Competitiveness of Small- and Medium Enterprises of the Arizona Aerospace and Defense Supply Chain

This paper discusses the development of a database and an interactive data visualizat ion of Arizona aerospace and defense suppliers. The paper also summarizes key results of a survey of those companies focusing on their strategic competitiveness and next generation manufacturing (NGM) read iness.The survey categories included: co mpany demographics, supply chain management, global engagement, sustainability and green, process improvement, and innovation. Develop ment of the database andselected key findings of the survey are reported. To summarize: Arizona aerospace and defense companystrengths include: Product portfolio and product diversity; Frequency and scale of process and system improvements; Balance of revenue sources between private- and public; Balance of customers between military and commercial. Weaknesses include: Strategic planning and strategic plan imp lementation; Utilizat ion of lean manufacturing techniques; Underperformance in on-time delivery of products and services; Automation; Certificat ions; Global engagement; Interest toward, and knowledge of, strategy for global, sustainability and green, as well as innovation. We believe that the database and findings will, wh ilerepresenting a snapshot only, add to the knowledge base relat ing to NGM readiness of the aerospace- and defense companies in the United States, as well as provide new informat ion about the competitiveness of small- and mediu m aerospace- and defense suppliers.

[1]  S. Croom The dyadic capabilities concept: examining the processes of key supplier involvement in collaborative product development , 2001 .

[2]  T. O'Shannassy Sustainable competitive advantage or temporary competitive advantage: Improving understanding of an important strategy construct , 2008 .

[3]  Cathy A. Rusinko,et al.  Green Manufacturing: An Evaluation of Environmentally Sustainable Manufacturing Practices and Their Impact on Competitive Outcomes , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[4]  James A. Wolff,et al.  Small‐Firm Performance: Modeling the Role of Product and Process Improvements , 2006 .

[5]  G. R. Oldham,et al.  Employee Creativity: Personal and Contextual Factors at Work , 1996 .

[6]  A. Gunasekaran,et al.  Improving operations performance in a small company: a case study , 2000 .

[7]  R. Shapiro,et al.  From supply chain to demand chain: the role of lead time reduction in improving demand chain performance , 2004 .

[8]  Ronald V. Kalafsky,et al.  The Competitive Characteristics of U.S Manufacturers in the Machine Tool Industry , 2002 .

[9]  M. Porter Clusters and the new economics of competition. , 1998, Harvard business review.

[10]  Maurice Bonney,et al.  Trends in inventory management , 1994 .

[11]  R. Cooper,et al.  0 0 0 0 An Investigation into the New Product Process : Steps , Deficiencies , and Impact , 1986 .

[12]  J. Jayaram,et al.  Supply Chain Management: A Strategic Perspective , 1997 .

[13]  Michaela D. Platzer U.S. Aerospace Manufacturing: Industry Overview and Prospects , 2009 .

[14]  Steven B. Lyman,et al.  Supply chain management: a strategic perspective , 2002 .

[15]  S. Hart A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm , 1995 .

[16]  Derrick E. D'Souza,et al.  Manufacturing strategy, business strategy and firm performance in a mature industry , 1995 .

[17]  Robert J. Vokurka,et al.  Defining supply chain management: a historical perspective and practical guidelines , 1999 .

[18]  M. Porter Towards a dynamic theory of strategy , 1991 .

[19]  Miryam Barad,et al.  Linking improvement models to manufacturing strategies - a methodology for SMEs and other enterprises , 2001 .

[20]  E. Morash Supply chain strategies, capabilities, and performance , 2001 .

[21]  K. Mashford,et al.  Next generation manufacturing , 2003 .

[22]  Chiara Criscuolo,et al.  Global Engagement and the Innovation Activities of Firms , 2005 .

[23]  Eeric de Roodenbeke,et al.  Think globally, act locally , 1993, The Lancet.