Read the following discussion/passage and provide an appropriate answer for the questions that follow.
Of the several features of the Toyota Production System that have been widely studied, most important is the
mode of governance of the shop - oor at Toyota. Work and inter - relations between workers are highly scripted
in extremely detailed ‘operating procedures’ that have to be followed rigidly, without any deviation at Toyota.
Despite such rule - bound rigidity, however, Toyota does not become a ‘command - control system’. It is able to
retain the character of a learning organization
In fact, many observers characterize it as a community of scientists carrying out several small experiments
simultaneously. The design of the operating procedure is the key. Every principal must nd an expression in the
operating procedure – that is how it has an effect in the domain of action. Workers on the shop - oor, often in
teams, design the ‘operating procedure’ jointly with the supervisor through a series of hypothesis that are
proposed and validated or refuted through experiments in action. The rigid and detailed ‘operating procedure’
speci cation throws up problems of the very minute kind; while its resolution leads to a reframing of the
procedure and speci cations. This inter - temporal change (or exibility) of the speci cation (or operating
procedure) is done at the lowest level of the organization; i.e. closest to the site of action.
One implication of this arrangement is that system design can no longer be rationally optimal and standardized
across the organization. It is quite common to nd different work norms in contiguous assembly lines, because
each might have faced a different set of problems and devised different counter - measures to tackle it. Design
of the coordinating process that essentially imposes the discipline that is required in large - scale complex
manufacturing systems is therefore customized to variations in man - machine context of the site of action. It
evolves through numerous points of negotiation throughout the organization. It implies then that the higher
levels of the hierarchy do not exercise the power of the at in setting work rules, for such work rules are no
longer a standard set across the whole organization.
It might be interesting to go through the basic Toyota philosophy that underlines its system designing
practices. The notion of the ideal production system in Toyota embraces the following -‘the ability to deliver just- in - time (or on demand) a customer order in the exact speci cation demanded, in a batch size of one (and
hence an in nite proliferation of variants, models and speci cations), defect - free, without wastage of material,
labour, energy or motion in a safe and (physically and emotionally) ful lling production environment’. It did not
embrace the concept of a standardized product that can be cheap by giving up variations. Preserving
consumption variety was seen, in fact, as one mode of serving society. It is interesting to note that the
articulation of the Toyota philosophy was made around roughly the same time that the Fordist system was
establishing itself in the US automotive industry.