WORK
ROUTINE MANAGEMENT IN OPERATIONAL UNITS OF AN AGRO-INDUSTRIAL COOPERATIVE
Maria Carolina Pariz
Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Brazil
E-mail: maria.pariz@cocamar.co
Syntia Lemos Cotrim
Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Brazil
E-mail: slcotrim2@uem.br
Gislaine Camila Lapasini Leal
Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Brazil
E-mail: gclleal@uem.br
Danilo Hisano Barbosa
Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Brazil
E-mail: dhbarbosa@uem.br
Edwin Vladimir Cardoza Galdamez
Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Brazil
E-mail: evcgaldamez@uem.br
Submission: 10/03/2017
Accept: 17/05/2017
ABSTRACT
The
present work consists of analysis of the Work Routine Management development
and implementation, in a process (register) of Operational Units in an
Agro-industrial Cooperative, in order to use management tools that facilitate
the identification of possible problems that hamper the results and their
respective causes, and the execution of routine activities. The analysis
consists of process mapping, creation and review of process indicators, as well
as the definition of goals for monitoring and activating Routine Management. It
also includes the survey of opportunities for improvement and the definition of
an action plan in order to optimize the process for those involved, making it
possible to act by monitoring the results obtained, tracing future actions and
not only for correcting mistakes occurred during work routines.
Keywords: Routine
Management; Process Modeling; Process Indicators; Continuous Improvement
1. INTRODUCTION
According
to Pelissari (2011), the competitiveness scenario has made companies look for
ways to improve their processes. Globalization and, political and economic
instability have caused the need for constant market change and organizations
need to adapt to this reality, creating the need for the performance of the
process as a whole, covering the flow of information and materials, to be
analyzed and constantly improved by focusing on what the customer requires.
Salgado
et al. (2016) states that the search for the implementation of Quality
Management aims at continuously improve its results. According to Campos
(2013), the deficiency in the systemic view of managers can lead to the
creation of misaligned processes, creating a slow bureaucracy that is
detrimental to the progress of the actions and deliveries of the sectors,
resulting in many processes that conflict between them and are incompatible
with information technology systems used in organizations.
The
poor understanding of the processes, the distorted view of the needs and the
lack of concrete indicators that measure the results of the processes carried
out in them generate waste and create unnecessary areas and systems to
"meet the daily demand" (VOLPATO et al., 2011). It is in this context
that the routine management of daily work presents itself as an adequate
initial methodology for continuous improvement, since according to Campos
(2013), it introduces the concepts of quality focused on process
standardization focused on the real needs of customers.
The
cooperative needs to obtain competitive advantages, improving the daily
activities and developing the management of the processes of the operational
units of the cooperative. Thus, it was opted for the development of a routine
management project linked to the PDCA cycle, which allows operational employees
to be able to solve punctual problems, through the identification, optimization
and administration of the main activities that make up the processes, directing
them to the viability of the strategic objectives defined for the business.
With
the routine management, it is simple and reliable to monitor the performance of
processes by means of indicators because they are based on data and facts. Some
benefits of this practice are anticipation of possible problems and visual
identification of their root cause. This work analyzes the development of daily
routine management associated with the PDCA cycle in the registering process in
operational units of a cooperative.
The
text is structured in six sections besides this introductory. Section 2
presents the theoretical framework. In Section 3, the research method adopted
is described. Section 4 presents the development of the investigation and in
Section 5, the results obtained. Finally, Section 6 presents the difficulties,
limitations, and conclusion.
2. ROUTINE MANAGEMENT
Routine
management is a method that systematizes work patterns and seeks organizational
efficiency, through the management of employee’s responsibility, to avoid
changes that may, consequently, compromise established quality levels. However,
it is necessary to train and raise awareness among all employees involved
(CAMPOS, 2013).
Campos
(2013) emphasizes the importance of routine management by defining the
authority and responsibility of each employee in the process, in standardizing
the execution of processes, in monitoring results through established limits,
in a good working environment, in the maximum use of people's mental potential,
corrective actions on these results and the continuous search for perfection.
The author also emphasizes that routine management is the basis for the
processes management, and should be analyzed with care, dedication, priority,
autonomy and responsibility and relates the level of quality of the processes
with the quality of their product or service. In order to carry out such a
method, the process standardization requires the participation of the team to
continuously optimize the application, monitoring and control of the processes.
Chiavenato
(2011) mentions that in order to achieve excellence in product and process
quality, continuous improvement and total quality are incremental approaches,
aiming at continuously adding value. Campos (2013) points out that routine
management is composed of actions and verifications so that responsibilities
are distributed in the fulfillment of the obligations conferred on each
individual and each organization.
According
to Lages et al. (2010), the implementation of routine management aims to
improve the quality of the process by means of standardization actions and
maintenance of these standards, always aiming at increasing internal and
external customer satisfaction.
Campos
(2014) also points out that there is not a rigid method of improving its
management; it is based only on the standardization of critical processes using
PDCA cycle (plan, do, check, action) with the support of other tools that were
made necessary. Standardization is the way to achieve competitiveness at
international level, being one of the bases for management.
2.1.
Quality
Management Tools
2.1.1. PDCA
Cycle
The
PDCA cycle is a method of managing processes or systems, usually employed for
the purpose of Routine Management and Continuous Process Improvement. Werkema
(2014) describes the PDCA cycle as a managerial decision-making method for
solving organizational problems, indicating the way to reach the stipulated
goals.
Werkema
(2014) also states that PDCA is an iterative method of continuous improvement
that makes the process systematic, as it follows a set of standard steps. The
Plan phase consists of the steps of identifying the problem, analyzing the
process and defining the action plan. The Do phase is to act according to the
plan to block the causes of the problem. In the Check phase, the effectiveness
of the plan for blocking causes is verified. In the Action phase, there are two
stages, the standardization and the conclusion phase. In the standardization
stage, if the blocking was effective, the causes are definitively eliminated so
that the problem does not reappear, otherwise return to the Plan phase (CAMPOS,
2013).
Campos
(2014) considers that to optimize it is necessary to know how to maintain the
control guideline being this a basic principle of the definition of control.
Therefore, the control PDCA Cycle can be used to optimize the control
guidelines of a process. This method is used in pattern execution and
intervention in the cause of deviations.
2.1.2. SWOT
Analysis
The
SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) allows to
raise in the internal environment the strengths and weaknesses and to analyze
the opportunities and the threats that compose the external environment
(ANDRADE et al., 2008)
According
to Johnson et al. (2007), the SWOT analysis condenses the strategic aptitude of
companies to persuade trends generating impacts on strategic growth. According
to Appio et al. (2009) a strength
is something positive, it is a feature of the company that increases its
competitiveness. A weakness is something that is lacking in the company,
something negative, which makes you stand at a disadvantage compared to your
competitors.
Andrade
et al. (2008) mention that the relationship between the internal and external
environments explains the competitiveness level of the organization facing the
market. Galvão et al. (2015) cite that the strategy begins with the discussion
of issues related to threats, opportunities, risks and concerns, which can be
obtained with SWOT Analysis. From there on, plans and objectives can be
designed to achieve their expected results.
2.2.
Process
Modeling
An
important point in companies to aid in understanding their processes and making
more assertive decisions is the modeling of their processes that allows to
describe, understand, analyze and even monitor existing processes in
organizations by identifying opportunities for improvement (GALDAMEZ et al.,
2016).
BPM
CBOK® (2009) points out that process modeling consists of representing a set of
activities or tasks to represent an existing or projected process. Modeling is
performed by analyzing the end-to-end process.
Among
several existing techniques for modeling processes, the techniques of SIPOC and
BPMN were used in this study. BPMN is a standard form of representation for
process modeling. Piechnicki, Baran and Piechnicki (2012), similar to Braconi
and Oliveira (2009), explain that BPMN is a clear notation and easy
comprehension by all those involved in the processes, from technical responsible
to managers.
2.2.1. SIPOC
(Suppliers - Inputs - Process - Outputs - Customers)
According
to the BPM CBOK® guide (2009), the SIPOC model is defined as a form of process
documentation used in Six Sigma methodology. For this technique, there is no
specific pattern or notations or a table with the SIPOC elements.
For
Andrade et al. (2012), the SIPOC technique should simplify and visualize the
sequence of processes, representing inputs, outputs, step specifications, and
process flow.
According
to Werkema (2011), the SIPOC methodology is composed of the following elements:
·
Suppliers (S): who or what has the input to the
process;
·
Inputs (I): are the inputs themselves, such as
information, documents, services, applications, among others;
·
Process (P): are the main steps of what form the
process;
·
Outputs (O): are the products of the process;
·
Customers (C): for whom the results are intended.
2.3.
Performance
Management
The
purpose of performance management is to evaluate the efficiency and
effectiveness of an intervention by means of metrics that allow visualization
of the performance of the system studied (BARBOSA and MUSETTI, 2011).
Carpinetti, Galdamez and Gerolamo (2008) points out that the use of performance
measurement systems evolved by visualizing their potential in organizations as
the main point of generating significant information for management decision
making.
According
to Nappi and Rozenfeld (2015) with the rapidly changing demands of customers,
organizations need to become more customer-sensitive and need to create
sustainable market value. Thus, it is necessary access to accurate performance
information about the business, which needs to be integrated and accessible,
supporting improved performance of an organization and its business processes, making
it a vital part of a company's management system, formed by a set of indicators
that measure the efficiency and / or effectiveness of its processes and
actions.
For
Caldeira (2012), indicators are tools for monitoring process performance and
should show the level of the organization's achievements, to make comparisons
with pre-established targets, to treat deviations and performance levels. The
author also states that a good indicator must have some characteristics, such
as:
·
utility and reliability of data;
·
acceptable effort and simplicity for analysis and
calculation;
·
source of data available on an internal basis;
·
automatic calculation for greater agility and
reliability;
·
ability to audit data sources effectively and identify
errors;
·
establishment of monitoring frequency;
·
protection of external effects and flexible update;
·
and, established goal to analyze the performance of
the measured process, which guides the results.
According
to Braz et al. (2011), reanalyzing and modifying performance measurement
systems when necessary, based on internal and external environmental changes,
are as important as their development and implementation.
One
of the ways to outline the control and quality monitoring of a process, cited
by Aleksander and Armand (2013), is from the performance management, to align
the organizational strategy, defining the why, what and how often the
established goals will be measured, and the means of measurement.
3. RESEARCH METHOD
The
research developed is applied, since it focuses on producing understandings for
practical application, oriented to solve predetermined problems, according to
(KAUARK et al., 2010). As for the approach is identified qualitatively and in
relation to the objectives, according to Yin (2015), the study is exploratory,
and the technical procedure addressed is a case study, reproducing a way to
explore an empirical point through a set of predetermined procedures, which
involves a deep study of the goal that will allow knowledge in certain tools.
The
study was conducted through the implementation of the Routine Management
methodology, complemented by the Process Modeling Methodologies and Performance
Measurement System in the chosen process. The study applies its development
steps aligned with the PDCA Cycle, described as a management method that
represents the way to be followed to guarantee the achievement of goals
necessary for the survival of an organization (WERKEMA, 2014).
The
steps taken to develop the study were:
·
Review and architecture of the process based on the
collection of information with those involved in the creation of the SIPOC and
process mapping;
·
Creation and review of process indicators through
performance management theory;
·
Activation of the Routine Management methodology,
through training to develop the routine of monitoring the indicators and
standardization of the process;
·
Survey of process improvements from mapping analysis
and discussion meetings with stakeholders to identify opportunities for
performance enhancements.
4. CASE STUDY
The case study addresses the
development of the routine management project linked to the PDCA cycle in the
registration process, through the application of modeling and control tools.
The cooperative is formed by its
operating units and by the central administration. The operational units of the
cooperative are composed of processes that are managed by internal departments
of the Central Administration, which are responsible for supporting the
processes. Based on the analysis, the registering process was selected because
of its importance and the degree of impact, since it belongs to the Cooperated
Attendance process, which is considered a business process for the cooperative.
This process’ mission is to "Attend the cooperative, ensuring the
perpetuation of the Cooperative with sustainability, "because according to
Ugoani (2016), the organizational mission is a statement of purpose that serves
as a guide to strategy and decision making.
Observing the organization through
its processes makes it possible to establish a focus centered on the work
activities, allowing a more effective way of seeing the value chain. Process
Management seeks to boost strategy deployment, i.e., continuous improvement,
corporate governance and routine management. From this approach, it is
established the routine management development plan in the operating units.
Routine management has as main
objectives the process modeling, the standardization of good practices and the
management of the performance of the processes studied in the day to day,
taking into account the suppliers, inputs, outputs and clients of the studied process,
seeking to leverage professional efficiency and effectiveness through simple
and visual controls.
For the development and
implementation of the routine management project in the selected process, the
logic of the PDCA cycle was used, considering the phases of project planning,
analysis and application of improvements, development of monitoring indicators
and survey of improvement opportunities.
In short, the main stages of
research are:
1. Process modeling: identification of the sub processes
of the prioritized process so that the mappings are made, identifying people,
inputs and outputs, having as functional process maps and a tool that gathers
its main information (SIPOC), as well as an Initial survey of improvement
opportunities.
2. Creation and / or
revision of process indicators: definition of the indicators for the processes, as
well as the measurement system, including metrics, measurement effort and data
updating time.
3. Routine Management Activation: In this stage, standardization
of processes through ITRs, dissemination and training to standardize work in
all units, monitoring of indicators, collection of corrective and preventive
actions and activation of the Routine Management Rite.
4. Survey of
improvement opportunities: it occurs during the previous stages and with the analysis of the
process indicators, where the variations, characteristics and other general
aspects are observed.
4.1.
Stage
Plan
In the Plan phase, initially, the
main activities were defined for the realization of the project, according to
the routine management of work, considering the analysis and modeling of the
process, creation of improvement and standardization plans, and performance
management.
The Process Modeling, the first
activity of the stage, consisted of identification of the sub processes of the
prioritized process. The registration sub process is the data entry in the
cooperative, since it is responsible for retaining information of different
types, enabling the creation of a rich and reliable database, since it is used
as the basis for many decision making in the cooperative.
The reliability of the information
received is of extreme importance, since all the information that the registering
provides, are projected as estimates of reception and the strategies of
billing, besides being the decisive factor for the release of credit for the producer
who are on the unit. The registered information also allows to generate the
benefits to producers, such as scheduling of technical visits, participation in
the results, delivery and harvesting, in addition to all the benefits offered
to those who become cooperated.
The registration process is carried
out in each operational unit and, as support, has the assistance of the
cooperative department and units present in the central administration of the
cooperative. The registration process is divided into seven sub processes:
Registration Opening; Cooperative and Uncooperative Inactivation; Renewal of Register;
Admission of Cooperated; Resignation of Cooperated; Elimination / Exclusion of
Cooperated; And Cooperate Death.
4.2.
Stage
Do
Stage Do proceeded with the
execution of the four activities presented previously, from routine management,
through discussion meetings for alignment and some participants from operational
units as process specialists.
For the creation of the SIPOCs,
meetings were held with the Cooperativism department, responsible for
supporting these processes to the units, for construction, revision and
validation of process. SIPOC allowed visualizing the process and all involved
in a macro way, with the main points identified, as in Figure 2, which
represents the process with all its inputs, outputs, suppliers and clients,
identifying in the process column the sub processes defined.
Figure
2: SIPOC - Registration Process
The SIPOCs of the sub processes were
also built between the team and validated with the experts. Since the creation
of the SIPOCs, visits were made to some selected units to gather more detailed
information on the day-to-day execution of the process. The process mapping of
how it is currently occurring, based on the information collected, was created
using the BPMN methodology.
The map was discussed and reviewed
by the project team and validated in a discussion meetings with the
participation of supervisors and responsible for the process in the units.
These meetings allowed the survey of different points of view. The macro map of
the process can be visualized in Figure 3. The detailed maps of the sub processes
of registering were also designed using the Bizagi tool for surveying and
identifying the improvement opportunities.
Figure 3: macro map of registering process
Based on the different points of
view observed in the meetings held for information gathering, process
monitoring, mapping, alignment with the units, a SWOT analysis was developed
compiling all the opportunities, threats, strengths and weaknesses raised. The
SWOT analysis can be observed in Figure 4.
Figure 4: SWOT Analysis of Registering Process
This analysis sought to include the
main points raised by the employees involved in the process, the areas impacted
with the information generated by the process and the area that should manage
this process, seeking to obtain a better detail of the main considerations of
people involved, being possible to identify restrictions and, opportunities for
improvement and criteria for the subsequent optimization of the process. With
twenty-three improvement opportunities identified in process mapping and SWOT
analysis, these were unified for treatment in partnership with the Information
Technology Department (IT) to eliminate activities that did not add value to
the process, making it more agile and easier.
In order to establish a way to
control and monitor the performance of the process, indicators were defined in
line with the organizational strategy, evaluating the strategic objectives of
the departments involved with the registering process, identifying the main
points that needed control and why, and the frequency the measurements should
be carried out, the targets or limits established and the means or calculation
formula for the measurement.
For the definition of the
indicators, the team met with the Cooperativism department and the Units department
and verified what, from the point of view of these areas, it is extremely
important to be measured in order to be reached the high reliability of
information for the decisions and the high quality and performance in the
execution of this process.
Four indicators of performance were
then presented, which are shown in Table 1, with indicators 1 and 2,
respectively, "% of the mapping of the areas" and "% of registering
due" respectively, representing the quality of the information 3: "%
of letters sent with errors" represents the process performance in the
unit and the indicator 4, "% of active properties shortly after the
activation of the cooperative" brings the reliability of the execution of
the process in the Unit.
It should be emphasized that from
the monitoring of indicators, occurrences, failures, nonconformities and
together with the critical analysis, new ideas and opportunities must arise
that will lead to incremental improvements, which can be dealt with
immediately, as well as corrective actions and prevention that must be
implemented in the emergence of problems and risks detected, in addition to
potential transformation projects.
Quadro 1: Sistema de Medição de Desempenho -
Indicadores do Cadastro
As the changes were being carried
out in parallel, the updating of the ITRs and procedures would be performed
upon completion of the procedures and ITRs. However, it was defined the person
responsible for making the changes due in the documents and informing all those
involved.
The training for the standardization
of all the improvements treated would be applied after the formalization of the
update of the documentation with the completion of the requests sent to IT. The
training will be applied to all supervisors and those in charge of registering in
all the operational units, with the support of the department of Cooperativism
and Units. Non-compliance treatment training against performance indicators was
applied to all supervisors and unit managers, emphasizing the importance of
reaching established goals and the need to have up-to-date and reliable
information.
The implementation of Daily Meetings
was carried out with the purpose of creating the habit of monitoring and fast
discussions about the results achieved by the process indicators developed,
aiming at drawing action plans to achieve the best performance. In order to
activate routine management, it was necessary to engage the employees involved
in the process through training and lectures that sought to clarify the
importance and need to have this updated data, showing that one can transform
the organization from one-off improvements in its work routine, and that these
improvements can be identified by the process indicators for monitoring the
results.
The activation of routine management
was consolidated with the implementation of the monthly monitoring indicators
of the process and passed on to all units, allowing everyone to stay up to date
on the performance of their process, and thus help build actions for
improvement.
4.3.
Stage
Check
The Check stage was started after
the daily meetings were implanted. In this step, the measured performance
indicators are executed and the results and their deviations are checked
through the updated data according to defined periodicity. This verification allows
the identification of improvement points by means of deviations visualized,
controlling the process from the predefined limits and verifying the
effectiveness of the progress of the implanted daily meetings. This stage
belongs directly to the Unit Department, which is responsible for monitoring
the performance of the operating units.
4.4.
Stage
Action
All process needs, opportunities for
improvement, identified deviations and fall under the Action step, acting
correctively in the process, seeking to achieve greater and better performance
and quality of service. This step should be started whenever necessary to
obtain continuous improvement of the process, the departments involved and the
organization as a whole.
5. CONCLUSION
The application
of the Work Routine Management methodologies and Performance Measurement System
contributed to the achievement of a positive and perceptible result by all
employees of the units and departments involved.
The project
allowed the registration process to be understood, mapped and detailed in sub
processes. Their improvements were raised and punctuated through the search for
applicable solutions and that allowed to optimize the process, to then be
standardized and applied to all operational units.
Four process indicators were created to
establish controls to measure the performance of the results achieved in the
day-to-day execution of the process and to detect occurrences, failures and /
or nonconformities. Routine Management has been activated through the
establishment of Daily Meetings, which count on the employees' engagement to
follow up and discuss the results achieved through the interpretation of the
indicators, in order to draw up action plans to achieve the best performance in
the Registering process.
The results
achieved by the project show that the association between PDCA cycle and
Routine Management methods was effective. It is possible to understand how
Routine Management is necessary to understand the process and its variables and
how the PDCA cycle is a managerial method of numerous benefits for the
implementation of Routine Management, enabling the direction of the analysis
and the treatment of opportunities for improvement with a focus on continuous
improvement.
It is of fundamental importance, for
a good management of the processes, that the results are measured, analyzed and
translated into action plans to improve their performance more and more,
because if a manager who cannot measure the performance of their processes,
neither is able to manage it, and there are no ways to improve its performance.
This way, it can be concluded that the objectives were achieved through the
execution of the defined steps and the involvement and dedication of the team
formed for the project.
The literature on the subject is very
limited, although it is an optimization tool and helps the management of
day-to-day activities, it is still not well known and widespread. Its use is
well done in companies, but there are few publications on the basis of it. Even
with these restrictions, the project was developed and the validated steps,
which can be replicated to all other processes of the Operating Units, as a
suggestion for future work in the cooperative.
According to the internal
departments, the implementation of routine management brought benefits such as
the possibility of monitoring the performance of the processes in relation to
the goals and the analysis of improvement points from the deviations found. Thus,
it is possible to work looking forward and not only looking at the past
mistakes. It is a means of guaranteeing the results traced and expected by the
area, through the control and standardization of the process, considering five
basic elements indicators, information, ideas, analysis and action plans,
focusing on continuous improvement.
REFERENCES
ABPMP BPM CBOK™, V2.0. (2009) Guide to the Business Process
Management Common Body of Knowledge.
ALEKSANDER, J.; ARMAND, F.
(2013) Instruments and methods for the integration of company's strategic
goals and key performance indicators. Kybernetes, Vol. 42 Iss: 6, pp.928 – 942.
ANDRADE, G. E. V.; MARRA, B. A.; LEAL, F.; MELLO, C.
H. P. (2012) Análise da aplicação conjunta das técnicas SIPOC, fluxograma e FTA
em uma empresa de médio porte. XXXII Encontro Nacional de Engenharia de Produção,
Bento Gonçalves.
ANDRADE, J. C.; OLIVEIRA, V. M.; MOTA, H. C. M.;
LOPES, E. M.; FONTÃO, H. (2008) Aplicação da análise SWOT para identificar
oportunidades para o desenvolvimento econômico e social. XIII Encontro
Latino Americano de Iniciação Científica e IX Encontro Latino Americano de
Pós-Graduação – Universidade do Vale do Paraíba, São Paulo.
APPIO, J.; SCHARMACH, A. L. R.; SILVA, A. K. L.;
CARVALHO, L. C.; SAMPAIO, C. A. C. (2009). Análise SWOT como Diferencial
Competitivo: Um estudo exploratório na Cooperativa Muza Brasil. Revista
Interdisciplinar Científica Aplicada, Blumenau, v.3, n.3.
BARBOSA, D. H.; MUSETTI, M. A. (2011). The use of performance
measurement system in logistics change process: Proposal of a guide. International
Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, v. 60, n.4, p. 339-359.
BRACONI, J.; OLIVEIRA, S. B. (2009). Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN). Editora Atlas, São Paulo.
BRAZ, R. C. F.; SCAVARDA, L. F.; MARTINS, R.
A. (2011). Reviewing and
improving performance measurement systems: An action research. International Journal of Production Economics. Vol. 133, Issue 2.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.06.003
CALDEIRA, J. (2012). 100 Indicadores da
Gestão. 8. ed. Coimbra: Conjuntura Actual
Editora SA.
CAMPOS, V. F. (2014). Qualidade Total:
padronização de empresas. 2. ed. Editora Falconi, Minas Gerais.
CAMPOS, V. F. (2014). TQC: Controle da Qualidade
Total (no estilo japonês). 9. ed Editora Falconi, Minas Gerais.
CAMPOS, V. F. (2013). Gerenciamento da Rotina do
Trabalho do dia a dia. 9. ed. Editora Falconi, Nova Lima.
CARPINETTI, L. C. R.; GALDÁMEZ, E.V.C.;
GEROLAMO, M. C. (2008). A measurement system for managing performance of industrial clusters: a
conceptual model and research cases. International Journal of Productivity
and Performance Management, v. 57, n. 5, p. 405-419.
CHIAVENATO, I. (2011). Introdução à Teoria Geral
da Administração. 8. ed. Editora: Elsevier, Rio de Janeiro.
GALDAMEZ, E. V. C. ; COTRIM, S.L. ; GALVAO, E. M. ;
CURSE, J. S. ; LEAL, G. C. L. ; BAIOCHI, S. F. (2016). Melhoria da
Produtividade por meio do Mapeamento de Processo e Balanceamento da Produção:
Impacto em uma Indústria de Vassouras PET. Revista SODEBRAS, v. 11, p. 154-159.
GALVÃO, E. M.; COTRIM, S.L.;
LEAL, G. C. L.; ARAGAO, F. V. (2015) Sales Performance Management: a strategic
initiative to the growth of micro and small enterprises. In: XXI ICIEOM-
International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management,
Aveiro.
GIL, A. C. (2008). Métodos e Técnicas
de Pesquisa Social. 6. ed. Atlas
S.A., São Paulo.
INSTITUTO FEDERAL DE EDUCAÇÃO, CIÊNCIA E TECNOLOGIA
DA BAHIA. (2014). As organizações como um sistema. Disponível em: <
http://www.ifba.edu.br/professores/antonioclodoaldo/001%20SLIDES/1S%C3%8DNTESE_GR_SIPOC.pdf>
. Acesso em: 15/05/2016.
JOHNSON, G; SCHOLES, K.; WHITTINGTON, R.
(2007). Explorando a Estratégia Corporativa. 7 ed. Bookman, Porto Alegre.
KAUARK, F. S.; MANHÃES, F. C.; MEDEIROS, C. H.
(2010). Metodologia da Pesquisa: Um guia prático. Editora Via
Litterarum, Itabuna.
LAGES, P. G.; ZVIRTES, L.; BITTENCOURT, E.;
ARAUJO, N. G. A. (2010). Implantação do
Gerenciamento da Rotina do Trabalho do Dia-a-Dia em uma Empresa do Setor
Moteleiro. XXX Encontro Nacional de Engenharia de Produção, 11f. São Paulo.
NAPPI, V.; ROZENFELD H.
(2015). The Incorporation of Sustainability Indicators into a Performance
Measurement System. Assembly Technology and Factory Management/Technische
Universität Berlin.
PELISSARI, A. S. (2011).
Management competence: a study in small companies of confections. Revista
eletrônica adm. vol.17 no.1 Porto Alegre Jan./Apr.
PIECHNICKI, F.; BARAN, L. R.; PIECHNICKI, A.
S. (2012). Proposta de modelagem de um processo de
manutenção industrial baseada no padrão BPMN e na norma ISA-95. XXXII
Encontro Nacional de Engenharia de Produção. Bento Gonçalves, RS.
SALGADO, E. G.; SILVA, C. E. S; MELLO, C. H.
P. (2016). Reasons for Technology-Based
Companies Contemplated By the First Company Program to Seek ISO 9001:2008
Certification. Independent Journal of Management & Production
(IJM&P). V.7. ISSN: 2236-269X; DOI: 10.14807/ijmp.v7i1.387.
UGOANI, J. N. N. (2016). Emotional Intelligence and Organizational
Competitiveness: Management Model Approach Independent Journal of Management
& Production (IJM&P). V.7. ISSN: 2236-269X; DOI: 10.14807/ijmp.v7i3.427.
VOLPATO, F. B.; LEAL, G. C.
L.; de SOUZA, F. A.; CARDOZA, E. (2011). Mapeamento de Processos: Um estudo de caso em uma Indústria de Produção de Fios
Singelos. XXXI Encontro Nacional de Engenharia de Produção, 14f. Belo Horizonte.
WERKEMA, C. (2011). Lean Seis: Sigma Introdução
Às Ferramentas do Lean Manufacturing. Editora Elsevier.
WERKEMA, C. (2014). Ferramentas Estatísticas
Básicas do Lean Seis Sigma Integradas ao PDCA. Editora Elsevier.
YIN, R. K. (2015). Estudo de caso:
planejamento e métodos. 5. ed. Editora Bookman. Porto Alegre.