I International Journal of https://doi.org/10.4995/ijpme.2023.

19426

J Production Management Received: 2023-01-19 Accepted: 2023-07-20

PME and Engineering

Principles of cellular manufacturing/engineering/management:

case studies and explications

Richard Schonberger
Ph.D. Independent Researcher/Author 177 107th Ave. NE, #1702, Bellevue, WA USA 98004
[email protected]

Abstract:
Process improvement through cellular manufacturing, engineering, and management (CEM) is largely dated
and neglected. This article aims at rejuvenating the topic through re-conceptualization in the form of twelve
principles of workcell design, operation, and management, plus six corollary principles. An assessment model,
based on the twelve principles is suggested for planning and evaluating proposed or operational CEM cases.
Much of the attendant research emerges from published case studies, along with authors’ own extensive, on-
site visitations and analyses. Collectively, an intent to present rationale for considering and treating the workcell/
cellular construct as among the more significant concepts/methodologies within the field of manufacturing/
engineering/production management.
Key words:
Cellular manufacturing, Workcells, Flexibly quick response, Pull system, One-piece flow, Visual Management.

1. Introduction: Principles and a significant body of research, dated mainly in the

late 1990s and early 2000s, addressed the concept
Best Practices in Cellular Design,
known generally as reengineering, or reengineering
Operations, and Management the organization (Hammer and Champy, 1993).
Some of that research focuses on ‘business process’
Cellular engineering and manufacturing (CEM) reengineering (Vanhaverbeke and Torremans, 1999);
should be seen as ranking with the most significant a smaller segment specifically refers to physical
of process-improvement methodologies. CEM’s layout, potentially, if not inclusively, to include
origins date back, especially, to Mitrofanov’s, CEM configurations (Spath et al, 2012; Rabfeld et
Scientific Principles of Group Technology (1966), al., 2013).
reaching enlarged audiences through Burbidge’s,
The Introduction of Group Technology (1975), Notably, the CEM principles call for rejection of the
and Production Flow Analysis for Planning Group commonplace of arranging and operating productive
Technology (1989). These works were given to resources by commonality of function: lathes here,
applications in the realm of production-equipment drill presses there; order entry in one office, credit-
groupings. Before long, however, it became clear check in another; and so on. And rejection, as well,
that the concepts/methods should be equally relevant of the practice of grouping production into large lots
and advantageous with regard to the organization of one thing, then another, well out of synch with
and management of human work. Indeed, CEM actual customer requirements. Instead, CEM calls
concepts have migrated beyond industrial operations for production in small, ‘just-in-time’ quantities,
and are seen as applicable in administrative/office with high flexibility to quickly respond to changes
environments and human services (Smith et al., 2017), in usage/demand; and doing so through workcells
including healthcare (Lee et al., 2023). In addition, designed/organized by product family or customer

To cite this article: Schonberger, R. (2023). Principles of cellular manufacturing/engineering/management: case studies and explications. International Journal of
Production Management and Engineering, 11(2), 103-111. https://doi.org/10.4995/ijpme.2023.19426

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Int. J. Prod. Manag. Eng. (2023) 11(2), 103-111 103
http://polipapers.upv.es/index.php/IJPME
 Schonberger

family, or both at the same time (see Suri, 1998, on each CEM principle (numbered for convenient
‘quick response manufacturing’). reference) is described with a topical name and brief
description.
For example, in a production facility making
headrests for automotive vehicles, cellular principles 1. Flexible response. Workcells dedicate themselves
could be operationalized as four headrest workcells to flexibly quick customer responsiveness—the
for four headrest families, such as one focused ‘pull system’—with the aim of one-piece flows
workcell each for compact, economy, midsize, and rather than in batches with hiccup-like stops and
full-size cars. Or, groupings of headrest workcells by starts.
customer families, such as for Ford, Mazda, Audi,
and Renault. Or, at the same time, a workcell for a 2. Workcell layout. Workcell groupings/layouts
family of headrests for compact cars in the customer favor integration of tasks along the workflow:
family of Mazda, such as one workcell focused on viz., the customer chain. (This is contrary to
compact Mazda cars, another for economy Mazdas, conventional plant-layout concepts, which
and so on. Such focus could help the industry allow for, even prescribe, layout by process
in coping with coordination difficulties between commonality: the ‘process layout’).
module suppliers and sequencing in car assembly
(Jung, 2021, addresses that issue). 3. Workcell equipment and changeover. A
workcell may consist only or mainly of devices/
In as much as the term, cell, is typically associated equipment, which, for the sake of flexibly quick
with incarceration, or a biological cell in a living response, must strive for quick changeovers from
body, this article follows the practice, now common one product variation to others.
within the cellular-management community, of
using the more specific term, workcell, rather than, 4. Workcell equipment and concurrent
simply, cell. Among those extensively promoting production (CP). Workcells favor multiple
the preferable term, Nicholas (2011) devoted a simple, low-cost equipment units producing
considerable portion of the index and sections of his many product models concurrently, in tune with
lean/competitive advantage-oriented book is devoted usage variety patterns downstream. (This is
specifically to cellular manufacturing and workcells. contrary to conventional practice, which favors
few complex, high-cost ‘monument’ equipment
units for sequential production in large lots of
2. Methods each product variation, well out of phase with
downstream customer usage/demand.)
Most of the literature on CEM is dated, suggesting
that both the research community and practitioners 5. Cross-training within human workcells.
have considered the subject to have reached a point Human-populated workcells are treated as havens
where there’s little new to be explored: Much of for cross-training as a primary means of achieving
the relevant case-study or conceptual sources date flexible response. (In contrast, conventional
back to the eighties (Schonberger, 1981/1984; Hall, production has each worker narrowly posted/
1987), nineties (e.g., Shafer and Meredith, 1990), trained, thus to do one job repetitively.)
and early two-thousands (e.g., Kumar and Sharma,
2014; Wang, 2015). Given all that, this research, 6. Gearing workcells for knowing/understanding/
based mainly on case-study sources, is geared toward coordinating with customers and suppliers.
bringing forth a new approach to CEM research, Cross-training of workcell members is aimed
namely, in presenting principles for workcell design at/engenders understanding of downstream
engineering, operation, and management, thus to (customer-chain) purpose/needs/ends, as well as
restoke the flames, so to speak. those of upstream (supplier-chain) entities.

7. Workcell-to-workcell migration. Flexibility

3. Results brought about by cross-training includes abilities
and opportunities to fill-in for and migrate/
Exposition of CEM concepts focuses on the following rotate to feeder and user workcells, plus ‘sister’
twelve aspects, posited here, prescriptively, as cellular workcells (e.g., that produce other, related product
engineering and manufacturing principles. Below, components). Such movement of members to

104 Int. J. Prod. Manag. Eng. (2023) 11(2), 103-111 Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
 Principles of cellular manufacturing/engineering/management: case studies and explications

other workcells is sufficiently beneficial as to Serving as a partial summary of these 12 CEM

treat it not just as opportunistic but as purposeful principles, Heyer and Wemmerlöv had this to say
for the enterprise. in the Preface to their comprehensive (770-page)
book, Reorganizing the Factory: Competing Though
8. Workcells and enterprise effectiveness. Cellular Manufacturing (2002): ‘… we do believe
Workcells, in their press for production that flows that the basic principles that underlie cells, i.e.,
and the pull system, reduce/avoid many costs, dedicated and closely located resources assigned
including those related to conventional slow, responsibility for the completion of families of
halting deliveries along the chain of customers. products, components, or information deliverables,
(Conventional, non-workcell processing, should be guiding lights for the design of all
commonly focused on person/group/equipment manufacturing systems (and much office or service
efficiency—obtained by production in batches— work)’ [their italics].
is suboptimal and myopic, masking various
enterprise-wide costs and delays, plus customer Bicheo and Holweg (2023, p. 126) offer alternate
defections). words to summarize some key elements of the CEM
principles: ‘Compared with the traditional job shop,
9. Effective workcell size. While a workcell may the advantages [of workcells] are massive reductions
consist of a single member, the usual, more of lead time through one-piece flow, big reductions
effective format is of ‘a few’ members, thus to in inventory, simplified control, early identification
engender flexible staffing and harness various of quality problems, improved possibilities for job
skills/awareness/motivations. rotation, … and volume flexibility by adjusting the
number of workers.’
10. Effective workcell shape. An often ideal
configuration of workcell teammates/equipment Further, the CEM principles elevate the importance
is the U-shape, which may facilitate short- of the word, flow, from Burbidge’s 1989 book,
distance deliveries of component parts and Production Flow Analysis for Planning Group
tools from within the ‘U’. ‘U-cells’ also enable Technology, that term descriptive of a vital role and
members to more easily see and track each objective in any accurate, comprehensive explication
other’s situation, whether smooth or rocky, and of CEM principles; also, Schmenner (2015) in his
to react quickly to arising issues. comprehensive book on ‘Swift, Even Flow.’ See,
also, Afy-Shararah and Rich (2018) on operations
11. Visual management in workcells. Regardless flow effectiveness; and on flow manufacturing, and
of cellular shapes (‘U,’ linear, otherwise) DiBono (1997); Motwani (2002), and Huo, Gu and
effective performance is much enhanced by use Prajogo (2016).
of various inward and outward communication
media, notably visual overhead and wall displays Further, in regard to flexible response, Renna,
showing progress, slowdowns, interruptions for Materi and Ambrico (2023) offer that ‘cellular
run-outs of parts or quality issues, and so on. manufacturing systems are widely used due to their
advantageous capability of combining the flexibility
12. Workcells with queue limitation. In avoidance of the job-shop and the productivity of the flow
of clutter and excesses of component inventories, shop’; and Cagliano and Spina (2000), that explores
workcells employ visual queue-limitation strategically flexible production. See, also, Kossek
methods: a space-limited zone on a bench or et al., 2015, re ‘balanced workplace flexibility’ and
on the floor, an upper limit on number of parts ‘avoiding the traps.
containers in/near the workcell, with the rule: no
delivery of more parts until the queue is empty or See, also, Schonberger and Brown (2017) for their
reached its limit; and, quick refill if empty. Such introductive exposition on concurrent production
queue-limiters extend forward to next processes (PC) vs. the more typical sequential production or
and backward to feeder processes (including just one variation at a time.
stock rooms). (See Notes regarding the term,
queue limitation/queue limiter in place of the These twelve CEM principles do not borrow from
non-descriptive term, kanban.) but do bear a few similarities and overlappings with
certain of 25 Principles of Lean, as detailed by Bicheo
and Holweg (2023, pp. 12-14) in The Lean Toolbox,

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Int. J. Prod. Manag. Eng. (2023) 11(2), 103-111 105
 Schonberger

sixth edition. Most particularly, their No. 8 is named - Workcells and focused factories/plants-in-a-
‘Flow,’ No. 10 is ‘Pull,’ and No. 13 is to reduce plant. A mega-workcell—one that dominates
‘Time’—those three embracing CEM principle 1 an entire entity (e.g., a plant or factory or office
calling for flexible quick response—the pull system. or clinic) has been labeled as a ‘focused factory’
Notable, as well, is their No. 22 ‘Thinking small’ (Skinner, 1974). In other words, a focused factory
as is CEM principle 4 on multiple simple, low-cost has attributes of an enlarged workcell—or, better
equipment units. The two lists of principles, however, yet, a configuration of multiple workcells, all
have differing purposes, the CEM principles more contributing to a focused-facility whole.
narrowly targeted at what we argue is among the
- Workcell automation. As workcells evolve,
most effective of the various process-improvement
one tendency is toward replacement of human
concepts/methodologies; the Principle of Lean much
members with simple or multitask devices, i.e.,
broader and including things general (Learning, No.
automation. However, a possible downside of
24) and things to avoid (Avoid overload, No. 20).
such automation (besides its cost) is losses of
overall customer-chain flexibility: humans are
inherently flexible. Workcell automation also can
4. Corollary principles employ IT for display of queue limits, progress,
completions, and problems by type (e.g.,
Before discussing and exemplifying the CEM
breakdowns, low parts, help calls, etc.), though,
principles, we offer the following six corollary or
again, simple visuals (e.g., a dry-erase board)
supporting principles.
have flexibility and cost advantages.
- Tainted teamwork in oversized workcells.
As regards this last corollary, researchers have
When workcell membership grows to include
investigated links of cellular methods and Industry
more than ‘several’ human members its
4.0, along with the ‘productivity paradox’ (Skinner,
effectiveness is likely to be compromised through
1986), which explores how digitization brings forth
task overload and difficulty in maintaining
complexities that impact on operationalization
familiarity with the capabilities and proclivities
(Dold and Speck, 2021). We find, also, a significant
of members; teamwork suffers.
research trend on robotic workcells (e.g., Chen,
- Workcell diversity. Workcells benefit from 2001; Fulea et al., 2015). These factors imply a full
diversity of members’ skills, experience, social circle from earliest writings on equipment-focused
attributes (humanity, empathy, volubility, etc.), group technology/flexible manufacturing systems
and physical attributes (strength, stature, hand (FMS), forward to workcells made up of humans and
dexterity, visual acuity, etc.). accessory equipment, to replacement of the human
actuators with digitization and agile robots.
- Self-management in workcells. Workcells,
as they develop, are welcoming of self-
management, including members’ maintaining
visual displays of goals and progress toward
5. Discussion
them, tracking glitches and their causes, and
To some extent the CEM principles speak for
serving as convenient, near-at-hand meeting
themselves, requiring minimal elaboration, Suffice
places; and possibly co-located staff facilitators
here to examine just a few case-study examples,
(e.g., one or more personnel with engineering,
leading here with a single, but standout case example,
quality, or accounting credentials maintaining a
that of O.C. Tanner, which illustrates several of the
nearby presence).
principles and may serve as a model for further
- Outreach activities of workcell teams. consideration—notably, in extensions to workcell
Workcell members, as they attain high visibility applications in a variety of alternate contexts. In
as to purposes, challenges, obstacles, may see the Tanner example, the context is that of very low-
fit to organize occasional outreach activities, volume, high-mix production, chosen here for being
such as inviting representatives from supplier associated with particularly difficult management
or customer or sister entities to visit and jointly challenges.
face up to common obstacles and their removal.
In turn, workcell members may be welcomed for O.C. Tanner. Among the globe’s top examples of
return visits to such entities, thus to expand their effective workcell development is found at O.C.
consciousness of mutually important issues. Tanner’s production facility in Salt Lake City, Utah,

106 Int. J. Prod. Manag. Eng. (2023) 11(2), 103-111 Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
 Principles of cellular manufacturing/engineering/management: case studies and explications

USA. Tanner, designer and producer of ‘recognition’ to make any model from one day to an hour,
items, such as engraved jewelry for Tanner’s reducing production floor space 32 percent and
customer organizations, used as awards to their production flow distance from 2,372 to 1,001
deserving employees. Upon becoming sufficiently feet; further, the plant’s productive capacity was
aware of the potential of cellular production in its raised by 50 percent. The workcells produce
own operations—some three decades ago—Tanner more than one-hundred dishwater models daily
went to work: It reduced 10 departments to three, with brands including Amana, Jenn-Air, Maytag.
converting the rest to eight U-shaped, nine-person, With minimal notice, teams can adjust assembly
one-piece-flow workcells. The main production cells to changes in schedule to produce ‘any
process centers on processing small gold blanks model dishwasher at any hour of the day.’ (These
into emblems bonded to watches, pins, and so on, achievements led to the plant’s receiving a 2004
with volumes of around 10,000 awards per day, Shingo Prize and a 2004 Industry Week magazine’s
and average order sizes of 2.3 pieces. These steps Best Plant recognition.) See, also, a comparative
reduced production time (a.k.a., cycle time) from case study at Zanussi-Electrolux, Susegana, Italy,
26 days to 1; with gold work-in-process (WIP) cut producing refrigerators (Pannizolo, 1998).
from 475,000 to fewer than 2,000 pieces (Ott, 1999;
- CEM in high-volume, moderate-mix
Hamilton, 2001; author visit, 2003). All assemblers
production … of small electrical/electronic
are cross-trained with job rotation every two hours.
devices (multimeters, oscilloscopes and
Tanner management has welcomed many visitors,
accessories) at Fluke Corp. Everett, Washington,
eager to see this impressive CEM in action; Tanner
USA (Schonberger, 2019). Fluke Building 3 was
was an early recipient, in 1999, of the Shingo Prize,
designed to form some seventy-five or eighty
which is awarded by the Shingo Institute housed at
U-shaped workcells, most of them for finished-
Utah State University in Logan, Utah.
item assembly, including pack-out as the final
operation. The workcells are easily reconfigured,
Does O.C. Tanner’s version of CEM abide by/follow
with most benches, equipment, and storage racks
the twelve principles? The answer seems clearly to
on wheels with quick disconnects of utilities at
be yes in regard to most of the principles—with no
ceilings. All incoming materials, numbering
attempt to assess in detail herein. The question could
several thousand, arrive and within four hours
be more systematically answered via an analytical
are distributed to points of use next to assembly
case study, in which a case writer might employ
cells, replenished via queue-limiting ‘kanban
a CEM compliance matrix: placing each of the
cards’. In 1998 Fluke was acquired by Danaher
principles along 12 rows, and with a main column
Corp., known for its global leadership in lean
labeled as Degree of Compliance, subdivided
manufacturing.
into perhaps four degrees, such as Fully, Mostly,
Partially, Needs Work. (For example: A case-writer - CEM in moderate-volume, moderate-
affiliated with the Shingo Prize might undertake such mix production … of bottled cosmetics at
a study.) The CEM principles model along with such AmorePacific, Suwon, Korea (Schonberger,
a compliance matrix, could be employed at various 2019). Amore-Pacific’s Suwon cosmetics plant
other companies known to employ or be interested in is fully engineered into workcells (excepting
employing CEM. formulating the liquid base, which is produced
in large, nearby processor equipment). Formerly,
Following are four additionally notable CEM packaging was done by fifteen assemblers on a
examples, each in a different production context single, long conveyor-driven assembly line in
and each detailed elsewhere within published case batch mode with frequent changeovers. In early
studies; where to find those case studies is indicated. 2000s the assembly line was replaced with some
thirty assembly workcells, each dedicated to its
- CEM in high-volume, moderate-mix
own product variation: twenty-three, for larger
production … of large appliances (dishwashers)
batch jobs, are minimally automated and each
at Maytag Corp. in Jackson, Tennessee, USA
is staffed by three or fewer people; five or six
(Jusco 2004; Learmonth, 2003; Sharma, 2004;
U-shaped cells are for medium batches, each
Weber, 2011). The Maytag Dishwashing
with fewer than three people; and two cells, each
Products facility was designed and built in 1992
are tended by a single person. All assemblers
as a just-in-time plant. As its JIT efforts evolved,
are cross-trained and move from cell to cell as
it replaced its single, long assembly line with
customer-demand/product mix changes. With
eight one-piece-flow workcells, cutting time

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Int. J. Prod. Manag. Eng. (2023) 11(2), 103-111 107
 Schonberger

production so nimble, management informed is for methodologies that crunch both the short- and
the case-writer that all sales reps/agents were the long-term cycle times/customer-response times,
eliminated because they distort demand, and the which is a primary objective of the CEM principles.
sales force, equipped with PDA (personal data
assistant) devices, send sales data to company
planners in near-real time. Lead times were 6. Related Issues
reduced to five days for delivery to stores and
as well to consumers via their door-to-door sales Still-further research is indicated on how the CEM
force; distribution centers were cut from eight to principles interrelate with other organization units,
two. Amore received the Korea national quality such as HR—considering, notably, workcells’
award in 2004. effects/impacts on pay and employee turnover (see
Huber and Hyer (1985), on ‘The human factor in
Point of contrast: Loreal converted its cosmetics cellular manufacturing’); and product development
plant in Little Rock, Arkansas, USA, to three or with design-for-manufacturing concepts—or
four cells (a.k.a., lines) of 25-35 people (Hughes, more specifically, design-for-CEM; on this topic,
2009). A worthy start: but best-practice cellular see case study on Sentrol, Tigard, Oregon, USA
assembly would require further re-vamping to (Schonberger, 2019, Chapter II-48). Also, consider
form, say, fifteen cells of about six assemblers relationships with sales and marketing (Schonberger,
each. 2020); and supply-chain management integration
(Prajogo and Olhager, 2012). Various other issues
- Remanufacturing: Low-Volume, High-Mix
have to do with quality assurance (Kim et al., 1999);
Production … of carburetors, alternators, etc., at
data management for supply chains (Marbert and
East Bay Generator, North Oakland, California,
Venkataramanan, 1998; and Chandra and Tumanyan,
USA (Owen and Sprow, 1994; Schonberger,
2007); supply-chain management and its effects on
2019). In 1990 East Bay’s remanufacturing
manufacturing flexibility (Chaudhuri et al., 2018);
facility featured fourteen workcells, these for the
and spatial factors (see, as examples, a bottom-up
20 percent of major part numbers that yielded 80
approach to multi-facility layout, Peréz-Gosende,
percent of revenue: six workcells for the highest-
Mula and Díaz-Madroñiero, 2023, and multi-floor
volume starters (e.g., Ford, Delco, Chrysler);
cellular manufacturing layout, Zhao, Lu and Yi,
six alternator workcells, one carburetor cell,
2020).
and one cell for new business in parts for trucks,
forklifts, and the like. Workcells are set up so two
Among more theoretical issues are how CEM
assemblers can work in one cell (more would
may make use of infotech, as well as its possible
overcrowd), allowing for production to react
ecological impacts. As one example (of a great
quickly to ‘elephant orders.’ Its quick-response
many), see a study that proposes principles for
capabilities made East Bay the go-to shop (among
linking organizational culture and industry 4.0
many competitors) for old-part replacements—
design (Tortorella et al., 2023). As for environmental
and, as well, the go-to cite at premium prices for
impacts, Jararzadeh et al. (2022) consider how
other parts.
cellular manufacturing and ecological sustainability
- Plentiful other examples with potential for may, or should, interact.
further research as to compliance with the 12
CEM principles may be found (in early research) Among many other diverse, researchable impacts on
in Irani, 1999; and (of more recent vintage) in and to CEM, we note the area relating to workcell
Schonberger, 2019. employees: their roles, environment, and well-
being: Firms advanced in CEM are finding that
All these case-study examples—with their differing cross-training/job rotation relieves boredom and
contexts—have as a common objective and result, reduces employee turnover, makes each teammate
the reduction of inventories, and with it according process-conscious, with resulting elevated concern
to Little’s Law (Little, 2011), cycle times, while for quality; can form a basis for pay differentials for
increasing throughput. Those variables, however—as those who are certified at multiple work stations; and
Bicheo and Holweg (2023, p. 36) explain, ‘are long- grooms best employees for possible advancement
term averages. The maximum may be quite different into supervision and/or support functions, such
and, over a short period, say one day, the [Little’s as material handling and incoming or outgoing
Law] equation may not hold.’ Thus, the great need shipment work. As examples in the workforce arena,

108 Int. J. Prod. Manag. Eng. (2023) 11(2), 103-111 Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
 Principles of cellular manufacturing/engineering/management: case studies and explications

see Huber and Hyer (1985) on ‘The human factor in explore alternate ways of expressing, demonstrating,
cellular manufacturing’; and two more O.C. Tanner- applying, and assessing the principles, as well as
oriented papers, Williams (2013), ‘Our people are offering amendments, reductions, additions, and
our competitive edge’; and Hall (2005), ‘creating a perhaps further corollary principles. For their part,
culture of expectations’. Also, in regard to materials- practitioners may consider employing the ten-
management, with implications on CEM’s queue- principle CEM compliance matrix, described earlier,
limitation principle, see Schonberger (2022). as a tool for comprehensive engineering/design and
assessment of CEM practices.
Another prime example—again from Tanner—
applies to the mechanical and industrial engineering
functions. As Hall (2005) explained, ‘All O.C. Tanner
7. Notes on Terminology
[equipment people] either build themselves, or greatly
modify [cellular equipment], and modification never Queue limitation, as a term and concept, should be
ceases…. Were [O.C. Tanner equipment] purchased seen as offering considerable advantages over its
conventionally, 13 cells’ worth of equipment would historical predecessor term (from the Japanese),
be prohibitively expensive. Instead, [its] equipment kanban. Kanban is just a word whereas queue
is inexpensive…. The engineers learned to think of limitation and queue limit describe what should take
mobile, mini-sized “tinker-toy” equipment easy to place in the pursuit of the target stock-management-
modify’. oriented concept and its related CEM principle,
twelfth on the principles list.
Also beyond the scope of this paper are the many and
growing CEM applications in the services sector: Generally avoided as well herein is lean, which
administrative offices in any company, banks and has become rather a hodge-podge of concepts and
insurance companies, healthcare, restaurants, and so methodologies that largely are failing to convey
on. overriding objectives of flexibly swift, customer-
focused flow. Rather, the term, lean, has in various
The following quote (Barry, 2016) may serve as a quarters, gotten itself overly wrapped around
way to summarize some key aspects bearing on the reduction/elimination of wastes. Though lean is
CEM principles: generally seen as a contemporary construct, such
focus on waste elimination (and its Japanese-
In essence, cellular manufacturing is a distinct language typology) is hardly different from or
offshoot from the lean manufacturing philosophy. advanced of the targets of process improvement as
It also incorporates elements from just-in-time. The developed in the works of F.W. Taylor (1911) and
emphasis … is on speed, without sacrificing quality. the Gilbreths (Gilbreth and Gilbreth, 1916) in the
Speed is achieved in two ways. First, workstations
early to mid-20th century. Industrial engineer Frank
and machines are arranged [so that] components [are]
passed around and built without waiting for individual
Gilbreth had developed the process flowchart with its
batches to be assembled. five waste-reducing/process-improvement symbols
in 1921; standardized in 1947 by the American
Second, all workstations and machines are positioned Society of Mechanical Engineers (Gilbreth and
[so that] the assembly process can easily be tweaked Gilbreth, 1921). We do not propose a replacement of
and optimized. Cellular manufacturing equipment the term, lean, which has the benefit of brevity; what
is designed with the idea that an entire floor can be appears to be needed is a concise term that captures
picked up and put down in a different configuration
CEM targets of flexibility quick responsiveness and
in just … minutes. Therefore cellular manufacturing
achieves speed on both the tactical and strategic level
Schmenner’s, swift, even flow. Both terms, kanban
and lean, may be seen as having become jargonistic
Finally, this being the first stab at articulating and lacking in erudition.
principles of CEM, future research should also

References
Afy-Shararah, M., & Rich, N. (2018). Operations flow effectiveness: a systems approach to measuring flow performance.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 38(11), 2096-2123.
Barry, M. (2016) Cellular Manufacturing and Product Complexity. (https://www.aberdeen.com/featured/cellular-
manufacturing-and-product-complexity/) . Accessed in 2022.

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Int. J. Prod. Manag. Eng. (2023) 11(2), 103-111 109
 Schonberger

Bicheo, J., & Holweg, M. (2023). The Lean Toolbox, sixth edition. Buckingham, England: PICSIE Books.
Burbidge, J.L. (1975). The Introduction of Group Technology. New York: Wiley.
Burbidge, J.L. (1989). Production Flow Analysis for Planning Group Technology. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
Chandra, C., & Turmanyan, A. (2007). Organization and problem ontology for supply chain information support system.
Data & Knowledge Engineering, 61(2), 263-280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.datak.2006.06.005
Chaudhuri, A., Boer, H., & Taran, Y. (2018). Supply chain integration, risk management and manufacturing flexibility.
International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 38(3) (January). https://doi.org/10.1108/
IJOPM-08-2015-0508
Chen, I. (2001). Rapid response manufacturing through a rapidly reconfigurable robot workcell. Robotics and Computer-
Integrated Manufacturing, 17(3), 199-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0736-5845(00)00028-4
Cagliano, R., & Spina, G. (2000). Advanced manufacturing technologies and strategically flexible production. Journal of
Operations Management, 18(2),169-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(99)00022-4
DiBono, P. (1997). Flow manufacturing improved efficiency and customer responsiveness. IIE Solutions, 29(3).
Dold, L., & Speck, C. (2021). Resolving the productivity paradox of digitalized production. International Journal of
Production Management and Engineering, 9(2), 65-80. https://doi.org/10.4995/ijpme.2021.15058
Fulea, M., Popescu, S., Brad, E., Mocan, B., & Murar, M. (2015). Reconfigurable industrial robotic work cells. Applied
Mechanics and Materials, 762, 233-241. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.762.233
Gilbreth, F.B., & Gilbreth, L.M. (1916). Fatigue Study. New York: Sturgis and Walton.
Gilbreth, F.B., & Gilbreth, L.M. (1921). Process Charts. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
Hall, R.W. (1987). Attaining Manufacturing Excellence. Homewood, Illinois: Dow Jones-Irwin, 127-129, 189.
Hall, R.W. (2005). Creating a culture of expectations. Target, 21(6), 5-11.
Hamilton, L. (2001). Leadership in leading lean manufacturing. Proceedings, Shingo Prize Conference, 2001.
Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the Corporation – A Manifesto for Business Revolution. New York:
Harper Collins. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-6813(05)80064-3
Huber, V.L. & Hyer, N.L. (1985). The human factor in cellular manufacturing. Journal of Operations Management, 5(2),
213-228. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-6963(85)90008-7
Hughes, M. (2009). The brains behind the beauty. Industrial Engineer (November), 50-51.
Huo, B., Gu, M., & Prajogo, D. (2016). Flow management and its impacts on operational performance. Production Planning
& Control, 27(15), 1233-1248.
Jararzadeh, J, Khalili, H.A. & Shoja, N. (2022). A multiobjective optimization model for a dynamic and sustainable cellular
manufacturing system under uncertainty. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience. Article ID 1334081, 1-17.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/1334081
Jung, E. (2021). Integrating Tier-1 module suppliers in car sequencing problem. International Journal of Production
Management and Engineering, 9(2), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.4995/ijpme.2021.14985
Jusko, J. (2004). Lonely at the top. Industry Week (October), 58-60.
Kim, H.M., Fox, M.S., & Gruninger, M. (1999). An ontology for quality management-enabling quality problem identification
and tracing. BT Technology Journal, 17(4), 131-140. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009611528866
Kossek, E.E., Thompson, R., & Lautsch, B.A. (2015). Balanced workplace flexibility: Avoiding the traps. California
Management Review, 57(4), 5-25. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2015.57.4.5
Kumar, S., & Sharma, R.K. (2014). Cell formation heuristic procedure considering production data. International Journal
of Production Management and Engineering. 2(2), 75–84. https://doi.org/10.4995/ijpme.2014.2078
Learmonth, A.B. (2003). LeanSigma makes Maytag more competitive. Manufacturing Engineering (July), 14.
Lee, H.T., Lee, S.Y., Seo, J.Y., & Ahn. (2023). Short-term (6 weeks) experience of a modular workcell for hemostasis
testing including an intelligent data manager at a tertiary care hospital. Laboratory Medicine, lmac156.
https://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmac156
Little, J.D.C. (2011). Little’s law as viewed on its 50th anniversary. Operations Research, 59(3), 536–549. https://doi.
org/10.1287/opre.1110.0940
Marbert, V.A. & Venkataramanan, M.A. (1998). Special research focus on supply chain linkages: Challenges for design
and Management in the 21st century. Decision Sciences, 29(3). 5370551. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1998.
tb01353.x
Mitrofanov, S.P. (1966). The Scientific Principles of Group Technology. Yorkshire National Lending Library for Science
and Technology.

110 Int. J. Prod. Manag. Eng. (2023) 11(2), 103-111 Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
 Principles of cellular manufacturing/engineering/management: case studies and explications

Motwani, J. (2002). Flow manufacturing – necessity, benefits, and implementation: a case study. Industrial Management
and Data Systems, 102(2), 73-79. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570210419618
Nicholas, J. (2011). Lean Production for Competitive Advantage. New York: CRC Press. https://doi.
org/10.4324/9781439894163
Ott, D. (1999). Getting to continuous flow in a make-to-order environment. Lean practitioner presentation. Proceedings,
1999 Shingo Prize Conference, 609-625.
Owen, J.V. & Sprow, E.E. (1994). The power of partnerships. Manufacturing Engineering, (April), 33-39.
Pannizolo, R. (1998). Cellular manufacturing at Zanussi-Electrolux plant, Susegana, Italy. Ch. 13 in Suresh, N.C. & Kay,
K.M. (eds.). Group Technology and Cellular Manufacturing: State of the Art Synthesis of Research and Practice.
Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998, 62-67. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5467-7_27
Pérez-Gosende, P., Mula, J., & Díaz-Madroñiero, M. (2023). A conceptual framework for multi-objective facility layout
planning by a bottom-up approach. International Journal of Production Management and Engineering, 11(1), 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.4995/ijpme.2023.19006.
Prajogo, D., & Olhager, J. (2012). Supply chain integration and performance: The effects of long-term relationships,
information technology and sharing, and logistics integration. International Journal of Production Economics, 135(1),
514-522.
Rabfeld, C., Röble, D., & Jochem, R. (2013). Integrated and modular design of an optimized process architecture. International
Journal of Production Management and Engineering. 1(1), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.4995/ijpme.2013.1558
Renna, P, Materi, S., & Ambrico, M. (2023). Review of responsiveness and sustainable concepts in cellular manufacturing
systems. Applied Sciences, 13(2), 1125. . https://doi.org/10.3390/app13021125
Richardson, P.R. (1988). Cost Containment: The Ultimate Advantage. New York, NY: Free Press.
Schonberger, R.J. (1984). Just-in-Time Production Systems-Replacing Complexity with Simplicity in Manufacturing
Management. Industrial Engineering, 16(10), 52.
Schonberger, R.J. (2019). Flow Manufacturing – What Went Right, What Went Wrong: 101 Mini-Case Studies That Reveal
Lean’s Successes and Failures. New York, NY: Routledge/Productivity Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429432170
Schonberger, R.J. (2020). Extending the pursuit of flow (lean) management to encompass sales, general and administrative
functions. Production Planning and Control, 31(13), 1098-1109. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2019.1699971.
Schonberger, R.J. (2022). Containerization: A neglected element of lean, just-in-time. ISE Magazine, 51(12) December,
41-42.
Schonberger, R.J., & Brown, K. (2017). Missing link in competitive research and practice: Customer-responsive concurrent
production. Special issue on competitive manufacturing in a high-cost environment. Journal of Operations Management
49(51) (March), 83-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2016.12.006
Schmenner, R.W. (2015). Getting and Staying Productive: Applying Swift, Even Flow to Practice. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Shafer, S. M., Meredith, J. R. (1990). A comparison of selected manufacturing cell formation techniques. International
Journal of Production Research, 28(4), 661–673. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207549008942747
Sharma, A. (2004). Leveraging lean for growth: How to leverage your lean capability to create long-term sustainable
growth. Lean coach presentation, Shingo Prize conference, Lexington, Ky.
Skinner, W. (1974). The focused factory. Harvard Business Review (May-June), 113-121.
Skinner, W. (1986). The productivity paradox. Harvard Business Review, 64(4) (July-August), 55-59.
Smith, M., Paton, S., & MacBryde, J. (2017). Lean implementation in a service factory: Views from the front line.
Production Planning and Control, 20(4), 280-288. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2017.1418455
Spath, D., Bender, M., Immer, N., & Riegal, J. (2012). Value stream layouting – Efficient use of space through value
steam-oriented layout (in German) wt Werkstattstechnik online, 102(9), 556-563. https://doi.org/10.37544/1436-4980-
2012-9-556
Suri, R. (1998). Quick Response Manufacturing: A Companywide Approach to Reducing Lead Times. Portland, Oregon,
USA.: Productivity Press/Taylor & Francis.
Taylor, F.W. (1911). Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper & Row.
Tortorella, G.L., Prashar, A., Carim Jr., G., Mostafa, S., Barros, A., Lima, R.M., & Hines, P. (2023). Organizational culture
and Industry 4.0 design principles: an empirical study on their relationship. Production Planning and Control (23
January), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2023.2170294
Vanhaverbeke, W., & Torremans, H. (1999). Reengineering a business process. Knowledge and Process Management, 6(1),
41-52. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1441(199903)6:1%3C41::AID-KPM47%3E3.0.CO;2-4

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Int. J. Prod. Manag. Eng. (2023) 11(2), 103-111 111
 Schonberger

Wang, J.X. (2015). Cellular Manufacturing: Mitigating Risk and Uncertainty. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
https://doi.org/10.1201/b18009
Weber, A. (2011). From humble roots to global production power. Assembly Magazine, (November), W1-W13.
Williams, G. (2013). Our people are our competitive edge. Target (Fall), 34-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0262-
4079(13)62095-3
Zhao, Y., Lu, J.,& Yi, W. (2020). A new cellular manufacturing layout: Multi-floor linear cellular manufacturing layout.
International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, 17(3) (May-June), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/1729881420925300

112 Int. J. Prod. Manag. Eng. (2023) 11(2), 103-111 Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International