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

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1355-2511.htm

JQME
29,1 A review on the identification of
total productive maintenance
critical success factors for
114 effective implementation in the
Received 25 November 2020
Revised 20 March 2021
manufacturing sector
18 July 2021
Accepted 26 November 2021 Sudhir Chaurey
Shri Govindram Seksaria Institute of Technology and Science, Indore, India
Shyamkumar D. Kalpande
Mechanical Engineering Department,
Guru Gobind Singh College of Engineering and Research Center, Nasik, India
R.C. Gupta
Shri Govindram Seksaria Institute of Technology and Science, Indore, India, and
Lalit K. Toke
Mechanical Engineering Department,
Sandip Institute of Engineering and Management, Nasik, India
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to carry out the literature search on manufacturing organizations and
total productive maintenance (TPM). This research aims at studying TPM attributes and barriers in line with
the TPM framework for effective implementation of TPM. This study identifies the barriers in TPM
implementation and the critical success factors (CSFs) for effective TPM implementation.
Design/methodology/approach – In this manuscript, the study of TPM in the manufacturing sector has
been considered a broad area of the research and emphasis on the TPM literature review, which primarily
relates to the contribution of manufacturing sector and employment availability. Next sections covers TPM
history, importance, justification, pillars, obstacles and TPM implementation procedure and models.
Thereafter author identified the gaps in existing literature.
Findings – The existing literature shows that very few TPM implementation models are available for the
manufacturing sector. The study also found that there is no systematically conducted large-scale empirical
research which deals with TPM implementation. In order to bridge this gap, an investigation into the successful
implementation of TPM in is truly needed. The finding of the literature shows that there is a need of TPM model
specially developed for the manufacturing sector. The identified critical factors derived from the extensive
literature review help to overcome the barriers for effective TPM implementation.
Research limitations/implications – This review study is limited to Indian manufacturing industries. The
identified TPM CSFs are based on the TPM pillars and their sub-factors. This cross-sectional study was based
on the existing TPM model.
Practical implications – This paper can increase the significance of TPM strategy, which could help
managers of organizations to have a better understanding of the benefits of implementing TPM and therefore
enable patient satisfaction within their organizations.
Originality/value – The literature review covers methodical identification of TPM barriers and critical
factors for maintenance performance improvements. It allows the practitioners to apply these identified CSFs
for TPM implementation to achieve an improvement in industrial performance and competitiveness.
Keywords Total productive maintenance (TPM), Contribution of the manufacturing sector in India GDP,
Barriers of TPM, Critical success factors of TPM
Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Paper type General review
Engineering
Vol. 29 No. 1, 2023
pp. 114-135
1. Introduction
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1355-2511
In total productive maintenance (TPM), the word total means total employee involvement
DOI 10.1108/JQME-11-2020-0118 for the total number of manufacturing equipment and processes. Productive means the
effectiveness of resource utilization for more output with optimum input. The Total
maintenance is the activity which focuses on careful management for up keeping the productive
assets and equipment. According to Nakajima (1988), TPM is a manufacturing program
and designed to maximize equipment effectiveness throughout the life span of
maintenance
equipment. According to Ahuja and Khamba (2008, 2007), TPM is a methodology that
aims to increase the availability of existing equipment, and ultimately, it reduces the
capital investment.
TPM can play a significant role to maximize the equipment effectiveness and give long- 115
term profitability. TPM is an important tool, and well-developed and organized maintenance
strategies improve the quality with high productivity. It is observed that the considerable
benefits of TPM have been usually demonstrated in manufacturing large-scale organizations
rather than the small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
According to Willmott (1997), TPM is a tool to maximize the effectiveness of the
equipment. This effectiveness has been achieved by setting and maintaining proper
coordination between people and machines. TPM is an organized and well-defined program
and helps to eliminate the break-down losses and system down time. The study report of
Ahuja and Khamba (2008) relates TPM with capital investment. According to Ahuja and
Khamba, TPM is a methodology that aims to increase the availability of existing equipment,
hence reducing the need for further capital investment. Investment in human resources can
further result in better hardware employment, improved product quality and reduced labor
costs (Jaaron and Backhouse, 2011). The success of business depends on the cost of
operations and maintenance. According to Johansson and Nord (1996), the cost of operations
and maintenance affects the productivity, availability, quality, safety and environment. The
term productivity includes cost, quality, quantity, efforts, time, rework, scrap, working
environment and competitiveness of the industry. In construction industry, productivity is a
key aspect, and TPM plays a major role in achieving the same to become competitive in the
market. The implementation of quality system is also another tool used to get competitive
edge, and TPM is one of the important pillars of quality systems. The study report shows that
there are number of parameters which determine the quality of production. Nevertheless,
proper maintenance of machines is one of the important attributes that determines the
production quality. The man–machine coordination is the basic principle of TPM. The
optimization and effective utilization of machine is the responsibility of all plant personnel
rather than the respective department.
According Nakajima (1989), TPM is a plant improvement methodology, which
enables continuous and rapid improvement of the manufacturing process through the
use of employee involvement, employee empowerment and closed-loop measurement of
result.
The researchers have quoted various useful definitions of TPM. The TPM benefits based
on the TPM definitions have been summarized in following seven benefits of implementing
TPM (Willmott, 1997).
(1) Participation of all employees enhances the efficiency of equipment.
(2) TPM improves reliability, and the reliability leads to product quality and equipment
productivity.
(3) Cost-effective use of equipment throughout its product life cycle time.
(4) TPM training improves the machine life help for organizational asset.
(5) Improved utilization of skilled trades in higher technical areas and more diagnostic
work.
JQME (6) Practical and effective total quality team working example aimed at equipment
29,1 improvement and maintenance prevention.
(7) TPM improves the overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) and increases profitability.
The capacity of the organization is enhanced by an effective maintenance management
system. The maintenance management system develops and implements a TPM system and
cover the entire life of the equipment, spanning all equipment-related fields (planning, use,
116 maintenance, etc.) in the organization with all employee participation. The researchers
(Blanchard, 1997; Cooke, 2003) claim that TPM implementation improves the equipment
availability and reliability and reduces maintenance costs. Cholasuke et al. (2004) quoted that
the implementation of TPM increases product quality and equipment availability and
decreases operating costs. According to Nakajima (1988), TPM integrates production and
maintenance functions. The Japan Institute of Plant Maintenance (JIPM) proposed the eight
pillars of TPM. The introduction of TPM program is based on the implementation of a series
of eight pillars of TPM. These TPM pillars provide the systematic way to optimize plant and
equipment efficiency by creating a perfect relationship between man and equipment. The
TPM pillars are mounted on the 5S practices of the organization.
The implementation of 5S practice is a foundation phase of TPM. The 5S process creates
positive impressions on customers and increases the morale of employees and ultimately the
efficiency of organization. The study report of Venkatesh (2005) shows the results of 5S on an
organization’s growth through employee satisfaction and moral improvements. Considering
the importance of manufacturing sector in the nation’s economy, implementation of TPM
practices in manufacturing industries may improve the business performance and improve
the quality; nevertheless, it is observed that there are many obstacles to implement in TPM
practices in manufacturing industries (Toke and Kalpande, 2020).
Investment in human resources can further result in better hardware utilization, higher
product quality and reduced labor costs (Pardue et al., 1994; Krishnaiah, 1995; Jaaron and
Backhouse, 2011). The cost of operations and maintenance can make or break a business,
especially with today’s increasing demand on productivity, availability, quality, safety and
the environment and the decreasing profit margins (Johansson and Nord, 1996). In developing
countries, the manufacturing sector has gone through significant changes in the last decade.
Competition has been increased drastically, and customers focus on timely product delivery,
product quality and cost of product. Because of these, the manufacturing sector should
introduce a quality system to improve and increase both quality and productivity
continuously (Kumar et al., 2014; Hashim et al., 2012).
In this paper, the author has described initially the importance and contribution of
manufacturing sector in the nation’s economy and employment generation. The latter part of
this review encompasses the overview of TPM through the lens of manufacturing industries,
which leads to the identification of gaps in the existing literature. The study of TPM
implementation procedure and TPM model helps to identify the critical success factors (CSFs)
for effective TPM implementation.

2. Overview of TPM in manufacturing industries

2.1 Introduction
The manufacturing sector has been a key engine of economic growth and helps to bring about
economic resurgence as it has the highest multiplier effect as compared to any other sector.
It is also observed that in developing countries, like India, the importance of
manufacturing has diminished over the last 20–25 years, resulting in deindustrialization.
In India, the manufacturing sector emerged as one of the high growth sectors, and the
industrial development schemes, like “Make in India,” placed India on the world map as a
manufacturing hub and gave global recognition.
 According to the Indian Bureau of Equity Foundation (IBEF) report, the Indian Total
manufacturing sector grew at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5% during productive
FY16–FY20. The report also shows the strong growth in the production of basic metals
(10.8%), intermediate goods (8.8%), food products (2.7%) and tobacco products (2.9%).
maintenance
According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) held in
2019, India ranked among the top ten recipients of foreign direct investment (FDI) attracting
US$ 49 billion, and this is 16% increase from the previous year.
Manufacturing is a multifaceted function which involves strategic utilization of man, 117
machine, skill and technology and leads to innovation of ideas. Hence, it can be regarded as a
means of maximizing employability in the country. As per the Labour Bureau’s Quarterly
Report on Employment Scenario, the manufacturing sector has significantly contributed to
employment generation in the last two decades .This report also shows that manufacturing
sector has employed 64 million people in 2018–2019, and it progressively witnessed a 2%
increase in net employment. Various economic reports also predicted the exponential growth
in electronic manufacturing jobs. The electronic manufacturing ecosystem is expected to
reach investments worth Rs 26 lack crore by 2025. Manufacturing and infrastructure
industries also witnessed 8.02% growth in jobs between April and September 2019–2020.
The Government of India plans to increase the share of manufacturing sector in gross
domestic product (GDP) from 16 to 25% by 2022 thereby creating 100 million new jobs. Indian
government projection shows that the manufacturing sector will continue to grow at a fast
pace, so there arises a need to understand the manufacturing sector and the role of TPM in
their effective performance.

2.2 Overview
TPM is a tool to maximize the effectiveness of the equipment by setting and maintaining the
optimum relationship between people and machines (Willmott, 1997). Seiici Nakajima is
known as the father of TPM, and he describes TPM as “productive maintenance carried by all
employees through small group activities.” According to TPM principles, the responsibility
for optimizing equipment lies not just with the main tenancy department but also with all
plant personnel. Furthermore, TPM can be said as a plant improve methodology, which
enables continuous and rapid improvement of the service and manufacturing process
through the use of employee involvement, employee empowerment and closed-loop
measurement of result (Nakajima, 1989).
The effective maintenance management system provided better products, and it is a way
to enhance the organization productivity by the participation of all employees from top
management to frontline operators (Kalpande and Toke, 2020).
The TPM approach helps increase the uptime of equipment, reduces machinery set-up
time, enhances quality and lowers costs. Through this approach, maintenance becomes an
integral part of the team. Maintenance managers now view the consistent production of
quality goods as greatly dependent on the quality of operations rendered by the necessary
machinery. The ultimate benefits that can be obtained by implementing TPM are increased
profitability and improved productivity.
The study of report of Omar (2007) shows that companies develop their technological base
to capitalize on technology’s ability to make a positive contribution to performance. TPM can
improve the technological base of a company by enhancing equipment technology and
improving the skills of employees. Furthermore, TPM helps to improve the organizations’
capabilities by enhancing the problem-solving skills of individuals and enabling learning
across various functional areas (Foresti et al., 2020).
TPM describes a relationship between production and maintenance for continuous
improvement of product quality, service, operational efficiency, capacity, assurance and
JQME safety (Nakajima, 1988). The goal of TPM is an aggressive strategy that focuses on actually
29,1 improving the function and design of the production equipment and innovation of the
production (Swanson, 2001).
Various researchers have classified the TPM in short-term and long-term elements. The
short-term elements are more focused on autonomous maintenance and planned
maintenance. It also covers the trainings of maintenance staff for skill development.
Whereas the long-term elements are more focused on the new equipment design that involves
118 the innovation practices (McKone et al., 1999; Ahuja and Khamba, 2008).
TPM is a unique system, and the entire edifice of TPM is broadly based on the following
three categories:
(1) Planned maintenance.
(2) Quality maintenance.
(3) Education and training.
2.2.1 Planned maintenance. The planned maintenance is classified into four groups, namely
preventive maintenance (PM), corrective maintenance (CM) and maintenance prevention
(MP) (Ahuja and Khamba, 2008). The aim of planned maintenance is to make trouble-free
machines and equipment. The trouble-free machines produce defect-free products and
ultimately achieve customer satisfaction. PM is an action to keep a machine and equipment in
operating condition by means of inspection, detection and prevention of failure. This can be
described as a kind of physical check-up of equipment before it can result into breakdown.
PM can be divided into two basic categories: scheduled and monitored. The goal of interval-
based PM is to provide control of planned maintenance activities rather than allowing
machine breakdowns (Wireman, 1998; Pardue et al., 1994).
2.2.2 Corrective maintenance. This maintenance improves the reliability of the machine
and equipment by eliminating the failure. It also focuses on the improvement of
maintainability of the machine and equipment.
2.2.3 Maintenance prevention. This is an activity to design the equipment to be
maintenance free. According to Narender and Gupta (2012), the goal of the equipment and line
is to keep them completely maintenance free.
Nakajima (1982) quoted that TPM is not a mere combination of MP-CM-PM, but it
emphasizes promoting maintenance through “autonomous maintenance” by encouraging
small group activities. The concept of TPM lays much emphasis in maximizing the
equipment effectiveness by eliminating all forms of inefficiencies, hindering capital, material
and labor productivity. The mechanics of achieving such spectacular rise in equipment
effectiveness is through the involvement of all employees in the organization belonging to
various departments, like production, maintenance, technical services and stores (Singh and
Singh, 2019). This is possible when all employees channel their energies in a specific direction
without adopting a compartmentalized segmented approach. Such changes do not take place
at the expense of maintenance jobs. The challenge is to do things together at a higher
standard than was previously possible.
2.2.4 Quality maintenance. The aim of quality maintenance is to delight the customer
through highest quality by defect-free manufacturing. The focus is on eliminating
nonconformances in a systematic manner, much like focused improvement. An
understanding is gained of what parts of the equipment affect product quality, eliminating
current quality concerns and then moving to potential quality concerns. With planned
maintenance, efforts evolve from a reactive to a proactive method and use trained maintenance
staff to help train the operators to better maintain their equipment (Hashim et al., 2012).
 2.2.5 Education and training. Education is given to operators to upgrade their skill. It is Total
aimed to have multi-skilled revitalized employees whose morale is high and who are eager to productive
come to work and perform all the required functions effectively and independently
(Blanchard, 1997). Skill levels are improved by training and practice in the right way.
maintenance
Constant repetition leads to error-free and consistent performance. Murata and Harrison
(1991) propose three levels of quality of work:
(1) Repair level: People carry out instructions, but cannot foresee the future; they simply 119
react to problems.
(2) Prevention level: People can foresee the future by predicting problems and take
corrective action.
(3) Improvement level: People can foresee the future by predicting problems. They not
only take corrective action but also propose improvements to prevent recurrences. So
far, the focus has been limited to the systems and people involvement necessary to
develop a reliability-centered maintenance program with increasingly close
integration of production and maintenance personnel. This is the essential
foundation for TPM.
Carry-over with these levels’ researchers (Nakajima, 1989; Kodali and Chandra, 2001)
proposes six skills of particular value in the work place to fulfill their part of the new,
integrated relationship, new and enhanced skills needed by both operators and maintenance
personnel.
(1) Attention: The ability to concentrate and to discover deviations.
(2) Judgment: The ability to think logically and to make sound decision.
(3) Corrective action/restoration: The ability to restore normal conditions in the
minimum time with minimum losses.
(4) Prevention: The ability to prevent problems from arising through knowledge of
correct operation.
(5) Prediction: The ability to predict that problems are about to happen by spotting
deviation.
(6) Improvement: The ability to propose ideas to eliminate the problem point so that
problems do not recur.
According Juric et al. (2006), the initiatives of TPM are focused on addressing major losses
and wasted associated with the production system by affecting continuous and systematic
evaluations of production system, thereby affecting significant improvement in production
facilities. Table 1 below shows the previous studies is related to the TPM.
It is evident that the roots of TPM lay in the good maintenance philosophies and proactive
maintenance practices. The systematic way to optimize plant and equipment efficiency by
crating perfect relationship between man and equipment the JIPM propose the introduction of
TPM program which ,is based on the implementation of a TPM pillars.

3. Literature review on TPM

TPM is a program for increasing efficiency of machines and processes, which stands on eight
pillars with 5S as its foundation. The 5S practice is a preparatory phase of TPM, which is a
technique used to establish and maintain quality environment in an organization. A well-
organized workplace motivates people, both on the shop floor as well as others. The 5S
improves safety, work efficiency, improves productivity and establishes a sense of
JQME Autonomous Planned Quality Education and
29,1 Author maintenance maintenance maintenance training

Ahuja and Khamba √ √ √ √

(2008)
Elwardi et al. (2019)
Bartz et al. (2014) √ √
120 Hashim et al. (2012) √ √ √ √
Van der Wal and Lynn √
(2002)
Digalwar (2014) √ √
McKone et al. (1999) √ √
Foresti et al. (2020) √ √ √ √
Blanchard (1997) √
Jain et al. (2014a) √ √ √ √
Venkatesh (2005) √ √ √
Ireland and Dale (2001) √ √ √
Yamashina (1995) √ √
Graisa and Al- √
Habaibeh (2011)
Table 1. Piechnicki et al. (2015) √√
Previous studies Singh and Singh (2019) √√
about TPM Source(s): Developed for this research work

ownership. The 5S is developed in Japan for workplace organization and housekeeping,

which connote organization, tidiness, cleaning, standardization and discipline, respectively.
Venkatesh (2005) has studied various benefits of 5S implementation. He identified 5S
implementation and increase morale, create positive impressions on customers and increase
efficiency of the organization. Employees will feel better about where they work and
transform the physical environment of the work area, which makes the organization more
profitable and competitive in the marketplace.
After laying this 5S foundation, the TPM program is developed by constructing the
following eight pillars. The conceptual features of these pillars are briefly described in
following sections. The JIPM eight-pillar TPM implementation plan is depicted in Figure 1.

3.1 TPM pillars for identification of TPM-CSF

3.1.1 Autonomous maintenance. According to this pillar, the sense of ownership over the
equipment operated by the workers shall have to be developed. This is a contradiction to the
traditional maintenance engineering approach in which even minor maintenance problems
are attended by the employees working in the maintenance engineering department (Cooke,
2000). It follows a structured approach to increase the skill levels of personnel so that they can
understand, manage and improve their equipment and processes. The goal is to change
operators from being reactive to working in a more proactive way to achieve optimal
conditions that eliminate minor equipment stops as well as reducing defects and breakdowns.
The deployment of this pillar will improve OEE by reducing performance loss and
increasing equipment availability. In addition, there will be measurable improvement in
employee engagement and capability levels.
3.1.2 Individual improvement. It provides a structured, team-based approach to drive the
elimination of specifically identified losses in any process. According to this pillar, the worker
has to improve his/her level of attending to maintenance failures. Employees should also
 Total
productive
TPM maintenance

Safety, Health & Environment

Autonomous Maintenance

Individual Improvements

Education and Training

Planned Maintenance

Quality Maintenance
121

Initial Flow Control

Office TPM
Figure 1.
Eight pillars of TPM
5’s suggested by the JIPM

learn to analyze the cause of maintenance failures using tools like why-why analysis and
performance measurement analysis. This is a contradiction to the conventional maintenance
engineering approach in which a separate team consisting of maintenance engineering
professionals carries out the analysis and finds out the causes of maintenance failures.
This pillar develops the capabilities of teams to be self-sufficient in applying appropriate
problem-solving approaches.
3.1.3 Planned maintenance. It follows a structured approach to establish a management
system that extends the equipment reliability at optimum cost and aims to achieve zero
breakdowns. This pillar is a shadowed configuration of the conventional planned
maintenance approach (Ireland and Dale, 2001). This pillar will also contribute to
improved quality and safety performance. Another aspect of this pillar is the control of
maintenance costs and elimination of equipment losses. Six big losses identified in TPM field
are (Chan et al., 2005) as follows:
(1) Breakdown losses.
(2) Set-up and adjustment losses.
(3) Minor/Idling stoppage losses.
(4) Reduced speed losses.
(5) Defect/Rework losses.
(6) Start-up losses.
3.1.4 Quality maintenance. In order to construct this pillar, the organization has to inculcate
the culture of zero-defect philosophy and use of all resources, including equipment for
attaining continuous quality improvement. It does this by understanding and controlling the
process interactions between manpower, material, machines and methods that could enable
defects to occur. The key is to prevent defects from being produced in the first place rather
than installing rigorous inspection systems to detect the defect after it has been produced.
It reduces the cost of quality, as waste resulting from poor quality, rework, consumer
complaints and the need for inspection are reduced.
JQME 3.1.5 Office TPM. In order to construct this pillar, the smart methods and administrative
29,1 activities shall have to be promoted to support TPM activities. Further cost reduction in the
maintenance of equipment shall have to be supported by office administration. This is a
unique emphasis of TPM since no other model on continuous improvement has envisaged the
supporting role of office administration in organizations. It concentrates on all areas that
provide administrative and support functions in the organization. It ensures all processes
support the optimization of manufacturing processes and that they are completed at
122 optimal cost.
The application of Office TPM also benefits the organization by developing support
functions that react flexibly to changes in customer requirement and that ensure a strong
brand image is maintained.
3.1.6 Education and training. It ensures that staffs are trained in the skills identified as
essential both for their personal development and for the successful deployment of TPM in
line with the organization’s goals and objectives. Although training is imparted to employees
even in the conventional maintenance approach, its scope is restricted to a section of workers
working in maintenance engineering department.
Training and education creates a corporate environment, which can maximize the
potential of all employees and respond positively to the changing business climate,
technological advances and management innovation.
3.1.7 Safety health and environment. This pillar encompasses the humane approach. It
implements a methodology to drive towards the achievement of zero accidents. It is important
to note that this is not just safety related but also covers zero accidents, zero overburden
(physical and mental stress and strain on employees) and zero pollution. According to this
pillar, the TPM program must evolve a policy on the environment, health and safety, which
has to be strictly enforced with the commitment and support of the management.
The immediate benefits of implementing this pillar are to prevent reoccurrence of lost time
accidents and reduce the number of minor accidents as well as preventing environmental
system failure. This has a direct financial saving in the cost of containment, investigation and
compensation as well as reputational impact.
3.1.8 Initial flow control. It aims to shorten development lead times, with teams working on
simultaneous activities so that vertical start up can be achieved with zero defects. In order to
construct this pillar, the TPM program shall allow the review of designs for preventing
further mistakes, use of manufacturing process data and establishment of equipment’s start
up times. These principles are not followed in conventional maintenance engineering
approaches. In a nutshell, the implementation of TPM is marked by the construction of the
eight pillars and prevention of equipment losses. After constructing these pillars to different
heights, the TPM program is liable to contribute higher degree of maintenance quality.
Implementation of this pillar will deliver reduced product and process introduction lead
times, improved OEE and the ability to deliver in volume at the right quality from a
production start-up. Cost savings will be delivered both during the introduction phase and
throughout the equipment or product life cycle.
Some authors claim that OEE is the only parameter that has got the capability to indicate
the maintenance quality of equipment in organization (Kwon and Lee, 2004). However, some
authors have claimed that OEE alone cannot be considered a performance indicator of TPM
programs (Blanchard, 1997). Hence, it is recommended that the parameters namely mean time
between failure (MTBF), mean time to repair (MTTR), performance quality, mean down time
(MDT) and availability, which require only simple computations, shall also be used for
assessing the maintenance quality level.
According to the management policy, anyone of the above performance measurement
parameters or group of them shall be chosen to measure the maintenance quality level of the
equipment.
 The existing literature is available to indicate the application of TPM to various extents Total
in different countries (Eti et al., 2006; Tsang and Chan, 2000; Ahmed et al., 2005; Cigolini and productive
Turco, 1997). To cap it all, TPM is one of the world class manufacturing strategies
(Yamashina, 2000; Bamber et al., 1999). These developments indicate the prowess of TPM,
maintenance
which has played a phenomenal role in revolutionizing maintenance management and
engineering approaches and thus have gained a heritage position in world class
manufacturing principles. A positive strategic outcome of TPM implementation is the
reduced occurrence of unexpected machine breakdowns, which ultimately results in 123
enhanced profits and improves the productivity, cost, quality, delivery time, safety and
morale of employees in the organization (Gosavi, 2006; Johansson and Nord, 1996).
The various researchers show the analytical evaluation of TPM performance and its
economical aspect with cost management practices (Oluwagbemiga et al., 2014; Chaabaneet
et al., 2020). The researcher Piechnicki et al. (2015) focus on various decision-making tools and
parameters for achieving world-class TPM. The use of computers in TPM and relevant
supportive organizational factors has been studied by Balouei Jamkhaneh et al. (2018).
Duffuaa and Raouf (2015) have made a detailed study on planning of maintenance systems.
They also explained the various control parameters of maintenance systems.
The determination of CSFs is based on the extensive literature review. The study report of
various researchers has identified the key parameters for TPM implementation. The
summary of these critical factors and the respective contribution of researcher is shown in
Table 2.
The various sub-factors associated with these identified TPM CSFs are extracted in
Table 3. Table 3 shows the extensive literature study of abovementioned researchers, which
focuses on the usefulness of identified TPM CSF.
Besides all these benefits, it is observed that organization is facing the problems in the
implementation TPM. The detailed study on TPM obstacles is reviewed in the next section.

3.2 TPM obstacles

TPM is a philosophy to enhance an organization’s productivity and produce high-quality
goods by minimizing waste thereby reducing costs. To improve equipment reliability, the
TPM strategy was implemented in which the regular daily maintenance was carried out by
the operators, which minimize failures and thereby increasing machine availability, reducing
costs and improving profitability of the organization. The concept looks simple, but the
practical aspect of implementation is very complex involving various stages, where each of
which requires focused attention or else the TPM implementation process is bound to result
in failure. The researcher Poduval et al. (2013) noted these reasons for TPM failure in Indian
industries.
TPM is not a quick-fix methodology resulting in instant results; it requires commitment,
dedication and perseverance on part of the management and employees over the long run (in
terms of years) to deliver noticeable visible results.
Toke and Kalpande (2020, 2021) identified the various key reasons for strong resistant for
TPM and TQM implementation. They observed that lack of management exposure, difficulty
in understanding TPM methodology and philosophy by middle management, long time
taken for implementation, etc. are the major obstacles in TPM implementation.
The most important prerequisite is the total and absolute involvement of the top
management. The role of top management’s commitment and leadership has been frequently
emphasized in many literature studies to have the decisive influence over successful TPM
implementation (Pramod, 2007; Tsang and Chan, 2000; Poduval et al., 2013; Ahuja and
Khamba, 2007). The study report of researchers found that a committed top management is
must for implementation of TPM, and it can bind together all the departments of the
organization.
 29,1

124
JQME

literature
Table 2.

CSF based on the

Identification of TPM
TPM- CSF
Early
Autonomous Planned Quality Focused equipment Training and Safety, health, TPM in
Authors maintenance maintenance maintenance improvement mgt. education environment administration

Shirose (1996) √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √
Johansson and √ √
Nord (1996)
Blanchard √
(1997)
McKone et al. √ √
(1999)
Kumar and √
Ellingsen (2000)
Ireland and √
Dale (2001)
Chan et al. √
(2005)
Heine et al. √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √
(2006)
Gosavi (2006) √ √
Ahuja and √ √
Khamba (2008)
Hashim et al. √
(2012)
Jain et al. √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √
(2014a, b)
Bartz et al. √
(2014)
Digalwar and √
Padam (2014)
TPM-CSF What is it? How does it help?
Total
productive
Autonomous Places responsibility for routine Gives operators greater “ownership” of maintenance
maintenance maintenance, such as cleaning, lubricating their equipment
and inspection, in the hands of operators Increases operators’ knowledge of their
equipment
Ensures equipment is well-cleaned and
lubricated 125
Identifies emergent issues before they
become failures
Frees maintenance personnel for higher-
level tasks
Planned Schedules maintenance tasks based on Significantly reduces instances of
maintenance predicted and/or measured failure rates unplanned down time
Enables most maintenance to be planned
for times when equipment is not
scheduled for production
Reduces inventory through better control
of wear-prone and failure-prone parts
Quality Design error detection and prevention into Specifically targets quality issues with
maintenance production processes. Apply root cause improvement projects focused on
analysis to eliminate recurring sources of removing root sources of defects
quality defects Reduces number of defects
Reduces cost by catching defects early (it
is expensive and unreliable to find defects
through inspection)
Focused Have small groups of employees work Recurring problems are identified and
improvement together proactively to achieve regular, resolved by cross-functional teams
incremental improvements in equipment Combines the collective talents of a
operation company to create an engine for
continuous improvement
Early equipment Directs practical knowledge and New equipment reaches planned
management understanding of manufacturing performance levels much faster due to
equipment gained through TPM towards fewer start-up issues
improving the design of new equipment Maintenance is simpler and more robust
due to practical review and employee
involvement prior to installation
Training and Fill in knowledge gaps necessary to Operators develop skills to routinely
education achieve TPM goals. Applies to operators, maintain equipment and identify
maintenance personnel and managers emerging problems
Maintenance personnel learn techniques
for proactive and preventative
maintenance
Managers are trained on TPM principles
as well as on employee coaching and
development
Safety, health, Maintain a safe and healthy working Eliminates potential health and safety
environment environment risks, resulting in a safer workplace
Specifically targets the goal of an
accident-free workplace
TPM in Apply TPM techniques to administrative Extends TPM benefits beyond the plant
administration functions floor by addressing waste in
administrative functions
Supports production through improved Table 3.
administrative operations (e.g. order Explanation of TPM
processing, procurement and scheduling) CSF and its usefulness
JQME However, at the present moment, high resistance is often encountered from the shop floor
29,1 operators and as well as the maintenance personnel (Poduval et al., 2013).To this extent,
active top management support is crucial to overcome such resistance, especially during the
transition period (Fredendall, 1997). Researchers identified that the workforce in the
organization need to acquire new knowledge, skill and abilities related to TPM (Blanchard,
1997; Thiagarajan and Zairi, 1997). The study report of Bakerjanhas identified major
obstacles relevant to industries, namely, lack of top management commitment; failure to
126 allow sufficient time for the evolution; attitude of top management to minimum manpower to
cut cost; resistance to technology advancement adoption; lack of organization
encouragement; inadequate skilled training and lack of implementing TPM practices
(Omar, 2007; Haddad and Jaaron, 2012).
According to Chen (1997) and Tsang and Chan (2000), TPM accomplished the
maximization of equipment effectiveness through total employee participation and
incorporated the use of autonomous maintenance in the small group activities to improve
the equipment reliability, maintainability and productivity.
TPM is not simple; in fact, it is a very complex concept. The most favored numeral in TPM
circles is zero – zero defects, zero breakdowns and zero accidents (Elwardi et al., 2019;
Nakajima, 1988). If an organization has set its sights on high quality, it needs to follow some
basic philosophies, which built upon one another, finally culminating in the goal of high
productivity then to achieve this is difficult but not impossible.
Robinson and Ginder (1995) stated TPM is a production-driven improvement methodology.
They also quoted that continuous and systematic evaluation of production affecting significant
improvements in production facilities. He also suggested the various approaches, like RCM, for
improvement in the production system. Davis and Willmott (1999) focus on the philosophy of
empowerment and encouragement of employees for TPM implementation. The study report of
Jain et al. (2014a, b) focus on the TPM pillars and extracted the various TPM-CSF for effective
TPM implementation. The study report of Muhammad et al. (2019) shows the various problems
and barriers, which affect TPM implementation.
From the above study, it is abridge observed that TPM implementation focuses on
improvement in equipment availability, performance and quality with assuring health and
safety of employees and protection of the environment. After overcoming these identified
TPM obstacles, the systematic study on TPM implementation through the lens of TPM model
may provide the effective guidelines for TPM implementation. In the light of these findings,
the detailed study of TPM implementation procedure and various TPM models are explained
in the next section.

4. TPM implementation procedure and models

This section provides an emphasis on the TPM implementation procedure and identification
of CSF, which has been used to assess the organizational requirements for successful
implementation of TPM results in enhanced profits and improve the productivity.
The JIPM has provided a roadmap for TPM implementation. It starts with the
identification of pilot area and restores equipment to prime operating condition. It addresses
major losses after measuring OEE and lastly introduces proactive maintenance techniques.
The 12 essential steps to develop and implement a TPM program outlined by Nakajima (1988)
are given below.
4.1 Preintroduction stage
Step 1: Announcement of TPM – Top management needs to create an environment that
will support the introduction of TPM. Without the support of management, skepticism
and resistance will kill the initiative.
 Step 2: Launch a formal education program – This program will inform and educate Total
everyone in the organization about TPM activities, benefits and the importance of productive
contribution from everyone.
maintenance
Step 3: Create an organizational support structure – This group will promote and sustain
TPM activities once they begin. Team-based activities are essential to a TPM effort. This
group needs to include members from every level of the organization from management to
the shop floor. This structure will promote communication and will guarantee everyone is 127
working toward the same goals.
Step 4: Establish basic TPM policies and quantifiable goals – Analyze the existing
conditions and set goals that are SMART: Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and
Time-based.
Step 5: Outline a detailed master deployment plan – This plan will identify what resources
will be needed and when for training, equipment restoration and improvements,
maintenance management systems and new technologies.

4.2 Introduction stage

Step 6: TPM kick-off – Implementation will begin at this stage.

4.3 Execution stage

Step 7: Establishment of a system for the improvement of production efficiency/
effectiveness – Project teams will analyze each piece of equipment and make the necessary
improvements.
(1) Individual improvement “Kobetsu Kaizen” – Project activities and activities by small
group.
(2) Autonomous maintenance “Jishu Hozen” – Step-by-step methods, diagnosis and
approval certificates.
(3) Planned maintenance: Corrective, scheduled and predictive maintenance.
(4) Education/training and personal development: Operation and maintenance skill
development to enhance an operator’s proficiency with equipment.
Step 8: System to manage industrial safety, health and environment – Establishment of
system for zero accident and zero pollution.
Step 9: System for quality maintenance – Setting maintenance and control of conditions
such that defective products are eliminated.
Step 10: System for development and management of products and equipment –
Development of easily manufactured products and implementation of easily operated
equipment.
Step 11: Improvement of efficiency of administration and support sections – Production
support and efficiency improvements in one’s own section.

4.4 Established stage

Step 12: Complete implementation of TPM and further development – Assessment of PM
awards and pursuits for higher targets.
JQME Maintenance and reliability as a core business strategy is a key to successful TPM
29,1 implementation. Without the support of top management, TPM will be just another “flavor
of the month.” Some researchers have found the contemporary models for TPM
implementation and identified the key factors for successful implementations (Hashim
et al., 2012; Kodali and Chandra, 2001; Kumar et al., 2014; Parida, 2006; Johansson and
Nord, 1996; Thorat and Mahesha, 2020). The study of Johansson and Nord (1996) explored
the six TPM elements, which are used in Indian industry to target and measure improved
128 company performance. The success and benefit of TPM within the companies are
measured according to their requirement. Many companies have developed their own scale
of measurement and indicators within the TPM framework. The most widely used
performance indicators within the TPM elements in the context of Indian manufacturing
industries and their unit of measurement are shown in Table 4. Piechnicki et al. (2015)
proposed a model to prioritize the CSF in the phases of TPM implementation process and
the result showing different degrees of priorities of CSF in each phase of the process. In
their paper, important CSFs are top management commitment, training and education,
effective communication and culture change. Bartz et al. (2014) concluded that the TPM
assists in improving industrial performance and competitiveness of the production line
studied.
Hashim et al. (2012) developed a conceptual model of the TPM. This model will be used to
study the relationship between TPM practices and innovation performance for industry.
Hashim identified that TPM and performance have a significant and positive relationship.
Likewise, studies conducted by Eti et al. (2006) show that the TPM will reduce costs and
improve the quality and also directly impact to organization performance. Seth and Tripathi
(2005) also noted that TQM and TPM approaches have an impact on industry in the Indian
context.
Wireman (1998) has developed the concept of maintenance performance indicators (MPIs).
MPIs are used for evaluating the effectiveness of maintenance. A performance indicator is a
measure capable of generating a quantified value to indicate the level of performance,
considering single or multiple aspects. The selection of MPIs depends on the way in which
maintenance performance measurement (MPM) is developed. MPIs could be used for
financial reports, for monitoring the performance of employees, customer satisfaction, the
health, safety and environmental (HSE) rating and OEE, as well as many other applications. If
this is carried out properly, then MPIs can identify resource allocation and control, problem
areas, the maintenance contribution, benchmarking, personnel performance and the
contribution to maintenance and overall business objectives (Digalwar and Padam, 2014;
Kumar and Ellingsen, 2000).

TPM elements Performance indicators TPM elements Performance indicators

Productivity Overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) Cost Manufacturing cost

Overall plant effectiveness (OPE) Maintenance cost
Labor productivity TPM cost
Mean time between failure (MTBF) Power cost
Mean time to repair (MTTR) Overhead cost
Production rate Quality Line rejection
Safety No. of accident Process defect
First aid case Scrap and rework
Table 4. Fire safety Defect rate
Important performance Morale Kaizen Delivery Inventory turnover ratio
indicators of Indian Operator training Spare parts
industries Internal and external awards Customer delivery
Kodali and Chandra (2001) developed a decision model using the analytical hierarchy Total
process for the justification of TPM for Indian industries. The inputs to the model help productive
to clarify the goals of the organization as it requires insights for constructive discussion.
It is evident from the results of this model that TPM can bring in commendable reforms and
maintenance
improvement in terms of equipment effectiveness, better products quality, meeting promised
delivery dates and conducive workplace. The obtained results are quite significant and
promising.
The analytical hierarchy process is used to justify TPM and confer the adequacy 129
of TPM implementation. The priorities can be very useful for strategic and
operational decisions in reallocating resources (Kodali and Chandra, 2001). Kodali and
Chandra (2001) have identified priorities of resources by the AHP and resources
reallocated for TPM implementation. Their study focused on various TPM attributes,
namely, cost, productivity, quality, delivery, safety, moral, work environment and
competitive advantages.
The above-mentioned attributes and sub-attributes cover all aspects of TPM
implementation and may be a best suited for manufacturing organizations.
The literature review revealed that the contemporary maintenance system of
equipment for better operation and support is not ideal for service in the present form.
Some researchers (Kodali and Chandra, 2001; Arunraj and Maran, 2014; Elwardi et al.,
2019) have overcome these limitations and provided a useful framework for the study of
applicability of the environment required for successful implementation of TPM.
Nevertheless, it cannot identify the degree to which the various components of TPM are
present in the organization and cannot compare the industries based on components
of TPM.
On this background, the objective is to continuously improve the availability and prevent
the degradation of equipment to achieve maximum effectiveness. Consequently, the need is
arised to develop the multi-attribute decision model, which may help for successful
implementation of TPM components in Indian manufacturing industries. It also helps
to identify the priorities for strategic and operational decisions for the implementation
of TPM.

5. Gaps in the existing literature

In brief, the literature review shows that the importance of TPM for improving
productivity, managing quality, timely delivery, better health and safety and
continuous motivation for good working conditions has been recognized by industries,
worldwide.
It is recalled that the basic focus of this research is the implementation of TPM practices in
manufacturing industries in the Indian context. The development of TPM model like total
quality management is one of the ways for identification weighing for various TPM CSFs for
achieving the effective organizational benefits. The study report shows that profitability and
cost reduction are some of the main motivators for businesses to implement TPM. It is
also observed that the industries, which have implemented TPM, are enjoying the benefits out
of it.
Even though the manufacturing sector has been a major contributor to India’s GDP,
growth plays a significant role in the development of economy. Critical observation of the
reported literature as above leads to identifiable gaps in the body of knowledge related with
TPM implementation. The literature review till now focused on the development of TPM
model in manufacturing industries only. An attempt was then made to understand TPM
through the lens of resource allocation in the context of Indian manufacturing industries. The
literature survey reveals that TPM implementation in the manufacturing sector is not yet
JQME adopted widely. One more prominent reason is the nonavailability of TPM model, which
29,1 focuses on the key area for effective implementation. The literature review has identified few
models which are of less useful, as they are not helping to identify the effort required. So, it is
essential to develop a new “TPM model,” which facilitates the implementation of TPM in
manufacturing sector industries.
Hence, it appears that studying manufacturing sectors from a TPM perspective would
provide a challenge to researchers, academician and practitioners; nevertheless, the result of
130 this study helps managers for effective implementation of TPM practices.

6. Findings and conclusions

From the above review study, it is observed that TPM provides a method for achievement of
world class levels of OEE through people and not through technology or systems alone. It
includes the organizational structures, human interactions, analytical tools and success
criteria associated with the implementation of TPM programs.
On the basis of literature analysis and interactions with the managers, a large number of
barriers inhibiting the TPM implementation in industries were identified. These barriers are
grouped into different categories so that their intensity can be computed without much
difficulty. The identified barriers are grouped into four categories and represented in
Figure 2.
After the extensive literature review and discussion of industry practitioners and
academician, the authors identified eight major CSFs. The various sub-factors are also
derived from these eight CSFs for getting in-depth insights into TPM study and are presented
in Table 5.
TPM increases the availability, performance efficiency and quality rate and results in the
improvement of OEE of the equipment. The literature studies on various aspects of TPM
were reviewed, and existing gaps in the literature were identified. Understanding the
different stakeholder views towards TPM implementation, there is a need to develop the TPM
model, which provides an easy and simple way to implement TPM in manufacturing
industries.

Behavioural Technical

Lack of acquaintance and knowledge of TPM

Inadequate skilled training and capacity building
Support and commitment from top management Low level of availability of TPM
Repair driven or overhaulling maintenance attitude
Attitude to resist for organizational changes

Barriers to TPM
Implementation

Strategic policy for standard operating procedures

Lack of maintenance management process
Cost cutting approach by manpower reduction Lack of appreciation and reward mechanism
Lack of pilot study execution Incompetence to plan design change
Indecorous constitution of team
Figure 2.
Categorization of TPM
Strategic Cultural
barriers
SN TPM-CSF sub-attributes
1 Productivity improvement
2 Quality improvement
3 Reduction in cost
4 Delivery performance
5 Safety and health
6 Improve morale
7 Work environment support
8 Competitive advantages
Total
productive
Productivity improvement by individual maintenance
Productivity improvement by program
Productivity improvement by material availability
Productivity improvement by utilization of energy
Productivity improvement by equipment
Quality improvement by customer complaints 131
Quality improvement by support of client claim
Quality improvement by equipment maintenance
Quality improvement by product
Reduction in cost due to breakdown
Reduction in cost due to maintenance
Reduction in cost due to manpower
Reduction in cost due to operation
Reduction in cost due to hoard energy
Guaranteed delivery performance
Timely delivery performance
Assured delivery performance
Safety and health by accidental remedies
Safety and health by environmental factors
Safety and health by pollution reduction
Improve moral by employee encouragement
Improve moral by dedicated team
Improve moral by TPM meeting
Improve moral by coordination and team spirit
Improve moral by feedback
Work environment- top management support
Work environment- ownership of equipment
Work environment- capacity building
Work environment- communication
Work environment- self analysis
Competitive advantages by customer response Table 5.
Competitive advantages by service and product support List of TPM-CSF and
Competitive advantages by value addition their sub-attributes

References
Ahmed, S., Hassan, M.H.J. and Taha, Z. (2005), “TPM can go beyond maintenance: except from a case
implementation”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 19-42.
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. (2008), “Assessment of contributions of successful TPM initiatives
towards competitive manufacturing”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 14
No. 4, pp. 356-374.
Arunraj, K. and Maran, M. (2014), “A review of tangible benefits of TPM implementation”,
International Journal of Applied Sciences and Engineering Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 171-176.
Balouei Jamkhaneh, H., Khazaei Pool, J., Khaksar, S.M.S., Arabzad, S.M. and Verij Kazemi, R. (2018),
“Impacts of computerized maintenance management system and relevant supportive
organizational factors on total productive maintenance”, Benchmarking: An International
Journal, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp. 2230-2247, doi: 10.1108/BIJ-05-2016-0072.
Bamber, C.J., Sharp, J.M. and Hides, M.T. (1999), “Factors affecting successful implementation of total
productive maintenance: a UK-based case study perspective”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 162-181.
JQME Bartz, T., Cezar, M.S. and Paula, B.B. (2014), “Improvement of industrial performance with TPM
implementation”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 2-19.
29,1
Blanchard, B.S. (1997), “An enhanced approach for implementing total productive maintenance in the
manufacturing environment”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 3 No. 2,
pp. 69-80.
Chaabane, K., Schutz, J., Dellagi, S. and Trabelsi, W. (2020), “Analytical evaluation of TPM
performance based on an economic criterion”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering,
132 Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 413-429, doi: 10.1108/JQME-08-2019-0085.
Chan, F.T.S., Lau, H.C.W., Ip, R.W.L., Chan, H.K. and Kong, S. (2005), “Implementation of total
productive maintenance: a case study”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 95,
pp. 71-94.
Chen, F. (1997), “Issue in the continuous improvement process for preventive maintenance:
observations from Honda, Nippondenso and Toyota”, Production and Inventory Management
Journal, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 13-16.
Cholasuke, C., Bhardwa, R. and Antony, J. (2004), “The status of maintenance management in UK
manufacturing organisations: results from a pilot survey”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 5-15.
Cigolini, R. and Turco, F. (l997), “Total productive maintenance practices: a survey in Italy”, Journal of
Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 259-272.
Cooke, F.L. (2000), “Implementing TPM in plant maintenance: some organizational barriers”,
International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 9, pp. 1003-1016.
Cooke, F.L. (2003), “Maintaining change: the maintenance function and the change process”, New
Technology Work and Employment, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 35-49.
Davis, R. and Willmott, P. (1999), Total Productivity Maintenance, A Set Maintenance Management,
Alden Press, Oxford.
Digalwar, A.K. and Padam, P.V. (2014), “Implementation of total productive maintenance in
manufacturing industries: a literature-based metadata analysis”, The IUP Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. XIII No. 1, pp. 39-53.
Duffuaa, S. and Raouf, A. (2015), Planning and Control of Maintenance Systems, Springer International
Publishing, 978-3-319-19803-3.
Elwardi, B., Meddaoui, A., En-nhaili, A. and Mouchtachi, A. (2019), “Towards a new model of
industrial performance improvement for SMEs: a case study of TPM implementation in an
industrial SME”, International Journal of Process Management and Benchmarking, Vol. 9
No. 4, pp. 547-563.
Eti, M.C., Ogaji, S.O.T. and Probert, S.D. (2006), “Reducing the cost of preventive maintenance through
adopting a proactive reliability-focused culture”, Applied Energy, Vol. 83, pp. 1235-1248.
Foresti, R., Rossi, S., Magnani, M., Bianco, C.G.L. and Delmonte, N. (2020), “Smart society and artificial
intelligence: big data scheduling and the global standard method applied to smart
maintenance”, Engineering, Vol. 6 No. 7, pp. 835-846.
Fredendall, L., Patterson, J., Kennedy, W. and Griffin, T. (1997), “Maintenance: modeling its strategic
impact”, Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 440-453.
Gosavi, A. (2006), “A risk-sensitive approach to total productive maintenance”, Automatica, Vol. 42,
pp. 1321-1330.
Graisa, M. and 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, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 541-558.
Haddad, T.H. and Jaaron, A.A.M. (2012), “The applicability of total productive maintenance for
healthcare facilities: an implementation methodology”, International Journal of Business,
Humanities and Technology, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 148-155.
Hashim, S., Habidin, N.F., Conding, J., Ain, N., Jwaya, S.L. and Zubir, A.F. (2012), “Total productive Total
maintenance and innovation performance in Malaysian automotive industry”, International
Journal of Engineering Research and Development, Vol. 3 No. 11, pp. 62-67. productive
Heine, S., Proulx, T. and Vohs, K. (2006), “The meaning maintenance model: on the coherence of social
maintenance
motivation”, Personality and Social Psychological Review, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 88-111.
Ireland, F. and Dale, B.G. (2001), “A study of total productive maintenance implementation”, Journal of
Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 183-191.
133
Jaaron, A. and Backhouse, C. (2011), “Value-adding to public services through the adoption of lean
thinking”, International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology,
Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 33-50.
Jain, A., Bhatti, R. and Singh, H. (2014a), “Total productive maintenance (TPM) implementation
practice: a literature review and directions”, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 5
No. 3, pp. 293-323.
Jain, A., Gupta, R.C. and Soni, S.C. (2014b), “Analytical hierarchy process for identification of
attributes for TPM implementation, working papers 2014-12-13”, Voice of Research, Vol. 3,
No. 3, December 2014 ISSN No. 2277-7733.
Johansson, B. and Nord, C. (1996), TPM- One Way to Increased Competitiveness: Examples from a
Medium Sized Company, (In Swedish), p. 16, IVF – Skrift 96849.
Juric, Z., Sanchez, A.I. and Goti, A. (2006), “Money-based overall equipment effectiveness”,
Hydrocarbon Processing, Vol. 85 No. 5, pp. 43-45.
Kalpande, S.D. and Toke, L.K. (2020), “Assessment of green supply chain management practices,
performance, pressure and barriers amongst Indian manufacturer to achieve sustainable
development”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 70 No.
8, pp. 2237-2257, doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-02-2020-0045.
Kodali, R. and Chandra, S. (2001), “Analytical hierarchy process for justification of TPM”, Production
Planning and Control, Vol. 12 No. 7, pp. 695-705.
Krishnaiah, J.M. (1995), “Total productive maintenance (TPM) – 5Ps to equipment management”,
Maintenance, July-September, pp. 8–10.
Kumar, U. and Ellingsen, H.P. (2000), “Development and implementation of maintenance performance
indicators for the Norwegian oil and gas industry”, Proceedings of the 14th International
Maintenance Congress (Euro maintenance 2000), Gothenburg, pp. 221-228.
Kumar, J., Soni, V.K. and Agnihotri, G. (2014), “Impact of TPM implementation on Indian
manufacturing industry”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,
Vol. 63 No. 1, pp. 44-56.
Kwon, O. and Lee, H. (2004), “Calculation methodology for contributive managerial effect by OEE as a
result of TPM activities”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 10 No. 4,
pp. 263-272.
McKone, K.E., Schroeder, R.G. and Cua, K.O. (1999), “Total productive maintenance: a contextual
view”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 17, pp. 123-124.
Muhammad, A.M., Zaheer, M.A., Haider, M., Rafique, M.Z., Rasool, M.A. and Amjad, M.S. (2019),
“Problems and barriers affecting total productive maintenance implementation”, Engineering,
Technology and Applied Science Research, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 4818-4823.
Murata, K. and Harrison, A. (1991), How to Make Japanese Management Methods Work in the West,
Glover, Aldershot, p. 42.
Nakajima, S. (1982), Introduction to TPM Development Program for Production Management, Japan
Management Association, Tokyo.
Nakajima, S. (1988), Introduction to TPM: Total Productive Maintenance, Productivity Press,
Cambridge, MA.
JQME Nakajima, S. (1989), TPM Development Program: Implementing Total Productive Maintenance,
Productivity Press, Portland.
29,1
Narender and Gupta, A.K. (2012), “A review of total productive maintenance system into an Indian
service sector”, International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 1,
pp. 10-18.
Oluwagbemiga, O.E., Olugbenga, O.M. and Zaccheaus, S.A. (2014), “Cost management practices and
firm’s performance of manufacturing organizations”, International Journal of Economics and
134 Finance, Vol. 6 No. 6, pp. 234-239.
Omar, M.B. (2007), “The implementation of TPM at high volume company”, Bachelor Degree Thesis,
UniversitiTeknikal Malaysia, Melaka.
Pardue, F., Peity, K. and Moore, R. (1994), “Elements of reliability-based maintenance”,
Maintenance, pp. 1-8.
Parida, A. (2006), “Development of a multi-criteria hierarchical framework for maintenance
performance measurement: concepts, issues and challenges”, Doctoral thesis, Lule
a University
of Technology, 2006: 37, ISBN: LTU-DT-06/37-SE, available at: http://epubl.ltu.se/1402-1544/
2006/37/index-en.html.
Piechnicki, A.S., Sola, A.V.H. and Trojan, F. (2015), “Decision-making towards achieving world-class
total productive maintenance”, International Journal of Operations and Production
Management, Vol. 35 No. 12, pp. 1594-1621, doi: 10.1108/IJOPM-11-2013-0479.
Poduval, P.S., Pramod, V.R. and Jagathy Raj, V.P. (2013), “Barriers in TPM implementation in
industries”, International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, Vol. 2 No. 5, pp. 28-33.
Pramod, V.R. (2007), “MQFD: a model for synergizing TPM and QFD”, PhD Thesis, Cochin University
of Science and Technology, Kochi.
Robinson, C.J. and Ginder, A.P. (1995), Implementing TPM: the North American Experience,
Productivity Press, Portland, OR.
Seth, D. and Tripathi, D. (2005), “Relationship between TQM and TPM implementation factors and
business performance of manufacturing industry in Indian context”, International Journal of
Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 22 Nos 2/3, pp. 256-277.
Shirose, K. (1996), New TPM Deploying Program – Processing/Assembly Version, JIPM, Tokyo.
Singh, J. and Singh, H. (2019), “Justification of TPM pillars for enhancing the performance of
manufacturing industry of Northern India”, International Journal of Productivity and
Performance Management, Vol. 69 No. 1, pp. 109-133.
Swanson, L. (2001), “Linking maintenance strategies to performance”, International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 70 No. 3, pp. 237-244.
Thiagarajan, T. and Zairi, M. (1997), “A review of total quality management in practice:
understanding the fundamentals through examples of best practice applications – Part 1”,
The TQM Magazine, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 270-286.
Thorat, R. and Mahesha, G.T. (2020), “Improvement in productivity through TPM implementation”,
Materials Todays Proceedings, Vol. 24 No. Part 2, pp. 1508-1517.
Toke, L.K. and Kalpande, S.D. (2020), “Total quality management in small and medium enterprises: an
overview in Indian context”, Quality Management Journal, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 159-175.
Toke, L.K. and Kalpande, S.D. (2021), “Strategic planning to investigate the decision index of
organization for effective total quality management implementation – in context of Indian small
and medium enterprises”, Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, Vol. ahead-of-print
No. ahead-of-print, doi: 10.1108/JEDT-11-2020-0447.
Tsang, A.H.C. and Chan, P.K. (2000), “TPM implementation in China: a case study”, International
Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 144-157.
Van der Wal, R. and Lynn, D. (2002), “Total productive maintenance in a South African pulp and
paper company: a case study”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 359-366.
Venkatesh, J. (2005), An Introduction to Total Productive Maintenance, Plant Maintenance Resource Total
Center, Print location: Plant Maintenance Resource Center, 1996-2005.
productive
Willmott, P. (1997), Total Productive Maintenance- the Western Way, Butterworth- Heinemann,
Oxford.
maintenance
Wireman, T. (1998), Developing Performance Indicators for Managing Maintenance, 1st ed., New York.
Yamashina, H. (1995), “Japanese manufacturing strategy and the role of total productive
maintenance”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 27-38. 135
Yamashina, H. (2000), “Challenge to world-class manufacturing”, International Journal of Quality and
Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 132-143.

About the authors

Sudhir Chaurey is a research scholar in S.G.S.I.T.S, Indore. His research area is total productive
maintenance. He is having 15 years of teaching experience in industrial and production engineering.
Shyamkumar D. Kalpande is working as a Vice Principal and Professor in the Department of
Mechanical Engineering at the Guru Gobind Singh College of Engineering and Research Center, Nashik,
Maharashtra, India. He earned his PhD in total quality management from S.G.S.I.T.S, Indore, India. He
has been associated with teaching for the last 25 years. He has contributed over 53 research papers in
international referred and national journals and conferences at international and national level. He has
received over 126 citations on Google scholar (h-index 5 7). His specific areas of interest are total quality
management; operation management, optimization techniques, green supply chain management,
sustainable supply chain management, green manufacturing, performance measurement, reverse
logistics, renewable/sustainable energy technologies, business sustainability, etc.
Dr. R.C. Gupta is working as a Professor in the Department of Industrial and Production Engineering
at S.G.S.I.T.S, Indore. He is having 30 years of teaching experience. He has published books and papers
in the areas of maintenance engineering, total quality management, supply chain management, etc.
Lalit K. Toke is working as an Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at
the Sandip Institute of Engineering and Management, Nashik, Maharashtra, India. He earned his PhD in
Mechanical Engineering from S.G.S.I.T.S, Indore, India. He has been associated with teaching for the last
20 years. He has contributed over 35 research papers in international referred and national journals and
conferences at international and national level. He has received over 272 citations on Google scholar
(h-index 5 5). His specific areas of interest are total quality management, operation management,
optimization techniques, green supply chain management, sustainable supply chain management, green
manufacturing, performance measurement, reverse logistics, renewable/sustainable energy
technologies, business sustainability, etc. Lalit K. Toke is the corresponding author and can be
contacted at: lalittoke2010@gmail.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