It is strange what topics come up at an annual Liberal Democrat dinner, but this topic, in the post title above, came up at one I attended last week.
It’s a big subject.
First of all, we need to be clear what “Just-in-time” actually means. It is a phrase which is bandied about so that it sometimes ceases to have any precise meaning.
In its purest,original sense, Just-in-time refers to Just-in-time manufacturing, as defined by Wikipedia:
Just-in-time (JIT) manufacturing, also known as just-in-time production or the Toyota Production System (TPS), is a methodology aimed primarily at reducing flow times within production system as well as response times from suppliers and to customers. Its origin and development was in Japan, largely in the 1960s and 1970s and particularly at Toyota.
…the wide use of the term JIT manufacturing throughout the 1980s faded fast in the 1990s, as the new term lean manufacturing became established, as “a more recent name for JIT”. As just one testament to the commonality of the two terms, Toyota production system (TPS) has been and is widely used as a synonym for both JIT and lean manufacturing.
One element of TPS was the “kanban system” (which was not one and the same as JIT) and involved a square (or “kanban”) on the floor (in a manufacturing plant) which held parts. The operative would take parts from that square and when the square was empty, it was a sign that the square needed to be filled up with parts. The idea was that the square was just big enough to hold the minimum number of parts required – and no excess.
The “lean manufacturing” development of the TPS is often referred to a “Kaizen” – another Japanese word meaning “change for better” which basically means “continuous improvement”.
This is all very difficult to explain over Boeuf Stroganoff and trifle, with someone bawling out raffle ticket numbers behind you.
I think the term “Just-in-time” has been hijacked as a critical term for anything unpleasant emanating from the supply chain world – too many lorries – too many warehouses – not enough stock on the shelves at supermarkets etc etc.
However, it should be remembered that “Just-in-time” in its purest sense is about the elimination of waste. That is, particularly, the elimination of wasteful inventory.
It is all too easy to criticise firms for having too many lorries whizzing around the countryside at all hours.
However, it should be remembered that the opposite end of the supply chain spectrum is to have excess inventory. That means waste. Wasteful carbon activity spent building and maintaining warehouses. Wasteful carbon activity spent manufacturing and shipping parts around the world which are eventually trashed. Wasteful human activity in managing and maintaining that inventory.
Excess inventory is a bit like something, on the bottom of one’s shoe, left behind by a canine friend. It is easy to pick it up, but extremely difficult to get rid of it.
* Paul Walter is a Liberal Democrat activist. He is one of the Liberal Democrat Voice team. He blogs at Liberal Burblings.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Why I'm backing Layla Moran for Lib Dem Leader
Useful welfare rights advice and contact details
Government bungles plans for Commons return
GUEST POST What one Lib Dem councillor has done under lockdown
Thursday reading
Reporting Back: Annual Council
John McHugo
Gwyn Williams
Toby Keynes
Richard Underhill
George Kendall
7 Comments
They are no more “evil” than Boeuf Stroganoff.
Not sure why it should be “evil”. It is not JIT that results in all the transport – it would be needed anyway if production is scattered around the country or the continent or the globe. All that JIT does is dictate when the transport is needed.
Mass production of European cars nowadays, for instance, involves different parts being made/assembled in lots of different places in different countries. It’s like a complicated spaghetti shaped assembly line (or series of assembly lines) scattered around the continent. It’s why the big carmakers with plants in the UK are so worried about Brexit.
If an assembly plant runs out of parts or a supermarket runs out of stock its too late not JIT. The application of the concept is obviously rational but without companies having to bear the full costs of the environmental damage, that is done by transporting goods vast distances, it will continue unabated.
‘Just in time’ is about maximising sales and reducing waste – I worked for a long time in the fashion industry, where seasonality and trends can make product obsolete very quickly – you want to get something on the shelf while it’s still hot – in both senses of the word if it’s a summer article! In a capitalist model it’s therefore desirable and sensible – but in a more holistic society obviously other factors such as the environmental impact and worker exploitation need to be taken into account.
Indeed. It’s the systems of production and distribution that are the serious question. JIT is just a result of the questionable systems that exist.
No
The massive increase in warehousing across the UK since the 1980’s, indicates that ‘hardcore’ JIT didn’t work; a degree of slack being necessary to avoid systemic instability and as John Payne puts it being late and having an unplanned stock outage. Also a degree of slack allows for more efficient logistics: it’s one articulated lorry, not 14 transit vans.
Not sure why JIT supply chains should be regarded as ‘evil’, however, I can understand that the way some companies operate and pressurise their staff to achieve ‘JIT’ could be seen as verging on ‘evil’.