Identification of key enablers for total productive maintenance (TPM) implementation in Indian SMEs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the key enabler for total productive maintenance (TPM) implementation in Indian small and medium enterprises (SMEs) by using graph theoretic approach (GTA). There are certain enablers for TPM implementation which helps the organization to implement it successfully. It is very essential to identify the nature and impact of these key enablers. Design/methodology/approach A large number of the enablers (27) have identified for TPM implementation in Indian SMEs from the available literature, questionnaire survey and expert opinion. These TPM enablers have categorized into six major categories. Findings In this research work, the intensity of identifying enablers has been calculated to show their impact or influence in TPM implementation. The value of intensity of TPM enablers shows the role or impact of individual enabler in the implementation of TPM in Indian SMEs. Practical implications This study provides an easy-to-use methodology for the practical decision makers in the manufacturing industry to improve their performance by implementing TPM in Indian SMEs. A detailed methodology has prepared to identify the enablers for TPM implementation in Indian SMEs by using GTA. This study also explains that how to check the feasibility of an organization to implement TPM in Indian SMEs successfully. Originality/value TPM is an improvement concept which holds the potential to improve manufacturing organizations, but its implementation is not easy in Indian SMEs. The reason behind the unsuccessful implementation of TPM in most of the organizations is the ignorance of impact of innumerable enablers and barriers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".