The automated factory: Justification and implementation

T he factory of the future seems finally to be realizing the longhoped-for production wonders of customized and diversified products. This factory also provides flexible processes that optimize resources; as a result, lead times are getting shorter, inventories are dropping, machine utilization is increasing, and quality, consistency, and performance are improving. All these results have already been achieved in the U.S. by firms utilizing various forms of factory automation. However, as the automated factory advances quite rapidly in the U.S., disillusionment with automation has surfaced. One technology after another has been denounced by users after reportedly failing as the long-sought cure-all. Disaffections started with materials requirements planning (MRP) and MRP II, moved to robots, and were even expressed in a study that found that 75 percent of the firms surveyed claimed not to have realized cost improvements from their computer-aided design (CAD) systems. Even flexiblemanufacturing systems (FMS) have been criticized for not living up to expectations. These problems lead to the following questions: What does this mean to management? Is the automated factory a fad? Should manufacturers avoid investment in new process technologies? What are the internal and external effects of these new technologies? What are the adaptation obstacles? How can we ensure a successful implementation of the automated factory? The following cases present instances in which American firms capitalized on the advantages of advanced manufacturing technologies. A firm can expect both external and internal benefits from an automated factory, but it can also find certain obstacles to adaptation. Certain steps, however, can aid in implementation and help derive the maximum benefit from the FMS investment.