 Digraph representation

Digraph is prepared with nodes (Eis, which denotes the inheritance of TPM enablers) and
edges (eijs, which denotes the interdependence of the TPM enablers). The major enablers
have already identified from questionnaire survey (114 samples), literature review and
expert opinion. An expert team is formed for establishing the interdependencies among
these six major enablers. This team consists six senior managers (from this considered
BIJ Questionnaire
Literature Expert
25,8 Review Survey
Opinion

Identification of key Enablers for TPM

Implementationin Indian SMEs

2618 Human Related Work Related Maintenance Related

TPM Enablers TPM Enablers TPM Enablers

Knowledge Organization Related Customer Related

Related TPM TPM Enablers TPM Enablers

Graph Theoretic Approach (GTA)

Draw Digraph for Enablers and Sub-enablers

Convert the Diagraph of sub-enablers into matrix form

Substitute the values of inheritance and interdependency in the matrix of sub-enablers

Evaluate the permanent function for the matrix of sub-enablers

Graphical Representation of Permanent Function

(It represents the total number of groups)
Figure 2.
Methodology for Convert the Diagraph of Enablers into matrix form
calculating the
intensity of enablers
Substitute the values of permanent function of sub-enablers
for TPM
implementation in and interdependency in the matrix of Enablers
Indian SMEs
Evaluate the permanent function for the matrix of Enablers (IOETPM)

organization) and four academicians (from an academic institute of Madhya Pradesh).

These members have been selected on the basis of their seniority, knowledge, experience
and product knowledge. This team has analyzed these already identified enablers and
established an interrelationship among them in the considered organization as shown in
Figure 3. It may change as the organization changes. This model has converted into
digraph to represent the interdependencies as shown in Figure 4.

Human-related TPM
Ennablers (E1) (HRTE)

Customer-related TPM Work-related TPM

Ennablers (E6) (HRTE) Ennablers (E2) (WRTE)

Figure 3. Organization-related TPM Maintenance-related TPM

Systematic Ennablers (E5) (ORTE) Ennablers (E3) (MRTE)
representation of key
enablers for TPM
implementation in
Knowledge-related TPM
Indian SMEs
Ennablers (E4) (KRTE)
 TPM
E1
implementation
in Indian SMEs
E6
E2

2619

E5 E3
Figure 4.
Digraph
representation of key
enablers for TPM
implementation in
E4 Indian SMEs

Here, a single arrow represents the interdependency of one enabler on another and two
arrows represents the mutual interdependence of both the enablers. This interdependency is
the decision of the expert team in this particular considered organization only.

4.2 Matrix representation

Digraph shows the graphical representation of enablers for TPM implementation and their
interrelationships at the system level. Digraph representation is suitable for a limited number
of enablers, but when enablers are large in numbers then prepared matrix. The graphical
analysis of such a problem will be very difficult for the researchers. In such cases, matrix
representation is used to overcome this difficulty. Matrix representation of the enablers for
TPM implementation shows a one-to-one representation. The matrix for TPM enablers is a
6 × 6 matrix in this study. The diagonal elements Ei (i ¼ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 in this case) show the
impact of TPM enablers in the TPM implementation process and non-diagonal elements eij
represents the interdependence of TPM enablers on each others. The matrix (E*) for the
digraph of TPM enablers at system level as shown in Figure 4 is written as:
8 9
> E 1 E 2 E 3 E 4 E 5 E 6 > Enablers ðE i Þ
>
> >
>
>E e
> >E
> 12 e13 e14 e15 e16 > >
>
>
1
>
>
1
>
> >
>
>
< 0 E 2 e 23 0 0 e 26 > E
= 2
n
E ¼ 0 e32 E 3 0 0 e36 E 3 : (1)
>
> >
>
> e41 e42 e43 E 4 0
> e > E4
>
>
>
46 >
>
>
> >
>
>
> 0 0 e 53 e 54 E 5 e 56 >
> E5
>
: >
;
e61 e62 0 e64 0 E6 E6

4.3 PF representation
PF is a mathematical expression of TPM enablers in symbolic form. It is a mathematical
model and can be used for calculating the intensity of enablers for TPM implementation.
The PF calculation is same as determinant of matrix calculation but use only positive sign for
all the terms because the negative sign gives the loss of some information
(Rao and Padmanabhan, 2010). Due to this ultimate property, many researchers (Rao, 2004,
2006a, b, c; Rao and Padmanabhan, 2006, 2007, 2010; Kulkarni, 2005; Grover et al., 2006;
BIJ Thakkar et al., 2007; Raj et al., 2010b; Singh and Singru, 2013; Attri et al., 2014) have used this
25,8 PF calculation concept in their study. The general equation of PF for TPM enabler’s matrix
(6×6) can be written as:
Y
6 XXXXXX 
Per ðE Þ ¼ Ei þ eij eji ðE k E l E m E n Þ
1 i j k l m n
2620 XXXXXX 
þ eij ejk eki þeik ekj eji E l E m E n
i j k l m n
"
XXXXXX 
þ eij eji ðekl elk ÞE m E n :
i j k l m n
#
XXXXXX 
þ eij ejk ekl eli þeil elk ekj eji E m E n
i j k l m n
"( )
XXXXXX 
þ eij eji ðekl elm emk þekm eml elk ÞE n :
i j k l m n
( )#
XXXXXX 
þ eij ejk ekl elm emi þeim eml elk ekj eji E n
i j k l m n
"( )
XXXXXX 
þ eij eji ðekl elm emn enk þekn enm eml elk Þ :
i j k l m n
( )
XXXXXX 
þ eij ejk eki ðelm emn enl Þ
i j k l m n
( )
XXXXXX 
þ eij eji ðekl elk Þðemn enm Þ
i j k l m n
( )#
XXXXXX 
þ eij ejk eki elm emn eni þein enm eml elk ekj eji : (2)
i j k l m n

4.4 Intensity of TPM enablers (IOE)TPM

The intensity of TPM enablers [(IOE)TPM] will show the strength of the enablers in the TPM
implementation process. In this research work, the IOETPM has been calculated to show the
influence of these enablers in TPM implementation. The intensity of enablers for TPM
Implementation can be defined as the function of TPM enablers:
 
ðI OE ÞTPM ¼ f ðTPM EnablersÞ ¼ f ðE 1 Þ; ðE 2 Þ; ðE 3 Þ; ðE 4 Þ; ðE 5 Þ; ðE 6 Þ
¼ Permanent Function of TPM Enabler Matrix:
The tool (IOE)TPM is versatile and has some features as:
(1) IOETPM acts as a mean to calculate the impact of TPM enablers in an organization; and
(2) IOETPM is the single index to measure the rate of success of TPM implementation in
an organization.
The values of Ei and eij must be known before calculating the value of (IOE)TPM. TPM
Faisal et al. (2007c) and Rao (2007) had already said that the field survey and previous implementation
research data can also be used to calculate (IOE)TPM. A certain numerical value is to be in Indian SMEs
assigned to different categories of enablers at the system and sub-system level for the
quantitative measurement of each category of enablers (Raj et al., 2010b). Ranked value
(i.e. Inheritance scale from 1 to 9) is used, in case of qualitative data, to find the (IOE)TPM.
The ranked value of TPM enabler depends upon the value of sub-enablers, for example, 2621
the ranked value for HRTE (E1) will depend upon top management leadership (E11),
motivation (E21), total employees involvement (E31), coordination between departments (E41)
and employees empowerment (E51). If the impact of these sub-enablers is very high,
then assign a rank of 7, 8 or 9; when the impact is the medium, then assigned a rank of
4, 5 or 6; otherwise, a lower rank 1, 2 or 3 is assigned for TPM enablers. The same
concept of assigning the values has been used in the study of Grover et al. (2006), Raj et al.
(2010b) and Gurumurthy et al. (2013). Wani and Gandhi used previous data while
Kulkarni (2005) used data collected from questionnaire to select the value for
enablers. Many researchers (Kulkarni, 2005; Singh and Agrawal, 2008; Singh and
Singru, 2013; Attri et al., 2014) considered same number of factors in each category,
while Thakkar et al. (2007), Raj et al. (2010b) and Kumar and Garg (2012) considered an
unequal number of factors in different categories. In current research, five sub-enablers
are used in the first three categories and four sub-enablers are used in remaining
three categories.
A medium-size organization (say A) (name of the company has not been disclosed for
confidential purpose) has considered for justifying the significance of the methodology
adopted in this research. This considered organization is producing edible oil and
deoiled cake. First of all, prepared digraphs at the sub-system level as per the decision of
the expert team as shown in Figure 5. In these diagraphs, subscript denotes the
enablers and superscript indicates the sub-enablers. To find the (IOE)TPM, these diagraphs
have converted into matrix form by putting the inheritance and interdependence
values. This methodology is used to calculate the (IOE)TPM in this considered
organization. The opinion of every member of the expert team has been taken and
requested them to rank the sub-enablers and their interdependencies (as per the two
scales, i.e. 1–10 for inheritance and 1–5 for interdependencies as shown in Table V ). The
responses of each member of the expert team have been recorded as shown in Table VI.
The average value of these responses has been used for converting diagraphs into the
matrix. Also check the validity and reliability of these responses by calculating their
mean (m), standard deviation (SD) and coefficient of variation as shown in Table VII.
Since the SD is less than the mean for all the enablers and sub-enablers, it shows the
responses are significantly reliable. The researchers (Grover et al., 2006; Attri et al., 2013;
Raj et al., 2010a, b; Singh and Singru, 2013) already used these ranked values in their
study for converting digraphs to matrix for the calculation of the intensity of enablers
or barriers:

 
8 9 Sub  enablers E 1i
>
> 9 3 4 4 4>
>
>
> >1
>
>
<4 7 0 0 4>
>
>
=
n
E1 ¼ 0 0 8 2 3 2 : (3)
>
> >
>
>
> 0 0 3 6 >3
4>
>
> >
>
: ;
4 3 0 3 9 4
5
BIJ Human related TPM Inheritance and Work related TPM Enablers Inheritance and
Enablers Interdependencies Interdependencies
25,8
E11 = 9, E12 E21 = 6, E22
= 7, E13 = 8, E14 E21 = 7, E23 = 8, E24
E11
= 6, E15 = 9, = 8, E25 = 9,
e112 = 3, e113 e212 =1, e213
E15 = 4, e114 = 4, e115 E25 E22 = 2, e214 = 2, e223
E12
2622 = 4, e121 =4, e125 = 4, e224 = 4, e225
= 4, e134 = 2, e135 = 3, e232 = 3, e234
= 3, e143 = 3, e145 = 4, e242 = 4, e243
E13 E24 E23 = 4, e245 = 2, e252
E14 = 4, e151 =4, e152
= 3, e253 = 3, e254
= 3, e154 = 3
=3
Maintenance related TPM Inheritance and Knowledge related TPM Inheritance and
Enablers Interdependencies Enablers Interdependencies

E31 = 8, E32 E41 = 8, E42

E13 = 8, E33 = 7, E 34
E41 = 9, E43 = 6, E44
= 6, E35 = 8,
e12 = 7, e412 = 4, e413
3 = 3, e3
13

= 4, e15
3 = 4, e3
21 = 2, e414 = 3, e421
E35 E32
= 2, e23
3 = 3, e25
3 = 4, e423 = 2, e424
= 4, e3 = 3, e35
32 E44 E42
3 = 3, e434
= 3, e3 = 3, e3
41 42
= 2, e441= 3, e442
= 4, e43
3 = 3, e3
45
= 3, e443 = 2
E34 E33 E43
= 3, e51
3 = 2, e3
52
=2
Organization related TPM Inheritance and Customer related TPM Inheritance and
Enablers Interdependencies Enablers Interdependencies

E51 = 7, E52 E61 = 7, E62

E51 E61 = 6, E63 = 8, E64
= 8, E53 = 9, E54
= 8, e512 = 4, e513 = 9, e613 = 3, e614
= 3, e514 = 2, e523 = 2, e623 = 3, e631
Figure 5. E52 = 3, e534 = 3, e541 E62 = 2, e532 = 3, e634
Digraphs and E54 E64
= 3, e543 = 3 = 4, e641= 3, e643
inheritance and
interdependence =2
for TPM enablers E53 E63

Quantification of TPM enablers (Eis) Quantification of TPM enablers (Eijs)

Qualitative measure of Assigned value to Qualitative measure of Assigned value to
inheritance inheritance (Eis) interdependencies interdependencies (Eijs)

Exceptionally high 9 Very strong 5

Very high 8 Strong 4
High 7 Medium 3
Above average 6 Weak 2
Average 5 Very weak 1
Below average 4
Table V. Low 3
Scale for inheritance Very low 2
and interdependence Exceptionally low 1
 TPM
implementation
in Indian SMEs

2623

Table VI.
Responses of
Note: Responses are on the basis of scale of inheritance and interdependence expert team

Enablers/
sub-enablers E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6

Mean 7.0 7.6 7.4 7.5 8.0 7.5 3.46 3.0 3.07 2.8 3.0 2.75
Standard
deviation (SD) 1.58 1.14 0.89 1.29 0.82 1.29 0.66 0.96 0.73 0.79 0.58 0.71 Table VII.
Coefficient of Summary of
variation (in %) 22.6 15 12 17.2 10.25 17.2 19.1 32 23.8 28.2 19.33 25.8 responses of experts
BIJ Similarly, the matrix for other TPM Enablers can be written as: 
25,8 8 9 Sub  enablers E 2i
>
> 6 1 2 2 0 >
>
>
> >
> 1
>
> 0 7 4 4 3 >
>
< =
E n2 ¼ 0 3 8 4 0 2 ; (4)
>
> >
>
>
> 0 4 4 8 2 >
> 3
2624 >
> >
>
: ;
0 3 3 3 9 4
5
 
8 9 Sub  enablers E 3i
>
> 8 3 4 0 4> >
>
> >
> 1
>
> 2 8 3 0 4 >
>
< =
E n3 ¼ 0 3 7 0 3 2 ; (5)
>
> >3
>3 4 3 6 3>
> >
>
>
> >
>
: ;
2 2 0 0 8 4
5

 
8 9 Sub  enablers E 4i
> 8 4 2 3>
>
> >
>
<4 9 2 3=1
E n4 ¼ 2 ; (6)
>
> 0 0 6 2>>
>
: >
;3
3 3 2 7
4

 
8 9 Sub  enablers E 5i
> 7 0 3 2>
>
> >
>1
< 0 6 3 0=
E n5 ¼ 2 ; (7)
>2
> 3 8 4>>
>
: >
;3
3 0 2 9
4

 
8 9 Sub  enablers E 6i
> 7 4 3 2>
>
> >
>
<0 8 3 0=1
E n6 ¼ 2 : (8)
>
> 0 0 9 3>>
>
: >
;3
3 0 3 8
4
The value of a PF for HRTE can be calculated by using equation (2). The value of E1* is:
 
Per E n1 ¼ 9  7  8  6  9 þ9  7  8  4  3 þ9  7  3  9  2 þ9  7  3  3
3 þ9  3  4  8  6 þ9  3  3  4  2 þ4  3  8  6  9 þ4  3
8  4  3 þ4  3  3  2  9 þ4  3  3  3  3 þ4  3  4  2
4 þ4  3  4  6  3 þ4  4  4  8  4 þ4  3  4  3  3 þ4
 TPM
3  4  8  6 þ4  3  4  3  2 þ4  3  4  8  6 þ4  3  4  3 implementation
2 þ4  7  4  2  4 þ4  7  4  6  3 þ4  7  4  8  4 þ4  7
in Indian SMEs

4  3  3 þ4  7  4  8  6 þ4  7  4  3  2 ¼ 70;899:
Similarly, the values of PF of other sub-system level enablers are calculated and given as: 2625
PerðE n2 Þ ¼ 59;832; PerðE n3 Þ ¼ 40;880; PerðE n4 Þ ¼ 5;690; PerðE n5 Þ ¼ 5;292; PerðE n6 Þ
¼ 4;452:

The system-level matrix can be obtained by replacing diagonal elements with the values of a
PF of sub-system level:
     
E 1 ¼ Per E n1 ¼ 70;899; E 2 ¼ Per E n2 ¼ 59;832; E 3 ¼ Per E n3 ¼ 40;880;
     
E 4 ¼ Per E n4 ¼ 5;690; E 5 ¼ Per E n5 ¼ 5;292; E 6 ¼ Per E n6 ¼ 4;452:
And the values of interdependencies at the system level are taken as similar as taken at sub-
system levels. These values are:
e12 ¼ 4; e13 ¼ 3; e14 ¼ 2; e15 ¼ 3; e16 ¼ 3; e23 ¼ 3; e26 ¼ 2; e32 ¼ 3; e36 ¼ 3;

e41 ¼ 2; e42 ¼ 4; e43 ¼ 3; e46 ¼ 2; e53 ¼ 2; e54 ¼ 3; e56 ¼ 1:

The system-level matrix for TPM Enablers can be found out by putting the values of
inheritance and interdependence in Equation (1) as given by the following equation:
8 9
>
> 70;899 4 3 2 3 3 >
> E1
>
> >
>
>
> 0 59;832 3 0 0 2 >
> E2
>
> >
>
>
<0 >
=
3 40;880 0 0 3 E3
En ¼ : (9)
>
> 2 4 3 5;690 0 2 >
> E4
>
> >
>
>
>0 0 2 3 5;292 1 >
> E5
>
> >
>
>
:2 >
3 0 1 0 4;452 ; E 6

The PF of this matrix is calculated by using PF Equations (2) and is found to be 2.6 × 1025.
This value of PF shows the intensity of enablers for TPM implementation (IOETPM) in the
considered organization. Since, the inheritance of each Enabler has calculated at sub-system
level by using GTA. Therefore, the value of inheritance for Enabler at system level
depending upon its sub-enablers. First, calculate maxima and minima of PF at the
sub-system level by assuming the hypothetical maximum (9) and minimum (1) values of
diagonal elements, respectively. For example, maxima of the PF value for HRTE exist when
inheritance of each sub-enabler is maximized, i.e. 9, and the minima exists when inheritance
of each sub-enabler is minimized, i.e. 1 ( from the scale of 1–9 for inheritance). Therefore, the
matrix for each TPM Enablers for its maximum and minimum values is as shown in
Figure 6.
Now the values of (IOETPM)max and (IOETPM)min are calculated by replacing diagonal
elements of matrix at system level as given in Equation (9) by these maximum and
minimum values of inheritance of the particular category. The final matrixes for
(IOETPM)max and (IOETPM)min are given by the following equations, respectively.
BIJ Enablers Maximum value Minimum value

25,8 9 3 4 4 4 1 1 3 4 4 4 1

Human related
TPM Enablers
4 9 0 0 4 2 4 1 0 0 4 2
*
(E1 )max = 0 0 9 2 3 *
(E1 )min = 0 0 1 2 3

(HRTE)
3 3
0 0 3 9 4 4 0 0 3 1 4 4
4 3 0 3 9 5 4 3 0 3 1 5
Per (E1)max =165,786 Per (E1*)min = 6,490
9 1 2 2 0 1 1 1 2 2 0 1
2626 TPM Enablers
Work related
0 9 4 4 3 2 0 1 4 4 3 2
(WRTE) (E2*)max = 0 3 9 4 0 (E2*)min = 0 3 1 4 0
3 3
0 4 4 9 2 4 0 4 4 1 2 4
0 3 3 3 9 5 0 3 3 3 1 5
Per (E2*)max =125,847 Per (E2*)min = 2,175
9 3 4 0 4 1 1 3 4 0 4 1
Enablers (MRTE)

2 9 3 0 4 2 2 1 3 0 4 2
Maintenance
related TPM

(E3*)max = 0 3 9 0 3 3
*
(E3 )min = 0 3 1 0 3 3
3 4 3 9 3 4 3 4 3 1 3 4
2 2 0 0 9 5 2 2 0 0 1 5
Per (E3*)max = 92,664 Per (E3*)min = 407
9 4 2 3 1 1 4 2 3 1
related TPM

4 9 2 3 2 4 1 2 3 2
Knowledge

(E4*)max = (E4*)min =
Enablers
(KRTE)

0 0 9 2 3 0 0 1 2 3
3 3 2 9 4 3 3 2 1 4

Per (E4*)max =10,563 Per (E4*)min = 259

9 4 3 2 1 1 4 3 2 1
Organization
related TPM

(E5*)max = 0 9 3 0 2 (E5*)min = 0 1 3 0 2
Enablers
(ORTE)

0 0 9 3 3 0 0 1 3 3
3 0 3 9 4 3 0 3 1 4

Per (E5*)max = 9,027 Per (E5*)min =151

9 0 3 2 1 1 0 3 2 1
related TPM

Figure 6.
Customer

0 9 3 0 2 0 1 3 0 2
Enablers
(CRTE)

(E6*)max = (E6*)min =
Maximum and 2 3 9 4 3 2 3 1 4 3
minimum values for 3 0 2 9 4 3 0 2 1 4
TPM enablers Per (E6*)min =128
Per (E6*)max = 9,360

 
ðIOETPM Þmax ¼ E n max
8 9
>
> 165;786 4 3 2 3 3 >
> 1
>
> >
>
>
> 0 125;847 3 0 0 2 >
> 2
>
> >
>
>
<0 >
=3
3 92;664 0 0 3
¼ ; (10)
>
> 2 4 3 10;563 0 2 >4
>
>
> >
>
>
> 0 0 2 3 9;027 1 >
>
>
> >
> 5
>
:0 >
;
3 0 1 0 9;360 6
8 9
> 6;490 4 3 2 3 > 1 3
>
> >
>
>
> 0 2;175 3 0 0 >
> 2 2
>
> >
>
>
<0 >
=3
  3 407 0 0 3
ðIOETPM Þmin ¼ E n min ¼ : (11)
>2
> 4 3 259 0 2 >>4
>
> >
>
>
> 151 1 >>
>
> 0 0 2 3 >
> 5
: ;
2 3 0 1 0 128 6
The value of Per (E*)max and Per (E*)min are 1.63×1027 and 2.8×1016, respectively. These are TPM
called the maximum and minimum IOETPM, which indicate the range within which they implementation
can vary. The maximum, minimum and current values of PF for enablers at the system and in Indian SMEs
sub-system levels are given in Table VIII.

5. Discussion
This paper presents a methodology to evaluate the feasibility/suitability of TPM 2627
implementation in Indian SMEs. This is based on the influence of enablers. These enablers
have been obtained through the questionnaire survey, available literature, and expert
opinion. In total, 114 usable responses were obtained from top management of various
Indian SMEs. A medium-size organization has been considered to demonstrate the proposed
methodology. In this research work, the intensity of various TPM enablers has been
calculated by using a GTA methodology to know their influence on TPM implementation in
Indian SMEs. PF is used to obtain the intensity of these enablers. Out of total six TPM
Enablers, the HRTE has maximum intensity for the considered medium-size organization.
Top management leadership, motivation, total employee involvement, coordination between
departments and employees empowerment play a significant role in TPM implementation at
the sub-system level. Many researchers have already explained the importance of top
management in TPM implementation. It is the duty of the top management of the
organization to motivate their employees either by empowering them or by giving some
incentives, rewards so that the participation of employees can increase in the TPM
implementation program. The top management should come forward to make the strategy
on the basis of the intensity of these enablers to implement TPM effectively.
The next important enabler is WRTE, which indicated that the CMMS, team spirit, work
culture, workplace environment, attitude change also play a significant role in TPM
implementation in Indian SMEs. Literature available on the TPM Implementation has
already discussed the necessity of these sub-enablers in TPM Implementation. Work culture
and workplace environment can enhance the willingness of employees to take part in TPM
Implementation. The attitude of employees should be positive so that they can think
positively. Employees should show willingness instead of resistance to adopt TPM.
And the next important category of enabler is MRTE. The maintenance programs as
Preventive maintenance, Autonomous maintenance, and Mobile maintenance should be
strongly implemented in an organization for implementing TPM. Maintenance department
should be sufficiently staffed and motivated in the maintenance program. Tools and
instruments for the maintenance of machines must be available, and the most important
thing is that the expenditure incurred on maintenance tasks should be monitored and
optimized. It is the duty of the production head to motivate their subordinates to take part in
maintenance task and also to establish an autonomous maintenance program.
Subsequent enabler categories are KRTE and ORTE. The training of employees should
be conducted on a regular basis for educating them and providing knowledge about TPM
and its benefits. Also, the organizational policy should be transparent for everybody to get
promotion, any rewards or incentives. The last enabler of this study is CRTE. Quality
plays a significant role in customer satisfaction. Nowadays, customer satisfaction is
needed to survive in this competitive environment which can only be possible by

           
PF Per E n1 Per E n2 Per E n3 Per E n4 Per E n5 Per E n6 Per E*
Table VIII.
Maximum value 165,786 125,847 92,664 10,563 9,027 9,360 1.63 × 1027 Interval for maxima
Minimum value 6,490 2,175 407 259 151 128 2.8 × 1016 and minima
Current value 70,899 59,832 40,880 5,690 5,292 4,452 2.6 × 1025 of PF values
BIJ continuous improvement. Safety, health and environment are also playing a vital role in
25,8 TPM implementation.
Since the value of Per (E*) at the system level represents the intensity of enablers for
implementing TPM in Indian SMEs, Table VIII illustrates that the current value of PF for
enablers at the system and sub-system level is very nearer to the corresponding maximum
value and very far from the corresponding minimum value. This comparison is
2628 mathematically characterized the feasibility/suitability of any organization to implement
TPM successfully based on the availability of these enablers and their interdependencies.

6. Conclusions
TPM implementation is a capital investment intensive and complex system. In order to get
the best economic benefits, procedure and implementation of TPM should carefully be
decided. A high level of maturity on the part of top management is required for successful
implementation of TPM in Indian SMEs. Motivation, total employee involvement,
employee empowerment, team spirit, positive attitude, various maintenance systems,
education and training, available resources, etc., are also the key enablers at the
sub-system level in this research. Therefore, it becomes necessary to understand
the nature of various enablers and their impact on the implementation of TPM in Indian
SMEs successfully.
In this research, a methodology has been proposed to evaluate the feasibility/
suitability of TPM implementation in the considered organization by using GTA. GTA is
both qualitative and quantitative methods for modeling the manufacturing system of any
organization to bring it feasible/suitable for TPM implementation. It helps in modeling the
various TPM enablers and their interdependency. The PF calculation gives a single
numerical value (i.e. IOETPM ) for this considered organization. A manufacturing system of
Indian SMEs can also be compared with knowing their PF values for the feasibility/
suitability of TPM implementation. It is recommended to calculate the value of PF for
selected few organizations which are using the TPM concept in a useful manner and also
set their range to get the optimal result by using this GTA methodology. The organization
which is highly interested to adopt the TPM concept, the IOETPM at the system level
should be calculated. If the value of IOETPM lies within the predefined set range, then it
should found to be suitable for TPM implementation, and if not, then it should be
compared with an organization in which TPM has been successfully implemented.
The value of the IOETPM should also be compared at the sub-system level and improve
weak enablers and again evaluate the value of IOETPM at the system level. Now, if this
value is within the required range, then the organization should be considered as being
feasible/suitable for TPM implementation.

6.1 Practical implications and scope for future research

This study has practical implications for both the decision makers in the manufacturing
industry as well as for the academic researchers. This study provides an easy-to-use
methodology for the practical decision makers in the manufacturing industry to improve
the performance of their organization by implementing TPM in Indian SMEs without
necessarily disturbing the normal functioning of the organization. It can provide the
analysis of how to check the feasibility/suitability of TPM implementation in Indian
SMEs before actual implementation. The present work is limited to identifying the
feasibility/suitability for TPM implementation in the targeted organizations by
calculating IOETPM. The feasibility of implementation of TPM in Indian SMEs can also
be checked by calculating the coefficient of similarity and dissimilarity. It saves money
and time in the implementation.
Acknowledgments TPM
The authors are grateful to the Editor-in-chief and the respected referees for their valuable implementation
comments and suggestions that led to a substantial improvement of the original manuscript. in Indian SMEs
The authors would like to thank Punjab Technical University, Kapurthala, for providing an
opportunity to do the research work. The authors would also like to thank University
Grants Commission (UGC), New Delhi for providing funding for this research work under
Research Award Scheme [(No. F.30-1/2014/RA-2014-16-GE-PUN-5159 (SA-II) and dated 2629
February 20, 2015].

References
Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S. (2007), “An evaluation of TPM implementation initiatives in an Indian
manufacturing enterprise”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 13 No. 4,
pp. 338-352.
Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S. (2008a), “An evaluation of TPM initiatives in Indian industry for
enhanced manufacturing performance”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability
Management, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 147-172.
Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S. (2008b), “Strategies and success factors for overcoming challenges in
TPM implementation in Indian manufacturing industry”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 123-147.
Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S. (2008c), “Total productive maintenance: literature review and
directions”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 25 No. 7,
pp. 709-756.
Ahuja, I.P.S. and Kumar, P. (2009), “A case study of total productive maintenance implementation at
precision tube mills”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 241-258.
Almeanazel, O.T.R. (2010), “Total productive maintenance review and overall equipment effectiveness
measurement”, Jordan Journal of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Vol. 4 No. 4,
pp. 517-522.
Amin, S.S., Atre, R., Vardia, A., Gupta, V. and Sebastian, B. (2013), “Indigenous development amongst
challenges”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 62 No. 3,
pp. 323-338.
Ammenberg, J. and Hjelm, O. (2003), “Tracing business and environmental effects of environmental
management systems – a study of networking small and medium-sized enterprises using a joint
environmental management system”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 12,
pp. 163-174.
Anand, G. and Bahinipati, B.K. (2012), “Measuring horizontal collaboration intensity in supply chain: a
graph-theoretic approach”, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 23 Nos 10-11, pp. 801-816.
Anbanandam, R., Banwet, D.K. and Shankar, R. (2011), “Evaluation of supply chain collaboration: a
case of apparel retail industry in India”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 82-98.
Arshinder, K.A. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2009), “A framework for evaluation of coordination by contracts:
a case of two-level supply chains”, Computers and Industrial Engineering, Vol. 56 No. 4,
pp. 1177-1191.
Attri, R., Dev, N. and Sharma, V. (2013), “Graph theoretic approach (GTA) – a multi-attribute decision
making (MADM) technique”, Research Journal of Engineering Sciences, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 50-53.
Attri, R., Grover, S. and Dev, N. (2014), “A graph theoretic approach to evaluate the intensity of barriers
in the implementation of total productive maintenance (TPM)”, International Journal of
Production Research, Vol. 52 No. 10, pp. 3032-3051.
Attri, R., Grover, S., Dev, N. and Kumar, D. (2012a), “Analysis of Barriers of Total Productive
Maintenance (TPM)”, International Journal System Assurance Engineering and Management,
Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 365-377.
BIJ Attri, R., Grover, S., Dev, N. and Kumar, D. (2012b), “An ISM approach for modelling the enablers in the
25,8 implementation of total productive maintenance (TPM)”, International Journal System
Assurance Engineering and Management, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 313-326.
Black, S.A. and Porter, L.J. (1996), “Identification of critical factors of TQM”, Decision Science, Vol. 27
No. 1, pp. 1-19.
Brah, S.A. and Chang, W.K. (2004), “Relationship between total productive maintenance and
2630 performance”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 42 No. 12, pp. 2383-2401.
Chakladar, N.D., Das, R. and Chakraborty, S. (2009), “A digraph-based expert system for nontraditional
machining processes selection”, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
Vol. 43 Nos 3-4, pp. 226-237.
Dean, J.W. and Bowen, D.E. (1994), “Management theory and total quality: improving research and
practice through theory development”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 9 No. 3,
pp. 392-418.
Dev, N., Samsher and Kachhwaha, S.S. (2012), “System modeling and analysis of a combined cycle
power plant”, International Journal of System Assurance and Engineering Management, Vol. 4
No. 4, pp. 353-364.
Dev, N., Samsher, Kachhwaha, S.S. and Attri, R. (2013), “GTA-based framework for evaluating the role
of design parameters in cogeneration cycle power plant efficiency”, Ain Shams Engineering
Journal, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 273-284.
Faisal, M.N., Banwet, D.K. and Shankar, R. (2006), “Mapping supply chains on risk and customer
sensitivity dimensions”, Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 106 No. 6, pp. 878-895.
Faisal, M.N., Banwet, D.K. and Shankar, R. (2007a), “An approach to measure supply chain agility”,
International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 79-98.
Faisal, M.N., Banwet, D.K. and Shankar, R. (2007b), “Information risks management in supply chains:
an assessment and mitigation framework”, Journal of Enterprise Information Management,
Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 677-699.
Faisal, M.N., Banwet, D.K. and Shankar, R. (2007c), “Quantification of risk mitigation environment of
supply chains using graph theory and matrix methods”, European Journal of Industrial
Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 22-39.
Faisal, M.N., Banwet, D.K. and Shankar, R. (2007d), “Supply chain agility: analysing the enablers”,
International Journal of Agile Systems and Management, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 76-91.
Gadakh, V.S. and Shinde, V.B. (2011), “Selection of cutting parameters in side milling operation using
graph theory and matrix approach”, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, Vol. 56 Nos 9-12, pp. 857-863.
Gandhi, O.P. and Agrawal, V.P. (1992), “FMEA – a digraph and matrix approach”, Reliability
Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 147-158.
Gandhi, O.P. and Agrawal, V.P. (1996), “Failure cause analysis – a structural approach”, Journal of
Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol. 118 No. 4, pp. 434-440.
Garg, R.K., Agrawal, V.P. and Gupta, V.K. (2006), “Selection of power plants by evaluation and
comparison using graph theoretical methodology”, Electrical Power and Energy Systems, Vol. 28
No. 6, pp. 429-435.
Garg, R.K., Gupta, V.K. and Agrawal, V.P. (2007), “Quality evaluation of a thermal power plant by
graph-theoretical methodology”, International Journal of Power and Energy Systems, Vol. 27
No. 1, pp. 42-48.
Grover, S., Agrawal, V.P. and Khan, I.A. (2004), “A digraph approach to TQM evaluation of an
Industry”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 42 No. 19, pp. 4031-4053.
Grover, S., Agrawal, V.P. and Khan, I.A. (2005), “Human resource performance index in TQM
environment”, International Journal of Management Practice, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 131-151.
Grover, S., Agrawal, V.P. and Khan, I.A. (2006), “Role of human factor in TQM: a graph theoretic
approach”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 447-468.
Gurumurthy, A., Mazumdar, P. and Muthusubramanian, S. (2013), “Graph theoretic approach for TPM
analysing the readiness of an organisation for adapting lean thinking: a case study”, International implementation
Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 396-427, available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/
IJOA-04-2013-0652 in Indian SMEs
Haleem, A., Sushil, Quadri, M.A. and Kumar, S. (2012), “Analysis of critical success factors of world
class manufacturing practice: an application of interpretative structural modeling and
interpretive ranking process”, Production Planning & Control: The management of Operations,
Vol. 23 No. 10, pp. 722-734. 2631
Hartmann, E. (2000), “Prescription for Total TPM Success”, Maintenance Technology Magazine Online,
available at: www.mt-online.com/april2000/prescription-for-total-tpm-success
Jain, A., Bhatti, R. and Singh, H. (2015), “OEE enhancement in SMEs through mobile maintenance: a
TPM concept”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 32 No. 5,
pp. 503-516.
Joshi, R., Banwet, D.K., Shankar, R. and Gandhi, J. (2012), “Performance improvement of cold chain in
an emerging economy”, Production Planning and Control: the Management of Operations,
Vol. 23 Nos 10-11, pp. 817-836.
Jutla, D., Bodorik, P. and Dhaliqal, J. (2002), “Supporting the e-business readiness of small and medium-
sized enterprises: approaches and metrics”, Internet Research: Electronic Networking
Applications and Policy, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 139-164.
Kaur, A., Kanda, A. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2006), “A graph theoretic approach for supply chain
coordination”, International Journal of Logistics and System Management, Vol. 2 No. 4,
pp. 321-341.
Kigsirisin, S., Sirawit Pussawiro, S. and Noohawm, O. (2016), “Approach for total productive
maintenance evaluation in water productivity: a case study at Mahasawat water treatment
plant”, Procedia Engineering, Vol. 154, pp. 260-267.
Kiran, C.P., Clement, S. and Agrawal, V.P. (2011), “Design for X-abilities of a mechatronic system – a
concurrent engineering and graph theory based approach”, Concurrent Engineering, Vol. 19
No. 1, pp. 55-70.
Kiran, C.P., Clement, S. and Agrawal, V.P. (2012), “Quality modelling and analysis of a
mechatronic system”, International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Vol. 12
No. 1, pp. 1-28.
Koulouriotis, D.E. and Ketipi, M.K. (2011), “A fuzzy digraph method for robot evaluation and selection”,
Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 38 No. 9, pp. 11901-11910.
Kulkarni, A. and Dabade, B.M. (2013), “Investigation of human aspect in total productive maintenance:
literature review”, International Journal of Engineering Research and Development, Vol. 5 No. 10,
pp. 27-36.
Kulkarni, S. (2005), “Graph theory and matrix approach for performance evaluation of TQM in Indian
industries”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 509-526.
Kumar, A., Clement, S. and Agrawal, V.P. (2010), “Structural modeling and analysis of an effluent
treatment process for electroplating-a graph theoretic approach”, Journal of Hazardous
Materials, Vol. 179 Nos 1-3, pp. 748-761.
Kumar, A., Clement, S. and Agrawal, V.P. (2011a), “Concurrent design of electroplating system for
X-abilities: a graph theoretic approach”, International Journal of Industrial and Systems
Engineering, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 350-371.
Kumar, A., Clement, S. and Agrawal, V.P. (2011b), “Quality modelling and analysis of electroplating
system using graph theory matrix approach”, International Journal of Productivity and Quality
Management, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 85-112.
Kumar, R. and Garg, R.K. (2012), “Structural analysis, modeling and development of algorithm of a
robotic system”, Aryabhatta Journal of Mathematics & Informatics, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 325-339.
Lamendola, M. (2003), “Top tools of maintenance”, Electrical Construction and Maintenance,
February 1.
BIJ Lawrence, J.J. (1999), “Use mathematical modelling to give your TPM implementation effort an extra
25,8 boost”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 62-69.
Lazim, H.M., Ramayah, T. and Norzieiriani, A. (2008), “Total productive maintenance and performance:
a Malaysian SME experience”, International Review of Business Research Papers, Vol. 4 No. 4,
pp. 237-250.
Mohan, M., Gandhi, O.P. and Agrawal, V.P. (2003), “Systems modeling of a coal based steam power
2632 plant”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part a: Journal of Power and
Energy, Vol. 217 No. 3, pp. 259-277.
Mohan, M., Gandhi, O.P. and Agrawal, V.P. (2004), “Maintenance strategy for a coal based steam power
plant equipment – a graph theoretic approach”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part a: Journal of Power and Energy, Vol. 218 No. 8, pp. 619-636.
Mohan, M., Gandhi, O.P. and Agrawal, V.P. (2007), “Real-time commercial availability index of a steam
power plant: graph theory and matrix method”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part a: Journal of Power and Energy, Vol. 221 No. 7, pp. 885-898.
Mohan, M., Gandhi, O.P. and Agrawal, V.P. (2008), “Real time reliability index of steam power plant – a
systems approach”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part a: Journal of
Power and Energy, Vol. 222 No. 4, pp. 355-369.
Mora, E. (2002), “The right ingredients for a successful TPM or lean implementation”, available at:
www.tpmonline.com
Muduli, K., Govindan, K., Barve, A. and Geng, Y. (2013), “Barriers to green supply chain management
in Indian mining industries: a graph theoretic approach”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 47,
pp. 335-344.
Mwanza, B.G. and Mbohwa, C. (2015), “Design of a total productive maintenance model for effective
implementation: case study of a chemical manufacturing company”, Procedia Manufacturing,
Vol. 4, pp. 461-470.
Nakajima, S. (1988), Total Productive Maintenance, Productivity Press, London.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Okpala, C.C. and Onyekachi, E.M. (2016), “Benefits and challenges of total productive maintenance
implemention”, International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology, Vol. VII No. III,
pp. 196-200.
Panneerselvam, M.K. (2012), “TPM implementation to invigorate manufacturing performance: an
Indian industrial rubric”, International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, Vol. 3
No. 6, pp. 1-10.
Paramasivam, V., Senthil, V. and Ramasamy, N.R. (2011), “Decision making in equipment selection: an
integrated approach with digraph and matrix approach, AHP and ANP”, International Journal
of Advance Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 54 Nos 9-12, pp. 1233-1244.
Poduval, P.S., Pramod, V.R. and Jagathy Raj, V.P. (2013), “Barriers in implementation of TPM in
industries”, International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, Vol. 2 No. 5, pp. 28-33.
Poduval, P.S., Pramod, V.R. and Jagathy Raj, V.P. (2015), “Interpretive structural modelling (ISM) and
its application in implementation off Total Productive Maintenance (TPM)”, International
Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 308-331.
Prabhakaran, R.T.D., Babu, B.J. and Agarwal, V.P. (2006), “Structural modeling and analysis of
composite product system: a graph theoretic approach”, Journal of Composite Materials, Vol. 40
No. 22, pp. 1987-2007.
Qureshi, M.N., Kumar, P. and Kumar, D. (2009), “Selection of 3PL service providers: a combined
approach of AHP and graph theory”, International Journal of Services Technology and
Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 35-60.
Raj, T. and Attri, R. (2010), “Quantifying barriers to implementing”, Total Quality Management (TQM):
European Journal of Industrial Engineering, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 308-335.
Raj, T., Shankar, R. and Suhaib, M. (2008), “An ISM approach for modeling the enablers of flexible TPM
manufacturing system: the case of India”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 46 implementation
No. 24, pp. 6883-6912.
in Indian SMEs
Raj, T., Shankar, R. and Suhaib, M. (2010a), “A graph-theoretic approach to evaluate the intensity of
barriers in the implementation of FMSs”, International Journal of Services and Operations
Management, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 24-52.
Raj, T., Shankar, R. and Suhaib, M. (2010b), “GTA-based framework for evaluating the feasibility of 2633
transition to FMS”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 21 No. 2,
pp. 160-187.
Rao, R.V. (2004), “Digraph and matrix methods for evaluating environmentally conscious
manufacturing programs”, International Journal of Environmentally Conscious Design and
Manufacturing, Vol. 12, pp. 23-33.
Rao, R.V. (2006a), “A decision-making framework model for evaluating flexible manufacturing systems
using digraph and matrix methods”, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, Vol. 30 Nos 11-12, pp. 1101-1110.
Rao, R.V. (2006b), “Selection of a non-traditional machining process using digraph and matrix method”,
Proceedings of the 1st International and 22nd All India Manufacturing Technology Design and
Research (AIMTDR) conference, IIT Roorkee, December 21-23, pp. 979-983.
Rao, R.V. (2006c), “A material selection model using graph theory and matrix methods”, Materials
Science and Engineering, Vol. 431 Nos 1–2, pp. 248-255.
Rao, R.V. (2007), Decision Making in the Manufacturing Environment Using Graph Theory and Fuzzy
Multi Attribute Decision Making Methods, Springer, London.
Rao, R.V. and Padmanabhan, K.K. (2006), “Selection, identification and comparison of industrial robots
using digraph and matrix methods”, Robot Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, Vol. 22 No. 4,
pp. 373-383.
Rao, R.V. and Padmanabhan, K.K. (2007), “Rapid prototyping process selection using graph
theory and matrix approach”, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 194 Nos 1-3,
pp. 81-88.
Rao, R.V. and Padmanabhan, K.K. (2010), “Selection of best product end-of-life scenario using digraph
and matrix methods”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 455-472.
Rodrigues, M. and Hatakeyama, K. (2006), “Analysis of the fall of TPM in companies”, Journal of
Material Processing Technology, Vol. 179 Nos 1-3, pp. 276-279.
Shahanaghi, K. and Yazdian, S.A. (2009), “Analyzing the effects of implementation of Total Productive
Maintenance (TPM) in the manufacturing companies: a system dynamics approach”, England,
UK, World Journal of Modeling and Simulation, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 120-129.
Singh, M., Khan, I.A. and Grover, S. (2011), “Selection of manufacturing process using graph theoretic
approach”, International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Vol. 2
No. 4, pp. 301-311.
Singh, M., Khan, I.A. and Grover, S. (2012), “Development and comparison of quality award: based on
existing quality awards”, International Journal of System Assurance and Engineering
Management, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 209-220.
Singh, R.K., Garg, S.K. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2006), “Strategy development by Indian SMEs in plastic
sector: an empirical study”, Singapore Management Review, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 65-83.
Singh, V. and Agrawal, V.P. (2008), “Structural modelling and integrative analysis of manufacturing
systems using graph theoretic approach”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management,
Vol. 19 No. 7, pp. 844-870.
Singh, V. and Singru, P.M. (2013), “Analysis of restructuring a manufacturing system using graph
theoretic model”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 615-636.
Suzuki, T. (1994), TPM in Process Industries, Productivity Press.
BIJ Thakkar, J., Kanda, A. and Deshmukh, S.G. (2007), “Evaluation of buyer–supplier relationships using
25,8 an integrated mathematical approach of Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) and graph
theoretic matrix”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 92-124.
Tripathi, D. (2005), “Influence of experience and collaboration on effectiveness of quality management
practices: the case of Indian manufacturing”, International Journal of Productivity and
Performance Management, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 23-33.
Tsarouhas, P. (2007), “Implementation of total productive maintenance in the food industry: a case
2634 study”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 5-18.
Venkatesh, S. and Smith, J.S. (2003), “A graph-theoretic, linear-time scheme to detect and resolve
deadlocks in flexible manufacturing cells”, Journal of Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 22 No. 3,
pp. 220-238.
Vinodh, S., Prasanna, M. and Selvan, K.E. (2013), “Evaluation of sustainability using an integrated
approach at process and product level: a case study”, International Journal of Sustainable
Engineering, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 131-141.

Corresponding author
Abhishek Jain can be contacted at: abhi_mpct@rediffmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com