Int. J.

Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

An information-processing model of maintenance management

Laura Swanson*
Department of Management, Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville, Edwardsville, IL 62026-1100, USA
Received 1 September 2000; accepted 1 May 2002

Abstract
In the past two decades, changes in the production environment have made the task of making decisions about
allocating maintenance resources and scheduling maintenance work more difcult. More variables and consequences
must be considered requiring increased information-processing capacity. In this paper, Galbraiths (Organization
Design, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA) information-processing model is applied to study how the maintenance
function applies different strategies to cope with the environmental complexity. Based on data from a survey of plant
managers, the analysis shows that maintenance responds to the complexity of its environment with the use of
computerized maintenance management systems, preventive and predictive maintenance systems, coordination and
increased workforce size.
r 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Maintenance management; Computerized maintenance management systems; Advanced manufacturing technology

1. Introduction
The maintenance function is critical to a manufacturing organizations ability to maintain its
competitiveness. Without well-maintained equipment, a plant will be at a disadvantage in a market that
requires low-cost products of high quality to be delivered quickly. Properly maintained equipment will have
higher availability and longer life. Poorly maintained equipment will fail frequently and need to be replaced
sooner. Additionally, poorly maintained equipment is less likely to produce products of consistent quality.
In the past two decades, changes in the production environment have made the maintenance task
increasingly complex. Higher levels of automation can make diagnosis and repair of equipment more
difcult (Robinson, 1987; Paz and Leigh, 1994). The high level of capital intensity associated with
automated equipment also places greater pressure on the maintenance function to rapidly repair equipment
and to prevent failures from occurring (Collins and Hull, 1986). Along with the intricacies associated with
technologies, the maintenance function often has to cope with managing many different maintenance craft
classications and increasingly complex organizational structures. All of this complexity makes the
decisions about allocating resources and scheduling work more difcult for maintenance. More variables
*Tel.: +1-618-650-2710; fax: +1-618-650-3979.
E-mail address: lswanso@siue.edu (L. Swanson).
0925-5273/02/$ - see front matter r 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 2 5 - 5 2 7 3 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 2 6 6 - 9

46

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

and consequences must be considered requiring increased organizational capacity for information
processing to support the ability to make quick and accurate decisions.
Recent studies have applied information-processing theory to study the information-processing
alternatives used by manufacturing organizations to cope with the uncertainty associated with complexity.
Stock and Tatikonda (2000) studied the technology transfer process using information-processing theory
and interdependence theory. In a series of case studies they found that technology transfer is most
effectively managed when the level of technology uncertainty is matched with appropriate types of
interorganizational interactions.
A study by Flynn and Flynn (1999) looked at the impact of complexity on manufacturing organizations.
Their ndings demonstrated that manufacturing organizations did indeed cope with complexities by
employing practices that reduced the need for information processing or increased the organizations
capacity for information processing.
In this study, the model used by Flynn and Flynn (1999) is applied more narrowly to the maintenance
function. The model used in the Flynn study and this study draws on the information-processing model
introduced by Galbraith (1977). Galbraiths model proposes that organizations cope with complexity
through different information-processing strategies. Reducing complexity to reduce information-processing
requirements is one strategy. Other strategies focus on ways of increasing the organizations informationprocessing capacity either by information system investments or by organizational changes to facilitate
decision-making.
The objective of this research is to empirically study the relationship between the complexity of the
production environment and the use of maintenance practices that assist in managing the informationprocessing requirements brought on by such complexity. Further, the research studies the relationship
between maintenance practices that support information processing and the performance of the
maintenance organization.
Section 2 of this paper draws on Galbraiths (1977) model to describe complexity and the factors that
contribute to it. In Section 3, maintenance practices that contribute to the maintenance organizations
information-processing capacity are discussed in terms of the approaches suggested in Galbraiths model.
Section 4 provides details on data collection and measures used as well as the methodologies used to study
the hypotheses. Section 5 reports the results of the analysis, and Section 6 provides a discussion of the
results.

2. Complexity in the production environment

Organizational complexity can be directly linked to uncertainty within the organization. Galbraith (1977)
denes uncertainty as the gap between the amount of information required to perform a task and the
information already possessed by the organization. Complexity results in problems that are more difcult
to understand or analyze, resulting in greater uncertainty (Perrow, 1967). Increased complexity has the
potential to affect the organization adversely resulting in reduced performance (Flynn and Flynn, 1999).
Galbraith (1977) proposed a model for describing the factors that contribute to an organizations
uncertainty and mechanisms for coping with uncertainty. The model includes both internal and external
factors that affect uncertainty levels. Goal diversity represents external factors such as the number of
products, markets and clients that the organization serves. In Galbraiths model, each of the different
external constituents contributes to the amount of information needing to be gathered and considered to
support decision-making processes. Labor diversity, or the number different types of workers within the
organization, primarily determines internal uncertainty.
Flynn and Flynn (1999) proposed an expanded set of factors that may contribute to internal uncertainty
in manufacturing organizations. These factors include manufacturing diversity and process diversity.

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

47

Manufacturing diversity includes characteristics such as variability of demand patterns and the complexity
of the products being produced. Process diversity is determined by the characteristics of process technology
(i.e., job shop, batch, continuous) in use as well as the product volume/variety trade-offs found in the
productprocess matrix.
As a function located within the overall organization, the maintenance department is somewhat shielded
from external, market-related factors that contribute to uncertainty. However, several internal factors that
add complexity for the overall manufacturing organization have a similar effect on the maintenance
function. Labor diversity may be a signicant source of complexity for maintenance. The maintenance
function may have to manage many different craft classications such as electricians, mechanics and pipe
tters. The maintenance department may also have a tall organizational structure with several reporting
levels.
Process diversity is also important to the maintenance function because it describes the actual equipment
that the maintenance function is responsible for maintaining. Studies have found that mass output
orientation impacts the overall supporting infrastructure for manufacturing organizations (Woodward,
1965; Blau et al., 1976; Ward et al., 1992). More recently, studies have found that organizational
adjustments are required in order to successfully implement advanced manufacturing technologies (Dean
and Snell, 1991; Nemetz and Fry, 1988). Logically, it may be assumed that this effect may be extended
to the organizational structure and practices of specic functions within manufacturing. Further, the
use of advanced manufacturing technology (AMT) has been found to be associated with maintenance
practices that support communication and coordination and technical expertise within the organization
(Swanson, 1999).

3. Information-processing alternatives for maintenance

Flynn and Flynn (1999) recognized that Galbraiths model provides some helpful direction in
understanding the effect of complexity on the manufacturing organization and used the model to
investigate the role of different manufacturing practices in mitigating the effect of complexity on
manufacturing performance. In Galbraiths model (1977), complexity has a direct effect on an
organizations information-processing needs. Organizations have two alternatives for coping with
complexity. The rst alternative is to reduce the need for information processing. The second alternative
is to increase the organizations information-processing capacity. Specic maintenance practices are
consistent with the information-processing alternatives discussed by Galbraith. These practices are
presented in the following sections.
3.1. Reducing information-processing needs
Galbraith (1977) proposed three methods for reducing an organizations information-processing
requirements. The rst method involves changing the organizations environment to reduce uncertainty.
Environmental management involves reducing complexity by reducing the number of product offerings,
reducing time pressure or reducing the need to forecast. For maintenance, environmental management
means managing the production environment instead of the external environment to make the process of
planning less complex. One way that the maintenance function can gain greater control of its work and
reduce uncertainty is to use preventive and predictive maintenance.
Preventive maintenance is work performed after a specied period of time or machine use (Gits, 1992).
Preventive maintenance restores equipment condition in order to avoid more catastrophic failures that
would cause more extended downtime. Predictive maintenance is based on the same principle as preventive
maintenance. Under predictive maintenance, diagnostic equipment is used to measure the physical

48

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

condition of equipment such as temperature, vibration, lubrication and corrosion. When one of these
indicators reaches a specied level, work is undertaken to restore the equipment to proper condition
(Vanzile and Otis, 1992; Herbaty, 1990).
Preventive and predictive maintenance provide the maintenance organization with a more predictable
and manageable workload. These practices also allow the production function to more easily determine its
ability to ll orders on time. This ability is especially important as the diversity of equipment to be
maintained and the number of different types of workers to be managed increases.
Hypothesis 1. The use of preventive and predictive maintenance to manage the maintenance environment
will be greater in plants with greater process and labor diversity.
The second method that Galbraith (1977) proposed for reducing information-processing requirements
was to create slack resources. Galbraith characterized the creation of slack resources as the reduction of
performance standards to create additional resources. Manufacturing organizations can create slack
resources by carrying inventory or adding excess capacity to meet variations in demand. Flynn and Flynn
(1999) observed that the creation of slack resources adds excess costs and would not be a viable approach to
combating complexity in most organizations. On the other hand, as a functional area within the
manufacturing organization, maintenance plays a critical role in ensuring that schedules are met and
quality is maintained. It is possible that an organization would consider carrying slack resources in
maintenance to be a viable option for preserving overall plant performance.
Since maintenance is a service, it would be impossible to carry an inventory in response to complexity.
However, it is possible that maintenance would carry excess capacity in the form of extra workers to ease
decision making about allocating resources in a complex environment.
Hypothesis 2. The maintenance workforce will be larger in plants with greater process and labor diversity.
Galbraiths (1977) third approach to reducing information-processing requirements is to use selfcontained tasks. With self-contained tasks, groups are created with each group being provided with
sufcient resources to perform its own task. This means that instead of being organized by function, groups
are organized according to outputs and given the resources required to produce that output. The use of selfcontained tasks reduces complexity by reducing goal diversity, or the number of different constituents
placing demands on the group. This reduces environmental complexity and, in turn, informationprocessing requirements. Flynn and Flynn (1999) used group technology as an example of self-contained
tasks in a manufacturing environment. Group technology assigns a group of machines to produce a specic
set of products rather than the universe of product offerings.
For maintenance, one way to create self-contained tasks is through the use of decentralized, area
maintenance crews. In many plants, maintenance workers are dispatched from a central shop. In this
setting, the central shop experiences goal diversity as it attempts to meet the varying maintenance needs of
different departments. The differing needs may be as a result of the repair needs of different types of
production equipment. Further complexity may be added by the need to allocate workers in a variety of
maintenance job classications to meet the needs of different production areas. By creating area
maintenance crews assigned to specic plant areas, the maintenance function reduces complexity by
dedicating crews to specic areas of the plant rather than trying to juggle and meet the needs of multiple
production areas with a single, central shop (Heintzelman, 1976).
Hypothesis 3. The use of area maintenance crews will be higher in plants with greater process and labor
diversity.

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

49

3.2. Increasing information-processing capacity

Galbraith (1977) proposed two methods for increasing an organizations information-processing
capacity. The rst method involves investments in vertical information systems. According to Galbraith,
vertical information systems allow an organization to process information without overloading the
organizations normal communication channels. A computer information system is one example of a
vertical information system. The value of vertical information systems is that their capabilities for
supporting communication and decision making mean that fewer exceptions are referred upward in the
organizational hierarchy.
In maintenance, there has been an increasing movement toward computerized maintenance management
systems (CMMS). CMMS assists in managing a wide range of information on the maintenance workforce,
spare-parts inventories, repair schedules and equipment histories. It can also be used to automate the
preventive maintenance function, and to assist in the control of maintenance inventories and the purchase
of materials. CMMS may also be used to plan and schedule work orders and to manage the overall
maintenance workload (Hora, 1987; Wireman, 1991). Another capability offered by CMMS is the potential
to strengthen reporting and analysis capabilities (Wireman, 1991; Callahan, 1997; Hannan and Keyport,
1991). Finally, CMMS has been described as a tool for coordination and communication with production
(Dunn and Johnson, 1991).
While the capabilities offered by CMMS do not in any way reduce the amount of information to be
processed by the maintenance organization, they do assist the maintenance function in managing the ever
increasing complexity brought about by more complex and varied technologies and a workforce with highly
specialized skills.
Hypothesis 4. The use of computerized information systems by the maintenance function will be higher in
plants with greater environmental complexity.
Galbraith (1977) also suggested that lateral relations assist in increasing information-processing capacity.
Lateral relations allow problems to be solved at the level that they occur rather than being passed up the
organizational hierarchy. Some examples of lateral relations include direct contact between individuals who
share a problem, liaison roles that provide a link between departments, task forces for solving problems on
an as needed basis and teams that work on interdepartmental problems on a continuing basis.
As a support function, maintenance must communicate and coordinate effectively with production. All
of the proposed types of lateral relations may be used to create links between maintenance and production.
As the production environment becomes more complex, coordination between maintenance and
production becomes more critical and may require the use of more than one type of lateral relation in
order to effectively support the ability to maintain quality and meet production schedules.
Hypothesis 5. The use of lateral relations by the maintenance function will be higher in plants with greater
process and labor diversity.
3.3. Performance
By reducing the need for information processing or increasing information-processing capacity, each of
the maintenance practices discussed above will help the maintenance function to operate more effectively.
Problems can be addressed and solved more quickly, and communication and coordination with
production is carried out more effectively. Thus,
Hypothesis 6. The use of maintenance practices that reduce the need for information processing or increase
information-processing capacity will be associated with higher maintenance performance.

50

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

4. Methodology
4.1. Sample
A sample of 354 plants was identied using the Harris Indiana Industrial Index (1992). To be included in
the sample, each plant had to meet two requirements. The rst requirement was that the plant had to have
at least 200 employees. This size limitation is consistent with previous research. Empirical studies have
generally limited their samples to larger plants with at least 200250 employees (Blau et al., 1976; Hull et al.,
1988; Collins et al., 1988; Dean et al., 1992; Snell and Dean, 1992). Plants with at least 200 employees will
have a signicant investment in technology and are likely to require an internal maintenance group to care
for equipment.
The second requirement was that the plant had to be primarily involved in a metalworking industry. The
industries included: primary metals (Standard Industrial Classication [SIC] 33), fabricated metal products
(SIC 34), industrial and metalworking machinery (SIC 35), precision instruments (SIC 36), and
transportation equipment (SIC 37). This requirement is comparable to several surveys of manufacturing
that have concentrated on plants primarily involved in metalworking industries (Dean and Snell, 1991;
Deane et al., 1990; Ettlie and Reza, 1992; Majchrzak et al., 1986). Within these industries, a variety of
different technologies are in use including a signicant level of automated and advanced manufacturing
technologies (Majchrzak et al., 1986). Conversely, these industries should be fairly uniform in the
exogenous factors that might affect maintenance management. Exogenous factors might include the
characteristics of the material being worked on and governmental regulations regarding the handling of
materials, products and equipment. For example, chemical and food-processing industries may have
different requirements for cleaning and maintaining equipment and for handling products. These
differences could inuence maintenance management.
Questionnaires were sent to the maintenance manager and production manager in each plant. Thus, a
total of 708 questionnaires were sent. The name of the plant manager was obtained from the Harris Index
(1992). The name of the maintenance manager was obtained directly, through telephone calls to the plants.
The survey respondents included 125 plant managers and 162 maintenance managers from 232 plants.1
Twelve of the questionnaires were incomplete and were eliminated from the sample. An additional 53
questionnaires were eliminated because they reported having fewer than 200 employees in their plant. In all,
there were 222 usable questionnaires from 180 different plants, representing a response rate of 31.4%.
Using data available from the Harris Index (1992), comparison of responding plants to non-responding
plants showed no signicant difference for size, age or industry.2

4.2. Variables
For the rst ve hypotheses in this study, the independent variables describe the maintenance
organization and the production technology in the plant. The dependent variables are measures of the use
of information-processing alternatives by the maintenance department. In the sixth hypothesis, the
information-processing alternatives become the independent variables and a measure of maintenance
performance is the dependent variable. The descriptions and names of the variables are shown in Table 1.
Appendix A lists specic items.

Dual responses were received from 55 plants and were used to assess interrater reliability.
Chi-square tests were used to assess the representativeness of the sample using plant size, age and 2-digit SIC industry. For each
characteristic, the null hypothesis of homogenous distribution for respondents and non-respondents was accepted at a 0.05 level.
2

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

51

Table 1
Variable denitions
Variable

Denition

Plant size (SIZ)

Unionization (UNION)
Technology variety (VARI)

Log of number of employees in plant

Unionized=1, Not unionized=0
Average of the reported variety of equipment types and the
number of OEMs (see appendix)
Average of the reported extent of use of nine different computer
technologies (see appendix)
Weighted average of the extent of use of ve different types of
process technologies (see appendix)
Total number of maintenance craft classications in the plant
Number of levels in the longest line between the craft worker and
the highest level maintenance employee in the plant
Extent of use of preventive and predictive maintenance (see
appendix)
Log of the number of hourly maintenance employees in the plant
Log of the percent of the maintenance workforce assigned to area
maintenance
Average of the reported extent of use of CMMS for 11 different
maintenance activities (see appendix)
Average of the reported extent of use of interdepartmental
committees, task forces and liaison personnel (see appendix)
Average of the extent to which maintenance had contributed to
improvements in plant performance in product quality, equipment
availability and production costs (see appendix)

Advanced manufacturing technology (AMT)

Mass output orientation (MASS)
Classications (CLASS)
Organization levels (LEVEL)
Preventive/predictive maintenance (PMV)
Maintenance department size (LMTCSIZ)
Area maintenance (AREA)
Computerized maintenance management systems (CMMS)
Lateral relations (LATREL)
Performance (PERF)

4.2.1. Complexity
Complexity was operationalized by taking into account characteristics of the production equipment
maintained by the maintenance organization and characteristics of the organizational structure of the
maintenance department.
4.2.2. Production technology characteristics
Three measures were used to describe the production technology in use. The rst variable measures the
diversity of equipment that the maintenance function is expected to maintain. Previous literature provides
little guidance into the measurement of the diversity of plant equipment. Variety was operationalized using
two items. In both items, the respondent was asked to indicate where his/her organization fell on a bipolar
scale describing a range from the use of relatively few equipment types and original equipment
manufacturers (OEMs) to a relatively broad set of equipment types and OEMs.
The second variable measured the extent of use of AMT in the plant. The measure of AMT was based on
an instrument used by Snell and Dean (1990). AMT was based on nine items that measured the extent to
which the plant had implemented different computer technologies (e.g., FMS, NC, DNC). Greater use of
AMT means that equipment is more complex to maintain (Robinson, 1987).
The third variable describing process technology is mass output orientation. The measure is similar to
one developed by Khandwalla (1974). Respondents were asked to rate on ve-point scales the extent to
which each of the ve major technologies were used in their plants.3 The ratings on the use of each of the
3
The technologies include custom technology, small-batch or job shop technology, large-batch technology, mass-production
technology and continuous-process technology. These categories represent increasing technical complexity.

52

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

ve technologies are weighted by the type of technology. Custom technologies received a weight of one and
the use of continuous technologies received a weight of ve. The weighted ratings were then divided by the
sum of the weights (one through ve) to produce an index of the extent mass output orientation in
the plant.
4.2.3. Organizational characteristics
Two measures were used to describe the maintenance organization. The rst variable measures
the number of levels in the organization. Respondents were asked to count the number of levels in
the longest line between the craft worker and the highest maintenance level employee in the plant. The
second item asked the respondent to report the total number of maintenance craft classications in the
plant.
4.2.4. Maintenance approaches
One way for the maintenance function to control its environment is through the use of preventive and
predictive maintenance. Respondents were asked to report, on ve-item Likert scales (1=020% to 5=81
100%), the extent to which equipment in their plant is covered by preventive and predictive maintenance.
The responses on the two items were averaged.
Maintenance department size was based on the log of the number of hourly maintenance workers in
the plant.
Use of area maintenance was employed to indicate the extent to which self-contained tasks were used to
reduce information-processing capacity requirements for the maintenance function. Use of area
maintenance was measured as the percent of the maintenance workforce assigned to production areas
throughout the plant (versus assigned to a centralized maintenance area).4
Investment in vertical information systems was operationalized as the extent of use of CMMS. The
measure of CMMS use included eleven items asking the respondent to report the extent to which computer
systems were used to support different maintenance activities (e.g., work-order planning and scheduling,
equipment failure diagnosis, inventory control).
The use of lateral relations was measured using three items. Respondents were asked to report on a vepoint Likert scale the extent to which interdepartmental committees, task forces, and liaison personnel were
used to coordinate interdepartmental communication and activities.
4.2.5. Performance
For this study, a plant level measure of maintenance performance was needed. At the plant level,
maintenance performance is evident in equipment availability, the ability to meet production schedules and
product quality (Pintelon and Gelders, 1992; Teresko, 1992; Macaulay, 1988). However, in the case of plant
equipment condition and availability, uniform plant-level measures of maintenance performance are
difcult to identify. It is only in the past few years that researchers have started to discuss uniform methods
of measuring maintenance performance (Arts et al., 1998; Tsang, 1998). Many plants track equipment
downtime on individual pieces of equipment, but overall plant indicators of downtime are often not
available.
Using plant level measures of production schedule compliance or product quality levels might be ways to
try to measure maintenance performance, but so many other factors may affect performance on these
variables it would be difcult to isolate the impact of maintenance practices.
Because of the problems associated with identifying and obtaining data for objective, uniform measures
of performance, a qualitative measure of maintenance performance was used. Respondents were asked to
4
The measure for area maintenance was skewed toward zero. To reduce the effect of heteroscedasticity, the log of the measure was
used.

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

53

evaluate the extent to which the maintenance department had contributed to plant improvements in
product quality, equipment availability and production costs. Responses were recorded using a ve-point
Likert scale (1 = less than 20% of performance improvement was the result of maintenance efforts, 5 =
more than 80% of performance improvements was the results of maintenance effort). The average of the
responses were used to obtain the measure of performance.
4.3. Analysis
The hypotheses concerning the relationship between environmental complexity and maintenance
organization and maintenance practices were tested using hierarchical regression analysis (Cohen and
Cohen, 1975). Hierarchical regression allows groups of variables to be entered into the regression equation
in steps. The rst group of variables is allowed to explain as much of the variability of the dependent
variable as possible. As subsequent variables are entered, the amount of variance of the dependent variable
that is explained by the newly entered independent variables is calculated. In this study, the variables
describing the plant environment (plant size and union status) were entered in the rst step. In the second
step, the production technology variables measuring production technology characteristics were entered. In
the third step, variables measuring the number of maintenance classications and number of levels in the
maintenance organization were entered. A signicant incremental R2 in the second or third step could be
interpreted as support for the hypotheses that there are relationships between production technology or
maintenance organization and maintenance practices. The F-statistics reported in the tables are
incremental. That is, they are associated with the change in R2 occurring when the variables were entered.
The variables were measured so that positive bs are consistent with the hypotheses. Positive bs would
indicate that plants with greater complexity would make more extensive use of the particular maintenance
practice than plants with lower levels of complexity. The form of the regression equation is shown below:
MtcPraci b0 b1 Sizei b2 Unionizationi b3 VARIi b4 AMTi b5 MASSi
b6 CLASSi b7 LEVELi eI :

The hypothesis concerning the relationship between maintenance practices and maintenance
performance were tested using linear regression analysis.

5. Results
The means, standard deviations and correlations for the variables are shown in Table 2. The alphas for
the variables measuring Variety, AMT, CMMS, Lateral Relations and Performance are also shown in
Table 2. The results for Hypotheses 15 are presented in Tables 3 and 4. The results for Hypothesis 6 are
shown in Table 5.
5.1. Environmental management
Hypothesis 1 predicted greater use of preventive and predictive maintenance to control more complex
maintenance environments. For preventive and predictive maintenance, the incremental F-test for the entry
of process technology characteristics was signicant (F 2:34; po0:10), which indicates evidence of the
effect of the process technology on the use of preventive and predictive maintenance. Specically, AMT has
a positive and signicant relationship (b 0:463; po0:05) with the use of preventive and predictive
maintenance. However, organizational characteristics such as the number of maintenance classications
and the number of levels in the maintenance organization were not signicantly related to the use of

6.24
0.59
3.49
2.60
2.96
4.53
2.96
2.43
2.90
3.13
2.62
2.60
2.87

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.

0.77
0.49
1.02
0.75
0.72
4.01
1.33
0.91
1.51
2.90
1.10
1.01
0.80

s.d.

0.22
0.21
0.34
0.21
0.45
0.12
0.05
0.73
0.37
0.02
0.26
0.02

0.04
0.10
0.14
0.32
0.00
0.11
0.43
0.17
0.14
0.18
0.14

Correlationsa

(0.67)
0.18
0.14
0.05
0.07
0.01
0.14
0.03
0.03
0.13
0.03

(0.77)
0.04
0.17
0.06
0.16
0.32
0.21
0.25
0.29
0.10

Correlations above 0.15 are signicant at po0:05: Coefcient a are in parentheses.

Size
Unionization
Variety
AMT
Mass output orientation
Classications
Organization levels
Prev/Pred Maintenance
Maintenance dept. size
Area maintenance
CMMS
Lateral relations
Performance

Means

Variable

Table 2
Correlations

0.12
0.03
0.08
0.22
0.13
0.18
0.03
0.04

0.09
0.00
0.59
0.31
0.08
0.11
0.04

0.06
0.02
0.21
0.26
0.00
0.04

0.03
0.05
0.34
0.16
0.30

0.33
0.02
0.22
0.07

0.05
0.07
0.03

10

(0.88)
0.33
0.20

11

(0.74)
0.21

12

(0.73)

54
L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

55

Table 3
Results for Hypotheses 14
H1: Extent of preventive and
predictive maintenance (PMV)
Variables

Constant
SIZ
UNION

4.211
0.140
0.435

Constant
VARI
AMT
MASS

3.924
0.171
0.463**
0.153

Constant
CLASS
LEVEL

3.736
0.008
0.061

DR2

R2

0.0143

0.0143

1.14

0.0576

0.0598

Overall F

R2

0.6052

0.6052

121.85****

2.34*

0.17

0.0072

0.6124

0.0612
4.988
0.104****
0.076

0.6553

13.15****

H4: Use of comp. maintenance

management systems (CMMS)

H5: Use of lateral relations (LATREL)

R2

0.0245

0.0245

1.23

0.1436
3.406
0.075
0.429***
0.405**

0.1681

5.47***

0.0994

0.2675

6.31***

2.991
0.021
0.337**

Constant
VARI
AMT
MASS

3.346
0.303
0.258**

Overall F

DR2

0.1356
0.013
0.459****
0.459****

0.1356

12.16****

0.0656
0.195
0.003
0.355****
0.023

0.2012

4.16**

0.0067

0.2079

0.64

0.043
0.015
0.054

100

*po0:10; **po0:05; ***po0:01; ****po0:001:

5.62****
157

0.0041

0.0041

0.22

0.0202

0.0243

0.70

0.0069

0.0275

0.34

0.39
104

R2

4.85****

R2

1.319
0.016
0.018
3.60***

DR2

DR2

1.546
0.098
0.086
0.087

157

Constant
SIZ
UNION

0.97

158

H3: Use of area maintenance

(AREA)

1.426
0.049
0.066

1.37

Variables

DR2

6.034
0.179
0.166
0.077
0.0021

Constant
CLASS
LEVEL

b
5.845
1.318
0.844

0.0433

H2: Maintenance department size

(LMTCSIZ)

56

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

Table 4
Logistic regression results for Hypothesis 3
Variable

Std Error

Wald Chi-square

Constant
SIZE
UNION
VARI
AMT
MASS
CLASS
LEVEL

8.518
1.147
0.213
0.101
0.265
0.137
0.175
0.244

2.544
0.418
0.386
0.206
0.257
0.268
0.043
0.160

11.210***
7.535**
0.305
0.243
1.066
0.261
4.288*
2.315

Chi-square

36.17***

*po0:05; **po0:01; ***po0:001:

Table 5
Results for Hypothesis 6
Variables

PMV
AREA
CMMS
LATREL
MTCSIZ

0.13**** (0.032)
0.12 (0.178)
0.15**** (0.069)
0.17*** (0.059)
0.000 (0.00)

17.15****
0.57
4.96**
7.92***
0.021

177
176
112
174
174

Dep Var: PERF.

*po0:10; **po0:05; ***po0:01; ****po0:001:

preventive and predictive maintenance. This provides partial support for Hypothesis 1. However, the
relationship is restricted to the use of AMT.
5.2. Slack resources
The second hypothesis predicted that the maintenance department workforce would be larger in plants
with more complex maintenance environments. For this hypothesis, the incremental F-test for the entry of
process technology characteristics was not signicant. However, for organizational characteristics, the
incremental F-test was signicant (F 13:15; po0:001). In this case, the number of maintenance craft
classications was positively and signicantly related to the size of the maintenance workforce (b 0:104;
po0:001), giving this hypothesis partial support.
5.3. Self-contained tasks
Hypothesis 3 predicted more extensive use of area maintenance would be associated with increasingly
complex maintenance environments. The measure of area maintenance was skewed toward zero, with about
one-third of the sample relying totally on centralized maintenance shops. This meant that the dependent
variable violated the assumption of normality required for linear regression. To address this problem, the
analysis was carried out in two steps. First, to perform the hierarchical regression, all samples with zero
area maintenance were eliminated from the sample, and the log of the measure of area maintenance was

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

57

used as the dependent variable. With this adjustment, the heteroscedasticity was eliminated. In this step,
none of the process technology or organizational factors was found to be related to the level of area
maintenance.
To test for differences between rms that did and did not use area maintenance, logistic regression was
used. Logistic regression is appropriate when analyzing models with categorical dependent variables and
categorical and continuous independent variables (Liao, 1994). Logistic regression provides an estimate of
the probability of each categorical response using the maximum likelihood method.
For this analysis, plants with no area maintenance crews, the dependent variable was given a value of
zero. For plants that used area maintenance crews, the dependent variable was given a value of one. The
results of the logistic regression are shown in Table 4. Each of the parameter estimates indicate the partial
effect of each independent variable on whether or not area maintenance crews are used. The number of
classications (b 0:175; po0:05) is signicant in a negative direction, counter to the hypothesis. This
indicates that plants with more maintenance craft classications are less likely to have decentralized area
maintenance crews.

5.4. Vertical information systems

The fourth hypothesis predicted more extensive use of CMMS in more complex maintenance
environments. The incremental F-test for the entry of process technology was signicant (F 5:47;
po0:01) which indicates evidence of a relationship between process technology characteristics and the use
of CMMS. Both AMT and complexity were signicantly related to the use of CMMS. For AMT, the
relationship was positive and signicant (b 0:429; po0:01). For complexity, the relationship was negative
and signicant (b 0:405; po0:05). The F-test for the entry of maintenance organization characteristics
was also signicant (F 6:31; po0:01). Specically, the relationship between the number of levels in
the maintenance organization and the extent of use of CMMS was signicantly and positively related
(b 0:258; po0:05). While the signicance of the relationship between maintenance environment and the
use of CMMS was conrmed for this hypothesis, the direction of the relationship received mixed support.

5.5. Lateral relations

In the fth hypothesis, more extensive use of lateral relations was predicted to be related to greater
process and labor diversity. The incremental F -test for the entry of process technology characteristics was
signicant (F 4:16; po0:05). The relationship was positive and signicant for AMT (b 0:355;
po0:001). The F-test for the entry of maintenance organization characteristics was not signicant. So this
hypothesis received partial support.

5.6. Performance
The sixth hypothesis predicted a positive relationship between maintenance practices that enhance
information-processing capacity or reduce the need for information processing and maintenance
performance. Three out of the four practices were signicantly related to performance. For preventive and predictive maintenance, the relationship was positive and signicant (b 0:130; po0:001).
The relationship with performance was also positive and signicant for CMMS (b 0:150; po0:001) and
lateral relations (b 0:166; po0:01). These results provide support to the fth hypothesis.

58

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

6. Discussion
This study examines the relationship between the maintenance environment and the informationprocessing capabilities of the maintenance department. Each of the ve hypotheses tested in this study
received some support. Taken together, the ndings seem to indicate that the maintenance function
responds to complexity in the production environment by undertaking different maintenance practices and
approaches. Preventive maintenance, increased maintenance department size and use area maintenance are
maintenance practices that reduce the need for information processing by managing the environment,
creating slack resources and creating self-contained tasks. These practices were used in response to more
automated technologies and a more varied maintenance workforce. CMMS and lateral relations to increase
information-processing capacity were used in response to the use of AMT. It also appears that some of the
information-processing alternatives used by maintenance in response to complexity contribute to improved
maintenance performance.
The ndings also seem to indicate that different factors contributing to complexity elicit different types of
responses. Production technology, in the form of AMT was found to be strongly associated with more
extensive use of preventive and predictive maintenance and CMMS and lateral relations. Organizational
characteristics were found to be only marginally associated with maintenance practices. The number of
levels in the organization was related to the extent of use of CMMS and maintenance crew centralization.
The number of craft classications was related to maintenance crew size.
AMT was strongly associated with several maintenance practices. AMT such as exible manufacturing
systems replace both physical human effort and some mental human effort. Introduction of AMT means
that equipment is more complicated to maintain (Robinson, 1987). AMT implementation also means that
production steps that were previously distinct may be combined into a single operation. Increased
integration means that equipment failures lead to more immediate and costly consequences (Finch and
Gilbert, 1986; Walton and Susman, 1987). Therefore, maintenance resources must be quickly and properly
directed to solve problems.
In Hypothesis 1, AMT was found to be signicantly and positively associated with the use of preventive
and predictive maintenance. By helping to manage the maintenance environment and create a predictable
workload, the use of preventive and predictive maintenance allows the maintenance function to maintain
the equipment in better condition. As a result, equipment failures are prevented and high equipment
utilization rates are supported. This is critical considering the large capital investment associated with
AMT. None of the other technology or organizational characteristics were found to inuence the use of
preventive and predictive maintenance.
AMT was strongly associated with the use of CMMS, as predicted in the fourth hypothesis. The
information-processing capabilities of CMMS provide the ability to quickly communicate and coordinate
the need for repairs. This result also makes sense in that organizations with computer-assisted
manufacturing technologies would be very comfortable with using a computer-based system for
communicating and coordinating maintenance activities.
In Hypothesis 5, AMT was strongly associated with the use of lateral relations. The complexity of
advanced manufacturing technologies makes production more dependent on the ability of the maintenance
department to maintain and repair these very capital-intensive technologies. Problems need to be xed
quickly and activities need to be coordinated carefully to maintain high utilization levels. Lateral relations
would complement the use of CMMS by creating close links between production and maintenance to
facilitate decision making and coordinate maintenance activities with production schedules.
Aside from AMT, the only technology characteristic signicantly associated with a maintenance
practices was mass output orientation. Mass output orientation was signicantly and negatively associated
with the use of CMMS. This is counter to the direction predicted in Hypothesis 4. It was expected that
organizations with higher mass output orientation would be more likely to use CMMS. As with AMT,

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

59

higher mass output orientation is generally associated with more automated, capital intensive equipment.
Therefore, high utilization and rapid response would be more critical. An explanation for the negative
relationship may be that organizations with lower mass output orientation such as job shops may have a
very large number of different pieces of equipment operating. By contrast, organizations with high mass
output orientation such as continuous processors may tend more toward a large monolithic piece of
equipment with many component parts. The complexity of tracking and scheduling work on the large
number of different pieces of operating equipment in a job shop type environment may be a greater
incentive toward the use of CMMS to increase information-processing capacity.
Maintenance organization structure was also related to maintenance practices. The results of the second
hypothesis showed that maintenance department size was positively and signicantly associated with the
number of maintenance craft classications. One way to reduce the complexity of allocating workers in
several crafts to different areas in a plant is to create slack resources by having more workers in each
classication. This leads to a larger overall maintenance organization.
The number of maintenance classications was found to be related to whether or not maintenance used
decentralized, area maintenance crews. However, counter to hypothesis three, organizations with more
classications were found to be less likely to use area maintenance. This may be a case of utilization
overriding information processing. In a maintenance department that has many craft classications,
assigning area maintenance crews may result in the need for an excess number of workers in some less
utilized classications. For example, a plant may only need one pipe tter, but using area maintenance
crews could mean that the plant would have to employ two pipe tters so that each area crew would be fully
staffed. By having a central maintenance shop, fewer maintenance workers would be needed and higher
utilization would be achieved.
Another reason for the results for Hypothesis 3 may be that the use of area maintenance simply does not
reduce the need for information processing. In fact, area maintenance workers required to work on a wide
variety of different types of equipment may result in greater information-processing requirements than
centrally located maintenance workers who specialize in maintaining different types of machines. This may
be especially signicant with the increasing use of modular technology that allows for the rapid changeout
of failed components. These components may then be brought to a centralized shop for repairs, reducing
the need for area maintenance crews.
The number of maintenance organization levels was signicantly and positively associated with the
use of CMMS. This makes sense in that the CMMS can be a channel for swiftly and accurately
communicating information on equipment status and schedules throughout an organization. CMMS helps
to speed the otherwise slow process of pushing information up and down through several organizational
levels.
Organizational levels and the number of maintenance classications were not signicantly associated
with any of the other maintenance practices studied. While organizational characteristics can play an
important role in inuencing the use of practices related to information-processing requirements, for
maintenance, it may be that equipment characteristics simply outweigh any organizational characteristics in
inuencing these practices.
Consistent with Hypothesis 6, three out of the ve maintenance practices were found to be positively
associated with maintenance performance. This nding would appear to conrm the widely discussed
importance of these practices in improving maintenance performance. By creating a more predictable and
manageable operating environment, preventive and predictive maintenance allow the maintenance function
to better support equipment availability and performance. By accelerating the otherwise slow process of
pushing information up and down through maintenance and production organizational levels, CMMS
allows maintenance to respond more quickly and better manage equipment performance. Lateral relations
also play a role in improving maintenance performance by allowing production and maintenance
departments to more effectively communicate and coordinate their activities.

60

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

The ndings in this study provide support for Galbraiths (1977) argument that use of informationprocessing alternatives is related to complexity. In responding to complexity, maintenance organizations
used environmental management, slack resources, self-contained tasks, vertical information systems and
lateral relations. This study also expands the Flynn (1999) study by applying it to a sub-unit of a
manufacturing organization and conrming the use of information-processing alternatives within the
manufacturing organization.
6.1. Managerial implications
One important implication of this study is in supporting the idea that the maintenance function must
adapt to the environment in which it operates. More complex environments require different maintenance
practices and approaches than less complex environments. The study also supports many maintenance
practices that have been promoted as being important to maintenance performance. The importance of
these practices has been supported in two ways. First, the strong link between the use of AMT and the use
of preventive and predictive maintenance, CMMS and lateral relations suggests the critical role these
practices may play in the successful implementation of new manufacturing technologies. Further, the link
found between preventive and predictive maintenance, CMMS, lateral relations and maintenance
performance further supports the importance of these world class maintenance practices.

Appendix A. Survey measures

Technology variety
How would you characterize equipment in your plant along the following dimensions? (circle number)
A single type of production
equipment represents more than
80% of total plant production
equipment
Supplied by a few original
equipment manufacturers (OEMS)

No single type of production

equipment represents more than
20% of total plant production
equipment
Supplied by many different OEMS

Advanced manufacturing technologies

To what extent are each of the following advanced manufacturing technologies used in your plant?
(circle number)
Not at all
Used
Used
moderately
extensively
Computer-aided design (CAD)
1
2
3
4
5
Numerical control (NC)
1
2
3
4
5
Computer numerical control (CNC)
1
2
3
4
5
Direct numerical control (DNC)
1
2
3
4
5
Automated material load/unload at
1
2
3
4
5
workstations
Automated material handling between
1
2
3
4
5
workstations
Flexible manufacturing systems (FMS)
1
2
3
4
5
Computer-aided testing and inspection
1
2
3
4
5
Computer-aided process planning
1
2
3
4
5

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

61

Mass output orientation

To what extent are each of the following types of production technologies used in your plant?

Custom technology
Used in the production or fabrication of
a single unit or a few units of products to
customers specications or needs, e.g.,
missile prototypes

Do
not
have
0

Used
minimally

Used
moderately

Used
extensively

Small batch, job shop technology

Used in the creation of small batches of
similar units, such as tools and dies

Large batch technology

Used in the manufacture of large batches
of drugs and chemicals, parts, cans and
bottles, counts of yarn, etc.

Mass production technology

Used in mass production of autos,
standard textiles, etc.

Continuous process technology

Used in oil rening and other automated
industries, in which the output is highly
standardized and mechanized and is
produced continuously rather than in
batches or shifts

Use of preventive and predictive maintenance

What percentage of the equipment in your plant is covered by preventive maintenance work orders?
1
0 TO
20%
2
21 TO
40%
3
41 TO
60%
4
61 TO
80%
5
81 TO
100%
What percentage of the equipment in your plant is covered by predictive maintenance work orders?
1
0 TO
20%
2
21 TO
40%
3
41 TO
60%
4
61 TO
80%
5
81 TO
100%

62

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

Use of area maintenance

What is the allocation of maintenance personnel between central shops and area maintenance?
% in Central Shops (Centralized maintenance areas which respond to calls from
all areas of the plant)
% in Area Maintenance (Maintenance crews dedicated to a single production
department or plant area)
100%
Total

Use of computerized maintenance management systems

To what extent are each of the following computerized maintenance management system modules used?

Work-order planning and scheduling

Preventive-maintenance planning and
scheduling
Predictive maintenance data analysis
Equipment failure diagnosis
Equipment repair history
Equipment parts list
Manpower planning and scheduling
Inventory control
Spare parts requirements planning
Material and spare parts purchasing
Maintenance budgeting

Do not
have
0
0

Used
rarely
1
1

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

2
2

Used
moderately
3
3

4
4

Used
frequently
5
5

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5

Use of lateral relations

In assuring compatibility among decisions in maintenance and other functions such as production and
engineering, to what extent are the following coordination methods used? (circle number)
Used
rarely
1

Task forces which are temporary bodies set up to

facilitate interdepartmental collaboration on a specic project
Liaison personnel whose specic job it is to coordinate
the efforts of several departments for purposes of a
specic project

Interdepartmental committees which are set up to

allow departments to engage in joint decision making
on an on-going basis

Used
moderately
3

Used
frequently
5

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

63

Performance

Over the past 2 years,

how much has maintenance
contributed to the
improvement of product
quality?
Over the past 2 years,
how much has maintenance
contributed to the
improvement of
equipment availability?
Over the past 2 years,
how much has
maintenance contributed
to the reduction of
production costs?

Less than 20%

of performance
improvement
was the result
of maintenance
efforts
1
2

About 50% of
performance
improvement
was the result
of maintenance
efforts
3
4

More than 80%

of performance
improvement
was the result
of maintenance
efforts
5

References
Arts, R., Knapp, G., Mann, L., 1998. Some aspects of measuring maintenance performance in the process industry. Journal of Quality
in Maintenance Engineering 4, 611.
Blau, P., Falbe, C., McKinley, W., Tracy, P., 1976. Technology and organization in manufacturing. Administrative Science Quarterly
21, 2040.
Callahan, m., 1997. 10 Hidden features of a CMMS. Plant Engineering 51, 7576.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., 1975. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, New Jersey.
Collins, P., Hull, f., 1986. Technology and span of control: Woodward revisited. Journal of Management Studies 23, 143164.
Collins, P., Hage, J., Hull, F., 1988. Organizational and technological predictors of change in automaticity. Academy of Management
Journal 31, 512543.
Dean, J., Snell, S., 1991. Integrated manufacturing and job design: moderating effects of organizational inertia. Academy of
Management Journal 34, 776804.
Dean, J., Yoon, S., Susman, G., 1992. Advanced manufacturing technology and organization structure: Empowerment or
subordination? Organization Science 3, 203229.
Deane, R., Gargeya, V., McDougall, P., 1990. Manufacturing strategy and performance of the new venture rm. In: Ettlie, J., Burstein,
M., Fiegenbaum, A. (Eds.), Manufacturing Strategy, the Research Agenda for the Next Decade. Kluwer, Boston, MA, pp. 5362.
Dunn, R., Johnson, D., 1991. Getting started in computerized maintenance management. Plant Engineering 45, 5558.
Ettlie, J., Reza, E., 1992. Organizational integration and process innovation. Academy of Management Journal 35, 795827.
Finch, B., Gilbert, J., 1986. Developing maintenance craft labor efciency through an integrated planning and control system:
A prescriptive model. Journal of Operations Management 6, 449458.
Flynn, B., Flynn, E., 1999. Information-processing alternatives for coping with manufacturing environment complexity. Decision
Sciences 30, 10211052.
Galbraith, J., 1977. Organization Design. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Gits, C., 1992. Design of maintenance concepts. International Journal of Production Economics 24, 217226.
Hannan, V., Keyport, D., 1991. Automating a maintenance work control system. Plant Engineering, May 21, pp. 108110.
Harris Indiana Industrial Index, 1992. Harris Indiana Industrial Index. Harris Publications, Twinsburg, OH.

64

L. Swanson / Int. J. Production Economics 83 (2003) 4564

Heintzelman, J., 1976. The Complete Handbook of Maintenance Management. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Herbaty, F., 1990. Handbook of Maintenance Management: Cost Effective Practices, 2nd Edition. Noyes Publications, Park Ridge,
NJ.
Hora, M., 1987. The unglamorous game of managing maintenance. Business Horizons, MayJune, pp. 6775.
Hull, F., Azumi, K., Wharton, R., 1988. Suggestion rates and sociotechnical systems in Japanese and American factories: Beyond
quality circles. IEEE Transactions in Engineering Management 35, 1124.
Khandwalla, P., 1974. Mass output orientation of operations technology and organizational structure. Administrative Science
Quarterly 19, 7497.
Liao, T., 1994. Interpreting Probability Models: Logit, Probit and other Generalized Linear Models. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Macaulay, S., 1988. Amazing Things Can Happen If You y Keep It Clean, Production, May, pp. 7274.
Majchrzak, A., Nieva, N., Newman, P., 1986. Adoption and use of computerized manufacturing technology: a national SURVEY. In:
Davis, D. D. and Associates (Eds.), Managing Technological Innovation: Organizational Strategies for Implementing Advanced
Manufacturing Technologies. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 105126.
Nemetz, P., Fry, l., 1988. Flexible manufacturing organizations: Implications for strategy and organization design. Academy of
Management Review 13, 627638.
Pintelon, L., Gelders, L., 1992. Maintenance management decision making. European Journal of Operations Research 58, 301317.
Paz, N., Leigh, W., 1994. Maintenance scheduling: issues, results and research needs. International Journal of Operations and
Production Management 14, 4769.
Perrow, C., 1967. A framework for the comparative analysis of organizations. American Sociological Review 32, 194208.
Robinson, C., 1987. Changing trends and new challenges in maintenance due to technology. In: Hartmann, E. (Ed.), Maintenance
Management. Industrial Engineering and Management Press, Norcross, GA, pp. 277280.
Snell, S., Dean Jr., J., 1992. Integrated manufacturing and human resource management: A human capital perspective. Academy of
Management Journal 3, 467504.
Stock, G., Tatikonda, M., 2000. A typology of project-level technology transfer processes. Journal of Operations Management 18,
719737.
Swanson, L., 1999. New production technologies and the maintenance function. International Journal of Production Research 37,
849869.
Teresko, J., 1992. Time bomb or prot center? Industry Week, March 2, pp. 5257.
Tsang, A., 1998. A strategic approach to managing maintenance performance. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 4,
8794.
Vanzile, D.K., Otis, I., 1992. Measuring and controlling machine performance. In: Salvendy, G. (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial
Engineering. Wiley, New York, pp. 15751584.
Walton, R., Susman, G., 1987. People policies for the new machines. Harvard Business Review, MarchApril, pp. 98106.
Ward, P., Berger, P., Miller, J., Rosenthal, S., 1992. Manufacturing process technology and support staff composition: An empirical
view of industry evidence. Production and Operations Management 1, 521.
Wireman, T., 1991. Total Productive Maintenance: An American Approach. Industrial Press, New York.
Woodward, J., 1965. Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice. Oxford University Press, Oxford.