View metadata, citation and similar papers at [Link].

uk brought to you by CORE

National
provided by Universiti Conference
Teknikal on (UTeM) Repository
Malaysia Melaka

Management of Technology and Technology Entrepreneurship (MOTTE 2005)

31st May - 2nd June 2005
Johor Bahru, Malaysia

PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT THROUGH MOTION AND TIME STUDY

Mohd Razali Muhamad1 & Wan Hasrulnizzam Wan Mahmood2

Faculty of Manufacturing Engineering
Kolej Universiti Teknikal Kebangsaan Malaysia
Locked Bag 1200, Ayer Keroh, 75450 Melaka.
Tel / Fax: 06-2332421
Email: mohdrazali@[Link] / 2serulnet@[Link]
1

ABSTRACT

Over time, the pattern of economic competitiveness has changed globally. Many countries
have joined the global economic competition to capture global market in order to remain
profitable and competitive by increasing its productivity. There are many factors that influence
the productivity of a manufacturing organisation. The most widely tackled issue is how to
improve efficiency and productivity. Motion and time study technique is one of the
productivity improvement techniques used in many manufacturing companies. Motion and
time study is defined as a scientific analysis method designed to determine the best way to
execute the repetitive task and to measure the time spent by an average worker to complete a
given task in a fixed workplace. Motion and time study offers real challenges in organization
involving competent engineers, business administrators, industrial relations personnel,
especially trained supervisors, and psychologists. The purpose of this paper is to discuss
related issues of motion and time study implementation and its influence toward productivity
improvement. Data from a study carried out on a sample of manufacturing industries in
Melaka shows that motion and time study implementation contributes positively towards
achieving productivity.

KEYWORDS: Productivity Improvement, Motion and Time Study, and Manufacturing

Organizations.

INTRODUCTION

Malaysia's manufacturing sector, which accounts for approximately 80% of exports and a third
of gross domestic product, is officially projected to grow 10.2% in 2004 due to robust demand
for electronics exports following the rebound in the global electronics markets (Cheong,
2004). However, there are fears that a managed economic slowdown in China could crimp
Malaysia's export performance as China buys close to a tenth of Malaysia's exports. However,
the Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers (FMM) rebuts this as it expects Malaysian
manufacturers to step up exports to the Southeast Asian nations. Exports to fellow ASEAN
members form about 27% of Malaysia's exports and FMM expects it to rise to 40%-50% in
five years.

The emphasis on product quality, innovative designs, competitive pricing and efficient
delivery continues to be important. The manufacturing sector is facing the challenges of
technological advancement and the continuing need to move towards higher added value (Mah
Lok Abdullah et al, 2003) and these are driven by: (1) Technological advances in Information
and Communication; (2) The demand for knowledge workers to improve productivity.
Development of the knowledge-based economy will contribute towards broadening the
economic base with the shift of the production possibility frontier. They include the continuing
investment in technology, innovation, management best practices, high specialization, as well
as workers education, skills and experience.

1
The manufacturing sector needs to improve productivity through upgrading of its primary
production technology. Technology can help to improve overall productivity in different ways
through the reduction in production cycle time and costs and better production and process
control. Manufacturing firms must achieve a degree of innovative capability in managing
production operations, processes and capital equipment. They need to develop and adopt good
management systems and practices such as Motion and Time Study, Total Productivity
Maintenance, Total Quality Management, Just-In-Time Methodology, Supply Chain
Management, etc.

This paper reports the main findings of a study of productivity improvement through motion
and time study approach in a sample of Melaka manufacturing companies’. This study
included extensive debriefings and data analysis to characterize sources of variability.

THE IMPORTANCE OF PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT

The only way a business or enterprise can grow and increase its profitability is by increasing
productivity in all aspects of a business or industry including sales, finance, production,
engineering, cost, maintenance, and management (Niebel, 1988). Important as the production
function is, it should be remembered that other aspects of the enterprise also contribute
substantially to the cost of operation and are equally valid areas for the application of the cost
of improvement techniques.

According to Atkinson et al (1995) and Krajewski and Ritzman (1998), productivity is the
value of outputs (goods or services) produced divided by the values of input resources (wages
cost of equipment and the like) used:
Output
Productivity =
Input
Based on Barnes (1980), productivity is a term that has number of different meanings although
it is most commonly associated with labor effectiveness in industry. In a broad sense
productivity is the ratio of output to some or all of the resources used to produce the output.
Labour productivity may be defined as “output per unit of time” or “output per labour hour”.

Labour productivity = units produced ÷ hours worked

Capital productivity = output ÷ capital input
Material productivity = output ÷ material input

Operation managers play a key role in detemining productivity. Their challenge is to increase
the value of output relative to the cost of input. If they can generate more output or output of
better quality using the same amount of input, productivity increases (Krajewski and Ritzman,
1998). If they can maintain the same level of output while reducing the use of resources,
productivity also increases. To profit from productivity improvement, management needs
measurement procedures for monitoring productivity performance and identifying
improvement opportunities (Miller, 1984).

2
MOTION AND TIME STUDY

The terms time study and motion study have been given many interpretations since their origin.
Time study, originated by Taylor, was used mainly for determining time standards, motion
study, developed by the Gilbreths, was employed largely for the same time, in the early days
greater use was made of time study and wage incentive than motion study (Barnes, 1980). It
was not until 1930s that a general movement got under way to study work with the objective
of finding better and simpler methods of getting job done. Then there followed a period during
which motion study and time study were used together, the two supplementing each other, and
the combined term motion and time study came into use. The purpose of the motion and time
study is to improve the effectiveness and the productivity of the work place.

Motion and time study offer real challenges. Industries with the competent engineers, business
administrators, industrial relations personnel, specially trained supervisors, and psychologists
carrying out motion and time study techniques are inevitably better able to meet competition
and better equipped to operate profitably (Niebel, 1988).

According to Barnes (1980), motion and time study is the systematic study of work systems
with the purposes of (1) developing the preferred system and method-usually the one with the
lowest cost; (2) standardizing this system and method; (3) determining the time required by a
qualified and properly trained person working at a normal pace to do a specific task or
operation; and (4) assisting in training the worker in the preferred method. Motion and time
study is composed of four parts:

1. Developing the Preferred Method / Work Methods Design. In the broadest sense,
every business and industrial organisation is concerned with the creation of goods and
services in some form utilizing workers, machines, and materials. In a manufacturing
plant, for example, the production process might include the procurement of the raw
materials, the machining and fabrication of the part, and the delivery of the finished
product. In designing such a manufacturing process, consideration would be given to
the entire system and to each individual operation which would go to make up the
system or process. The design of such a process employs the general problem-solving
procedure such as the systematic approach, scientific method, or engineering approach.
Method design therefore begins with the consideration of the purpose or goal to
manufacture a specific product, to operate a cash-and-carry cleaning and pressing
establishment, or to produce milk on a dairy farm. The objective is to design a system,
a sequence of operations and procedures that make up the preferred solution.
2. Standardizing the Operation / Written Standard Practice. After the best method
for doing the work has been determined, this should be standardized. Ordinarily, the
work is broken down into specific jobs or operations which are described in detail. The
particular set of motion, the size, shape, and quality of material, the particular tools,
jigs, fixtures, gauges, and the machine or piece of equipment should be definitely
specified. All these factors, as well as the conditions surrounding the worker, must be
maintained after they have been standardized. A written standard practice giving a
detailed record of the operation and specifications for performing the work is the most
common way of preserving the standard. A job is not measured until it has been
defined.
3. Determining the Time Standard / Work Measurement. Motion and time study may
be used to determine the standard number of minutes that a qualified, properly trained,
and experienced person should take to perform a specific task or operation when
working at a normal pace. This time standard may be used for planning and scheduling
3
 work, for cost estimating, or for labor cost control, or it may serve as the basis for a
wage incentive plan. Although standard data, predetermined time systems, and work
sampling are widely used for establishing time standards, perhaps the most common
methods of measuring work is stop-watch time study or electronic time study. The
operation to be studied is divided into small elements, each of which is timed with a
stop watch. A selected or representative time value is found for each of these elements,
and the times are added together to get the total selected time for performing the
operation. The speed exhibited by the operator during the time study is rated or
evaluated by the time study observer, and the selected time is adjusted by this rating
factor so that a qualified operator, working at a normal pace, can easily do the work in
the specified time. This adjusted time is called the normal time. To this normal time
are added allowances for personal time, fatigue, and delay, the result being the
standard time for the task.
4. Training the Operator. A carefully developed method of doing work is of little value
unless it can be put into effect. It is necessary to train the operator to perform the work
in the prescribed manner. Where but one or a few persons are employed on a given
operation and where the work is relatively simple, it is customary to train the operator
at the work place. The supervisor, the motion and time study analyst, a special
instructor, or a skilled operator may act as the teacher. In most cases it is the supervisor
who is responsible for training the operator, and the supervisor often depends upon the
methods and standards department for assistance in this task. The written standard
practice or the element breakdown sheet is a valuable aid to the supervisor in job
training. When large numbers of employees must be trained for a single operation; the
training is sometimes carried on in a separate training department. Charts,
demonstration units, and motion pictures are frequently used to advantage in such a
training program.

MOTION AND TIME STUDY AND PRODUCTIVITY

There is a body of knowledge which has evolved over the years that is designed to increase the
productivity of an organisation and of the individuals who make up the organisation. Motion
and time study has as its objective the elimination of unnecessary work, the design of methods
and procedures which are most effective, which require the least effort, and which are suited
to the person who uses them. Moreover, it provides methods of measuring work for
determining a performance index or productivity index for an individual or for a group of
workers, a department, or for an entire plant. Although industrial engineers and staff
specialists ordinarily perform work in this field, there is a trend toward developing forms of
work organisation in which motion and time study and the problem-solving process are used
directly by the managers, supervisors, and the employees themselves. In the latter case they
assume responsibilities for the design of jobs, determine work schedules, and verify the
quality of the work they produce.

4
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The research was carried out in order to fulfil the following research objective:
i. Evaluate the level of awareness of the Motion and Time Study for productivity
improvement and the productivity priorities.
ii. Identify the issues related to the implementation of the Motion and Time Study for
productivity improvement.

Figure 1 shows the research framework used. First of all, the research evaluate the level of
motion and time study awareness and productivity priorities among the respondents. Thus, this
research identified the issues related to the implementation of motion and time study including
reason of implementation, challenges, success factor etc.

Objective 2
Objective 1
Reason of IMPLEMENTATION OF Source of
Implementation MOTION AND TIME STUDY Awareness

Critical
Success Factor

YES PRODUCTIVITY
SUCCESS? IMPROVEMENT

NO Incentive to
Workers
The Challenges of the Constraining
Implementation Factor
Benefit of
Implementations

Legend: RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR PRODUCTIVITY
: Direct Cause IMPROVEMENT
--------- : Contribution

Figure 1: Research Framework

Model of productivity improvement through motion and time study is shown in Figure 2. The
research carried out the productivity activities including productivity techniques and the
priorities by companies profile through the problem in productivity and the issues. This
research suggest the motion and time study technique for productivity improvement.
Productivity improvement measured by the increasing of the index of producitivty, annual
turnover and market share.

5
 COMPANY’S PRODUCTIVITY
PROFILE
- Companies status
IMPROVEMENT
- Type of industry - Index of productivity
- Main product - Annual turnover
- Number of year in operation - Market share
- Level of technology
- Number of employees

NO
PRODUCTIVITY YES
ACTIVITIES
- Productivity priorities PROBLEM IN
- Productivity techniques PRODUCTIVITY

YES

MOTION &
TIME STUDY
- Motion study techniques
- Time study techniques

Figure 2: Model of Productivity Improvement through Motion and Time Study

DATA GATHERING

This study has focused on the companies involved in manufacturing activities and operating in
Melaka. This study was undertaken by semi-structured interviews and questionnaire survey.
The respondents of this survey include the middle managers, operation executives and senior
managers. Samples were chosen from a list of companies in MITC (Melaka International
Trade Centre) directory.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 1 shows the main features of the respondents. In term of the type of manufacturing
activities, the majority of the companies are involved in electrical and electronic industry. This
is followed by those involved in manufacturing plastic products. The majority of the
respondents are Malaysian based companies. Among the foreign-owned companies, the
Japanese firms appear to have significant presence.

Most of companies (about 65%) appear to be mature, with more than 10 years in operation.
Generally the respondents claim to have a moderate level of technology in place. The higher
level of technological applications resides within the multinational companies.

6
Table 1: Respondents Profile
Percentages (%)
No Items Notes
MNC SME Total
1 Products Index Electronic & The main products index of
30.8 23.1 53.8
Electrical manufacturing sector in
Engineering / Melaka Industries
3.8 7.7 11.5
Casting
Plastic - 19.5 19.5
Iron & Steel
7.7 7.7 15.4
Products
2 Country of Origin Malaysia 3.8 50.0 53.8
Singapore 11.5 - 11.5
Taiwan 3.8 - 3.8 -
Japan 3.8 7.7 23.1
Others 7.7 - 7.7
3 Number of Years In Less than 10 yrs 7.7 26.9 34.6
Operation
11 – 20 yrs 15.4 23.1 38.5 Mean = 17 years
21 – 30 yrs 15.4 7.7 23.1
More than 30 yrs 3.8 - 3.8
4 Number of Employees Less than 100 - 19.2 19.2
101 – 300 3.8 23.1 26.9 Mean = 615
301- 500 15.4 11.5 26.9
More than 500 23.1 3.8 26.9
5 Annual Turnover Less than 25 M 11.5 50.0 61.5 Count in Malaysian Ringgit
25 M – 49 M 7.7 7.7 15.4 (RM);
50 M – 75 M 7.7 - 7.7 M : Million
More than 75 M Mean = RM58,134 615
15.4 - 15.4
6 Level of Technology Low Tech Not computerized, Low
- 11.5 11.5
application of modern tools
Moderate Tech Moderately computerized,
15.4 46.1 61.5 Beginning to adopt
automation
High Tech Highly computerized,
26.9 - 26.9 Application of flexible
automation

N = 26 (MNC = 11; SME = 15)

a. Productivity Priorities

As can be seen in Table 2, quality accounted for 22.0 percent of productivity priorities,
followed by production (20.6 percent), cost (15.7 percent), time (13.9 percent), machine
utilization (12.1 percent), workforces (11.1 percent), and flexibility (4.7 percent). Besides that,
one of the respondents company was focused on innovative products as one of productivity
priorities in their company. The score in Table 2 was counted by cumulative score base on
respondent answers in questionnaire survey. The higher score shows the most priorities of
productivity by Respondents Company. By the way, as can be seen in Table 2, it is easier to
show the priorities of productivity by ranking.

7
Table 2: Productivity Priorities
No Item Score Percent (%) Ranking
1 Productions 150 20.6 2
2 Cost 114 15.7 3
3 Time 101 13.9 4
4 Workforces 81 11.1 6
5 Machine Utilization 88 12.1 5
6 Quality 160 22.0 1
7 Flexibility 34 4.7 7
N= 26
Score = Cumulative of rating score by respondent base on the productivity priorities
Percent (%) = Score
x 100.
Σ Score

b. Productivity Techniques

Table 3 shows the productivity techniques used by respondents. The companies mainly use
Statistical Process Control (25.0 percent), Just in Time techniques (20.2 percent) and Total
Quality Management (17.9 percent). Besides that, Motion and Time Study technique is ranked
number 4 (12.9 percent), followed by FMEA (9.4 percent), MRP (9.4 percent) and the others
(1.2 percent). The other techniques are Total Productivity Management (TPM), Quality
Function Deployment (QFD) and Six Sigma Approach.

Base on the interview, the multinational companies implement their productivity techniques
through the parent companies. The major factor affecting the implementation includes factory
facilities, investment capital, experience employee etc. The production and operation activities
in respondent companies are responsible to top management. Any decision of top management
will change the productivity techniques used.

Table 3: Productivity Techniques used by Respondents

No Item Score Percent (%) Ranking
1 Motion And Time Study 10 38.5 4
2 Failure Mode and Effects
8 30.8 5
Analysis (FMEA)
3 Just in Time System (JIT) 17 65.4 2
4 Total Quality Management
(TQM)
15 57.7 3
5 Flexible Manufacturing Systems
(FMS)
4 15.4 7
6 Material Requirement Planning
(MRP)
8 30.8 5
7 Statistical Process Control
21 80.7 1
(SPC)
8 Others 1 3.8 8
N = 26
Score = numbers of respondents whose implement the techniques listed above.
Percent (%) = Score
x 100.
N

8
c. Productivity Measurement and Index of Productivity

Based on the questionnaire survey and interview, the respondent companies have their own
productivity measurements and almost all of them do not use index of productivity. This is
because, the Japanese companies especially used their own term of productivity measurement
techniques. For all respondents, fulfilling the customer demand is very important compared to
measures or something else which are not easy to implement. Unfortunately, the many
respondents are not specify the measurement techniques used because of the confidently
policy.

d. Productivity Issues

All the respondents faced many problems in improving productivity in their companies. There
are many factors that contribute to the problem. The problems are:
(1) Inconsistent production volume,
(2) High operator turnover,
(3) Resource constraint, and
(4) Workers’ skill and attitude.

e. Level of Motion and Time Study Awareness

20 20
15
Frequency

15
Frequency

8
10
10 SME 4 SME
5 4
5 9 7 MNC 6 MNC
3
0
0 2
Implement Not
YES NO Implement

Figure 3a: Level of Awareness for Figure 3b: Motion and Time Study
Motion and Time Study Implementations

According to the Figure 3a, the level of awareness for motion and time study is “high”. It can
be seen from Figure 3a, out of a total 26 respondents, 65.4 percent of them are aware about
motion and time study compared 34.6 percent of them not aware of motion and time study as a
technique for productivity improvement. The figure shows that almost of all MNC are aware
about motion and time study compared to SME.

Figure 3b shows the motion and time study implementation of the respondents. From the
figure, only 58.8 percent out of a total 17 respondents (which are aware of the motion and time
study) implement motion and time study. MNC (35.3 percent) implement more compared to
SME (23.5 percent). By the way, we can conclude that the level of implementation motion and
time study among the respondents is still ‘Low’. This is because, only 38.5 percent of
respondents implement motion and time study technique compared to other techniques (refer
Table 3).

9
f. The Sources of Awareness

Academic
Consultants Literatures Internet /
22.0% 16.9% Mass Media
10.2%

Competitors
8.5% Government
Agencies
Suppliers Customer 0.0%
20.3% 22.0%

Figure 4: The Sources of Awareness for Motion and Time Study

Figure 5 shows the sources of awareness for motion and time study. As can be seen in the Pie
Chart above, the main sources of awareness are customer and consultants. It was followed by
suppliers (20.3 percent), academic literatures (16.9 percent), internet / mass media (10.2
percent) and competitors (8.5 percent). Unfortunately, there was no indication of sources of
awareness for motion and time study technique from government agencies.

g. Focus of implementation / person in charge / year of implementation

Base on interview and questionnaire survey, the main focus of implementing motion and time
study include reduce the time of unnecessary movement, as a way of job monitoring and
productivity improvement. Person in charge in the implementation usually are senior manager
and operation manager or production manager. The implementations depend on the operation
activities, scope of implementation and the procedure. The mean of year of implementation
motion and time study is 4.5 years.

h. Purpose of Implementation

As can be seen in the Table 4, there are six main reasons of motion and time study
implementation. Base on the mean of agreement score (see Table 4), it is clear that all of the
reasons listed in questionnaire survey are agreed by the respondent with the higher score.
Increase productivity (4.90), job efficiency (4.90) and quality improvement (4.80) are mainly
the reasons of the implementation motion and time study rather than reduce operation time per
part (4.60) compete in local market (4.00) and fulfilling market demand (3.60). This is
because, the mean score of the reasons considering that respondent strongly agreed. Beside
that, the other reason of the implementation of motion and time study are improve skill of
workforces, improve the old systems of productivity improvement and efficiency of job
monitoring systems.

From the analysis, we see that the reasons of implementation motion and time study are not
significant between the mean score and the testing variables (see Table 4). The results of
causality test between the reasons and testing variables including factor of number of year in
operation, number of employee, annual turnover, company status, level of technology and
Parent Company (see Table 1) in general succeed to reject the null hypothesis of causation.
However, the result indicates that the relationship between fulfilling market demand and the
number of employees is significant (p < 0.05).

10
Table 4: The Reason for Motion and Time Study Implementations
The Causality Test
No Item Mean SD
F (1) F (2) F (3) U H(1) H(2)
1 Increase
4.90 0.316 0.466 0.679 0.601 0.414 0.414 0.934
Productivity
2 Fulfilling
Market 3.60 0.966 0.099 0.000** 0.715 0.314 0.737 0.561
Demand
3 Compete in
4.00 0.943 0.466 0.095 0.956 0.645 0.645 0.628
Local Market
4 Reduce
Operation 4.60 0.699 0.819 0.549 0.473 1.000 0.693 0.522
Time per Part
5 Job Efficiency 4.90 0.316 0.466 0.679 0.601 0.414 0.414 0.934
6 Quality
4.80 0.422 0.123 0.397 0.439 0.759 0.221 0.243
improvement
N = 10
* consider disagreed by respondents (mean 3.5).
** Significant at the 0.05 level

F (1) : F-Test between item and numbers of years in operation.

F (2) : F-Test between item and numbers of employees
F (3) : F-Test between item and annual turnover
U : U-Test between item and company status
H (1) : H-Test between item and level of technology
H (2) : H-Test between item and types of product indexes.

i. Success Factor

Implementation motion and time study in general increased the productivity for most of the
respondents. In fact, the success of the implementation of motion and time study has being
dominated by several of success factor (see Table 5). Based on the mean score of agreement of
the success factor in motion and time study implementation generally show that most of the
success factor listed in questionnaires survey are similar with the success factor of
implementation motion and time study by respondents.

The main success factors in implementation of motion and time study is top management
commitment (4.80), followed by interdepartmental cooperation (4.70), good planning and
control system (4.40), company technical capability (4.40), effective training (4.40),
experienced work forces (4.30), steady fund inflow (4.30) and clear product strategy (4.00).
In-depth market study, supplier feedback and consultants credibility are not considered as
important success factors. Every one of success factors is not significant at the 0.05 level
between the testing variables. The results of the causality test show that not significant (see
Table 5).

11
Table 5: Success Factor in Implementation Motion and Time Study
The Causality Test
No Item Mean SD
F (1) F (2) F (3) U H(1) H(2)
1 Top
Management 4.80 0.632 0.544 0.513 0.601 0.221 0.414 0.934
commitment
2 Clear
Product 4.00 1.054 0.911 0.753 0.584 0.576 0.576 0.335
Strategy
3 Inter
Department 4.70 0.483 0.982 0.699 0.763 0.285 0.789 0.411
Cooperation
4 Steady
Funds 4.30 0.949 0.724 0.345 0.733 0.113 0.542 0.151
Inflow
5 Good
Planning and
4.40 0.699 0.725 0.808 0.261 0.724 0.814 0.584
Control
System
6 Company’s
Technical 4.40 0.516 0.057 0.779 0.495 0.453 0.080 0.463
Capability
7 Experienced
4.30 0.675 0.817 0.929 0.470 0.724 0.480 0.733
Work Forces
8 Effective
4.40 0.516 0.751 0.779 0.211 0.617 0.453 0.463
Training
9 In-Depth
Market 3.00* 0.943 0.148 0.133 0.537 0.645 0.249 0.238
Study
10 Suppliers
Feedback / 2.80* 0.632 0.724 0.762 0.575 0.464 0.903 0.257
Comment
11 Consultant’s
2.80* 1.033 0.287 0.660 0.778 0.825 0.507 0.266
Credibility
N = 10
* consider disagreed by respondents (mean 3.5).
** Significant at the 0.05 level

j. The Challenges

Table 6 shows that out of 8 types of challenges listed in questionnaire survey, only 5 of the
challenges faced in implementing motion and time study by respondents. The challenges are
mainly on lack of cooperation from workers (4.50), followed by inexperienced project leader
(4.20), unavailability of relevant consultant (4.00), staff training (4.00) and lack of inter
departmental cooperation (3.90). The items of the challenges were selected by mean score of
respondent’s answers.

However, the respondents considering disagreed for insufficient funds, no commitment from
top management and unclear product strategy are the challenges faced in implementing motion
and time study (see Table 6). This is because, mean score of the challenges are below than 3.5
to show disagreeing. In additional, base on Table 5, the success factors of the implementation

12
motion and time study were including the challenges listed whose disagreed by respondents.
Thus, there are not become the challenges for respondents.

The results of causality tests between the challenges faced by respondent and testing variables
shows that no causation. It is because, all of the significant value (refer Table 6) shows that
not significant at the 0.05 level. Thus, null hypothesis was rejected and alternatives hypothesis
used to show that no causation.

Table 6: The Challenges Faced In Implementing Motion and Time Study

The Causality Test
No Item Mean SD
F (1) F (2) F (3) U H(1) H(2)
1 No Commitment
from Top 3.40* 0.966 0.857 0.421 0.881 0.823 0.737 0.200
Management
2 Unclear Product
3.40* 0.843 0.238 0.062 0.914 0.038** 0.065 0.242
Strategy
3 Lack of
Interdepartmental 3.90 0.738 0.829 0.393 0.722 0.563 0.728 0.266
Cooperation
4 Insufficient
3.00* 0.816 0.571 0.796 0.067 0.429 0.429 0.634
Funds
5 Lack of
cooperation from 4.50 0.707 0.840 0.768 0.621 0.393 0.464 0.485
workers
6 Inexperienced
4.20 0.632 0.341 0.898 0.064 0.903 0.714 0.223
Project Leader
7 Staff Training 4.00 0.934 0.092 0.322 0.201 0.171 0.171 0.316
8 Unavailability of
relevant 4.00 1.247 0.770 0.339 0.887 0.570 0.363 0.511
Consultant
N = 10
* consider disagreed by respondents (mean 3.5).
** Significant at the 0.05 level

CONCLUSIONS

The study shows that there are many benefits to be obtained by implementing productivity
improvement effort. The mainly purpose of the implementation of motion and time study by
respondent are increase productivity, job efficiency, quality improvement, reduce operation
time per part, compete in local market and fulfilling market demand. The success of the of
implementation motion and time study had been contributed by several success factors such as
top management commitment, interdepartmental cooperation, good planning and control
system, company technique capability, effective training, experienced work forces, steady
fund inflow and clear product strategy. Unfortunately, the companies implementing motion
and time study face many challenges such as cooperation from workers, followed by
inexperienced project leader, unavailability of relevant consultant, staff training and lack of
inter departmental cooperation.

13
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Atkinson, A. A., R. D. Banker, R. S. Kaplan and S. M. Young. (1995). Management

Accounting, Prentice Hall, England. , p. 514
Barners, R. M. (1980). Motion and Time Study-Design and Measurement of Work. Seventh
Edition. John Wiley & Sons. Canada.
Cheong, P. (2004). “Manufacturing Sector to Grow 10% this Year”. [Online] Available
[Link] Date 23th August, 2004.
Krajewski, L. J. & Ritzman, L. P. (1998). Operation Management: Strategy and Analysis.
Fifth Edition. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. USA.
Mah Lok Abdullah, Andy K.H, Seo, Yong Ah Huat, Goh Swee Seang . (2003) ‘Sustaining
Competitiveness of the Manufacturing Sector through Productivity Enhancement’ Petaling
Jaya. August 18, 2003
Miller, D. M. (1984). “Profitability = Productivity + Price Recovery,” Harvard Business
Review May-June 1984, p 145-153.
Niebel, B. W. (1988), Motion and Time Study, Richard D. Irwin, Inc., Homewood, III.

14