mahindra & mahindra – implementing bpr

5/20/2018 Mahindra & Mahindra Implementing BPR

1/13

Mahindra & Mahindra Implementing BPR

In our never ending quest for quality and increasing productivity at all levels, the

various projects initiated by the companyincluding BPRare helping us achievehigher productivity, reduction in costs and improved quality.

- Keshub Mahindra, Chairman, Mahindra & Mahindra (M&M), in 1996.

M&MS PROBLEM PLANTS

In the mid-1990s, Indias largest multi utility vehicle (MUV) and tractor manufacturerM&M was facing serious problems at its Igatpuri and Kandivili plants in Maharashtra.The plants were suffering from manufacturing inefficiencies, poor productivity, longproduction cycle, and sub-optimal output. The reason: highly under-productive,

militantly unionized, and bloated workforces. The company had over the years beenrather lenient towards running the plants and had frequently crumbled under thepressure of union demands.

The work culture was also reportedly very unhealthy and corruption was widespread invarious departments. Alarmed at the plants dismal condition, Chairman KeshubMahindra tried to address the problem by sacking people who allegedly indulged incorrupt practices. M&M also tried to implement various voluntary retirement schemes(VRS), but the unions refused to cooperate and the company was unable to reduce thelabor force.

During this period, M&M was in the process of considering the implementation of aBusiness Process Reengineering (BPR) program throughout the organization includingthe manufacturing units. Because of the problems at the Igatpuri and Kandivili plants,M&M decided to implement the program speedily at its manufacturing units. Theprogram, developed with the help of the UK-based Lucas Engineering Systems, wasfirst implemented on an experimental basis at the engine plant in Igatpuri.Simultaneously, an exercise was initiated to assess the potential benefits ofimplementing BPR and its effect on the unions.

M&Ms management was not surprised to learn that the unions expressed extremedispleasure at the decision to implement BPR and soon went on a strike. However, this

time around, the management made it clear that it would not succumb to uniondemands. Soon, the workers were surprised to see the companys senior staff comedown to the plant and work in their place. With both the parties refusing to work out anagreement, observers began casting doubts on the future of the companys grand plansof reaping the benefits of BPR.

BACKGROUND NOTE

Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (M&M) was the flagship company of the Mahindra group,one of the top ten industrial houses in India. The companys history dates back to 1945,when two brothers, J.C.Mahindra and K.C.Mahindra, decided to start a business of

general-purpose utility vehicles. The brothers formed a company, Mahindra &Mohammed Ltd., in association with their friend Ghulam Mohammed. In October


2/13

1947, the first batch of 75 jeeps was released for the Indian market. In 1948, thecompany was renamed Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. Over the next few decades, thegroup promoted many companies in areas as diverse as hotels, financial services, autocomponents, information technology, infrastructure development and trading to name afew (Refer Exhibit I for M&Ms history).

Though M&M had established itself in the markets and was among the leading playersin many of the segments it operated in, it realized that some of its businesses were notclosely related to its core business. This realization marked the beginning of the biggestchange exercise since the companys inception. In 1994, a major restructuring exercisewas initiated as part of a BPR program. M&M introduced a new organizational model,in which various divisions and companies were regrouped into six distinct clusters ofrelated businesses, each headed by a president.

M&Ms core activities, automotive and tractors were made autonomous business units.The other activities of the group were organized into infrastructure, trade and financial

services, telecommunication and automotive components. According to companysources, the whole exercise was intended to develop a conceptual map to providedirection for the future growth of various business lines. It was decided that, in future,the group would confine its expansion to the identified thrust sectors.

The two main operating divisions of the company were the automotive division, whichmanufactured UVs and LCVs, and the farm equipment division, which made tractorsand farm implements. The company employed over 17,000 people and had six state-of-the-art manufacturing facilities spread over 500,000 square meters. The plants weresituated at Kandivili (MUVs and Tractors), Nasik (MUVs), Zaheerabad (LCVs,Voyager, three-wheelers), Igatpuri (Engines) and Nagpur (Implements and tractors).

The company had 33 sales offices supported by a network of over 500 dealers across the

country. These offices were connected to the companys plants by extensive ITinfrastructure. By 2001, the company had firmly established itself as one of the leadingplayers in the Indian automotive industry, with revenues of Rs 43.53 billion and profitsof Rs 1.2 billion[1](Refer Exhibit II for a summary of M&Ms operations).

The Kandivili and Nagpur plants were the production hubs for the farm equipmentdivision. This division, reportedly the single largest facility of its kind in the world,received the ISO-9001 certification in 1996. In 2001, the division marked its 16th year asthe market leader; its products were being used by over 600,000 Indian farmers. The

division was a successful exporter to many countries: the US, South Africa, Sri Lanka,Bangladesh, Nepal, Zimbabwe and several European countries. The division had setitself the goal of becoming the worlds largest tractor manufacturer in terms of volumeby 2005, from its 2001 position of number four.

M&Ms decision to undertake BPR implementation at the plant was largely influencedby its ambition to become the largest tractor manufacturer in the world. This wasaccompanied by a decision to focus on enhancing productivity and delivering world-class quality at the least possible cost. The company also decided to undertake a totalquality management initiative. Various initiatives such as supplier upgradation,strategic and global sourcing, product development, channel management and lean

manufacturing were also identified as thrust areas. Problems at the individual factoriesplayed a major part in the managements decision to hastenthe implementation of theBPR program.
http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn1http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn1http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn1


3/13

ABOUT BPR

The concept of BPR was popularized in the early 1990s by Michael Hammer and JamesChampy in their best-selling book, Reengineering the Corporation. The authors saidthat radical redesign and reorganization of an enterprise was necessary to lower costs

and increase the quality of service. According to them, IT was the key enabler for thatradical change. Hammer and Champy felt that the design of the workflow in most largecorporations was based on assumptions about technology, people and organizationalgoals that were no longer valid. They recommended seven principles of reengineeringfor streamlining work processes and, consequently, achieving significant levels ofimprovement in quality, time management and cost (Refer Table I).

Table I

BPR Principles

1. Organize around processes, not tasks Instead of work being divided among different people,one person is given the responsibility for an entire process. Each persons job is designed around an

outcome, such as a finished component or a completed process, rather than one of the tasksnecessary for producing the finished component or completing the process. This could meanreplacing functional departments such as manufacturing and marketing with interdisciplinary teamsthat concentrate on completing a particular business process.

2. Have output users perform the process Instead of departments functioning as distinctspecialized entities doing only their work, passing the output to someone else, BPR requires each

department to take full responsibility for one complete process.

3. Have those who produce information process it People responsible for generating a piece ofinformation should be involved in processing all the information regarding it. For instance, insteadof the traditional way of receiving goods (involving receiving, accounts payable and other

departments), only one receiving clerk receives the goods using specialized software.

4. Treat geographically dispersed resources as centralizedTo provide better customer service,companies decentralize operations. With current technology, a companys data can be centrally

located and yet be made available to all its geographically dispersed units. This way, companies getthe benefits of centralization as well as decentralization.

5. Link parallel activities in the workflow instead of just integrating their resultsCertain processes, such as product development, are performed in parallel andthen integrated at the end. However, quite often, the teams involved do notcommunicate well. In such a scenario, BPR would put people from variousfunctional areas on the team in charge of a particular product.

6. Empower workers and use built-in controlsMost organizations have many layers of personnelworking and several more to manage, audit and control them. BPR empowers the people actuallydoing the work by giving them the authority to take certain decisions. This results in faster

responses to problems and increases the quality of the task performed.

7. Capture information once and at the source Different departments capturing their own data attheir own pace leads to inefficiency, resource wastage and data discrepancy errors. By utilizinginformation technology effectively, data can be captured electronically at source, entered once in anonline database, and made available to all who need it.

Source: ICMR.

Simply put, BPR refers to a complete overhaul of the way an organization does itsbusiness. Instead of focusing on improving or modifying processes, it focuses on


4/13

reinventing the way the company carries out its business. And instead of focusing on theexisting business, it tries to determine what business the company should be involved in.BPR thus results in dramatic changes in a companys business activities. The kind ofresults the company looks for are not marginal in nature, BPR results in dramatic andhuge improvements in the processes being reengineered.

The most important aspect of BPR is the proper identification of the business processes.A business process can be defined as a collection of closely -related tasks performed tocreate value for the customers. According to analysts, in most organizations, processeshave traditionally not been earmarked or identified clearly. Thus, examining anddealing with business processes is a radical change in the way organizations andmanagers have traditionally functioned.

BPR seeks to remove the belief that by focusing on the efficiency of the tasks involved incarrying out a piece of work, the organization is doing its best to complete the task in atimely and cost-effective manner. Instead, it requires the organization to focus on the

outcomes of its processes in the way a customer would.

For instance, a customer of a furniture vendor who has asked for a wooden partition tobe installed in his house would be concerned only with the overall time taken for thework to be completed. He would not be concerned about individual processes: the timethe company takes to get the request approved and dispatched to the carpenters, thetime the carpenters take to finish their job, and the time the painters take to finish theirwork. Once the company begins looking at the above transaction from the customerspoint of view (i.e. getting the partition installed within a certain timeframe), it will get afresh perspective on customer expectations regarding quality, responsiveness and cost-effectiveness (Refer Table II for the effects of BPR).

Table II

The Effects of BPR

Work units change from functional to process teams

Jobs change from simple tasks to multidimensional.

Roles change from controls to empowered.

Advancement criteria changes from performance to ability

Executives change from scorekeepers to leaders.

Performance measures change from activity to results

Source: www.geocities.com

BPR can be categorized into Process Improvement, Process Redesign and BusinessTransformation. Process improvements involve improving processes that are part of asingle business function, and are not cross functional. They result in smallimprovements to the existing process, usually through eliminating non-value-addedactivities.

Process redesign on the other hand, involves the total redesign of an end-to-end process.This usually results in considerable performance improvement in terms of cost, quality


5/13

and cycle time. Business transformation begins with a study of the basic elements ofpeople, processes, information and technology involved by the top management. It is thehighest degree of BPR. It focuses on reinventing the business through a top-downreappraisal and redesign of the total business. The organization has to evaluate itselfand ask why it exists and what it is trying to achieve.

A typical BPR implementation exercise can be divided into three phases comprising twostages each (Refer Table III).

Table III

BPR Implementation Cycle

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

1. Business Understanding 3. Business Process Identification 5. Process Redesign

2. Project Planning &Training

4. Process Envisioning 6. Process Implementation


According to analysts, companies usually opt for reengineering when they are in serioustrouble, have foreseen trouble or are taking proactive measures to avoid landing introuble. Companies that implement BPR to avoid landing in trouble usually haveambitious and aggressive managements. As a result, they are able to implement BPReffectively and derive the benefits of reengineering. Many BPR exercises fail because theconcerned organizations do not ensure the presence of critical success factors for BPRimplementation (Refer Table IV). Often, BPR is confused with practices such asautomation, downsizing and outsourcing. However, such practices are only tools thatcan be a part of the overall BPR program; they can never be the all of such anexercise.

Table IV

BPR Success Factors

Strong and consistent top management sponsorship.

Addressing cultural transformation through effective change management.

Proven methodology including a vision process.

Reengineering team composition (in both breadth and knowledge).

Compelling business case for change (with measurable objectives).

Strategic alignment with company strategic direction.

Line ownership (pair ownership with accountability).


M&MS EXPERIENCE WITH BPR


6/13

By the mid 1990s, BPR had become a popular tool globally, with many leadingorganizations implementing it. However, when M&M undertook the exercise, it was stilla new concept in India. M&Ms workforce, as mentioned earlier, resisted this attemptto reengineer the organization. Soon after the senior staff began working on theshopfloors, the first signs of the benefits of BPR became evident. Around a 100 officers

produced 35 engines a day as compared to the 1200 employees producing 70 engines inthe pre-BPR days.

After five months, the workers ended the strike and began work in exchange for a 30%wage hike. As the situation returned to normalcy, BPR implementation gainedmomentum. M&M realized that it would have to focus on two issues whenimplementing the BPR program: reengineering the layout and method of working, andproductivity.

M&M worked on the principle of cellular manufacturing.[2] In this type ofmanufacturing, plant layout is reorganized drastically and workers are required to do

multi-tasking through multi-machine manning. The plant and machinery layout at thecompany had to be revamped to reduce non-productive activities and introduce cellularmanufacturing. To enhance productivity, M&M moved from a batch to a modularprocess[3]and implemented TPM[4]and Kaizen.[5]The company then revealed plansto enhance the capacities at its plants and asked the workers to start working harderand become more flexible. A group of workers voiced their resentment against this and,at one point of time, even halted production.

However, the management stood its ground and called the opposition as the dying gaspof any resistance to the new model of working. Anand Mahindra commented, All saidand done, I think our point was proven though it meant a loss in production. It was

necessary for the management to show the required commitment without whicheverything would have come unwounded.

In line with its decision to adopt practices followed by international auto players, M&Mdecided to replace its existing setup with the Platform Concept. The platform conceptfocuses on customer requirements. It requires the formation of cross functional teamsconsisting of professionals from R&D, manufacturing, processing, marketing etc. Theseteams jointly develop the product, keeping in mind the needs of the final customer.M&M took the help of its 600 strong R&D team consisting of engineering professionalswith experience across industries, for this purpose. This move was a complete shift fromthe traditional form of product development, which was product/function centric (i.e.

R&D, manufacturing and other departments worked in isolation at the developmentstage and came together only at the assembly stage).

To focus on customer requirements, M&M had to bring in features of concurrentengineering[6]at the development phase itself. This was accompanied by the formationof three full-time teams to bring the product development process in line with theplatform concept. The teams were named Horizon I, Horizon II and Horizon III.While Horizon I concentrated only on some improvements in existing products, HorizonII specialized in the upgradation of existing products. Horizon III was concerned withthe development of new products. This initiative resulted in the introduction of severalnew features like constant mesh gearbox for easy gear shifting and power steering to

reduce steering efforts (besides a range of improved as well as new products).
http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn2http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn2http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn2http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn3http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn3http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn3http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn4http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn4http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn5http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn5http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn5http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn6http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn6http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn6http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn5http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn4http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn3http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn2


7/13

Continuing with the BPR exercise, M&M decided to utilize information technology (IT)to seamlessly integrate all business functions and processes with each other. Several ITsystems were installed at various locations and various functions, and officers weredirectly linked with each other. The IT solutions were integrated with an ERP packageby SAP.[7] The solution integrated every facet of business operations to provide a

complete update of all organizational activities, at any point in time. ERP madecustomer requirements available. Every department and location was connectedthrough information technology. Since they were informed of the work at hand, theycould adjust their schedules and inventories accordingly. The whole system wasdesigned to be controlled not by the average user, not by IT professionals.

By April 2000, the BPR program was successfully implemented at M&M. At theIgatpuri plant, even as the number of employees declined to 760, the number of enginesproduced went up by 125 per day. The 400 excess workers at the plant were redeployedat the assembly plant in Nasik. The Nasik plant soon achieved a 125% improvement inproductivity. Employee costs at these two plants came down from 12.4% in 1994 to

10.1% in 1996. The number of vehicles produced overall increased from 47,760 in 1995to 65,405 in 1996 and 75,568 in 1997. A large part of this increase was attributed to theimprovement in productivity because of the BPR program. During the same period,inventory levels also came down from 74 days of net sales to 56 days, and value addedper employee increased from Rs 0.3 million to Rs 0.46 million.

Over the next few years, the BPR initiatives enabled the company to maintain steadygross margins, reduce working capital levels, and rationalize manufacturing processes.BPR not only enabled M&M to achieve a new and modern working relationship with itsemployees (with productivity as the main criteria), but also brought its manufacturingsystems up to international standards. The benefits of the BPR exercise included bbetter

inventory control, better sourcing, better order distribution across plants, onlineavailability of data, transparent access to data, process transparency and an integratedsales and supply chain.

THE FUTURE

Summing up the companys BPR experience, Anand Mahindra said, Let me put itin asimple way. If we have facilities in Kandivili today, which are not just surviving butthriving, it is all due to BPR. If you go back to the 1990s, there was no shortage ofpundits telling us that it would not be possible to manufacture in Mumbai due to thefact that the plants are old and depreciated, workers are too highly paid and not

producing good quality. In fact, some of our compatriots in the city have met a similarfate. So BPR was a way of reengineering our plants and making them viable in acompetitive environment.

Having reaped handsome gains from the BPR exercise, M&M decided to adopt otherglobally accepted practices to improve its business. Towards this end, the companyhired McKinsey & Co in 1997 to offer restructuring proposals. Following McKinseysrecommendations, the farm equipment division undertook Project Vishwajeet, amajor restructuring exercise, in May 2000. This project divided the tractors businessinto 38 business units classified under five business divisions. The hierarchy structure ineach of these divisions was limited to just five layers to ensure autonomy and clear

accountability.
http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn7http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn7http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn7http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftn7


8/13

The company continued with its efforts to further streamline its operations byundertaking a cost-saving program in May 2001 to reduce break-even volumes in theautomotive and farm equipment divisions. The program, undertaken as part of therestructuring proposals made by McKinsey, was expected to result in savings of 20-30%on business redesign, including sharing of resources to prevent duplication of capital

expenditure.

In addition, M&M envisaged 10-15% savings on process redesign and 5-10% savings onengineering redesign. The company also started outsourcing non-core manufacturingactivities, sourcing most components of a particular model from the same vendor, andincreasing the volume of business transactions with a few select suppliers. M&M,however, continued to manufacture critical components.

There was one unexpected, welcome change brought about by the BPR program andthe companys other initiatives aimed at the shopfloor and its workers. Commenting onthis, Anand Mahindra said, Today the atmosphere is so different that every morning

all the workers recite the company oath, which is a sea change from the situation tenyears ago when workers used to play cards on the shopfloor during working hours.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:

1. Comment on the circumstances that led M&M to implement a BPR program. Whydo you think the company-faced resistance from the unions when it decided to

implement BPR at the plants?

2. Analyze the BPR implementation exercise at M&Ms plants. How do you think theplatform concept helped the company? Also, comment on the benefits M&M reapedas a result of the BPR program.

3. How is BPR different from traditional improvement techniques like TQM? As amanager in charge of a shopfloor undergoing such a program, what measures wouldyou take to ensure its success?


9/13

Exhibit I

M&MMilestones

Year Events

1948 Steel trading business was started in association with suppliers in UK

Business connections in USA through Mahindra Wallace.

1949 WallaceSteel trading on behalf of European suppliers; Jeep Assembly.

1950 The first business (for 5000 Tons) with Mitsubishi Corporation for wagon building plates.

1953 Otis Elevator Co. of India established.

1954 Technical & Financial Collaboration with Willys Overland Corporation.

1956 Dr. Beck & Co. formed - a JV with Dr. Beck & Co. ,Germany.

1957 Mahindra Owen formeda JV with Rubery Owen & Co. Ltd., UK.

1958 Machine Tools Division started.1960 Mahindra Sintered Products Ltd. (MSP) formed - a JV with the GKN Group, UK.

1961 International Tractor Co. Of India (ITCI), a JV with International Harvester Co., US formed.

1962 Mahindra Ugine Steel Company (MUSCO) formed - a JV with Ugine Kuhlmann, France.

1965 Vickers Sperry of India Ltd., a JV with Sperry Rand Corporation, USARoplas (India), a collaboration with Rubery Owen. Manufacture of LCVs commenced.

1970 Mahindra Engineering & Chemical Products Ltd.(MECP) formed.

1971 International Harvester collaboration ended.

1975 Switch over to diesel vehicles in-house development.

1977 ITCI merges with M&M, to become its tractor division.1979 License from Automobiles Peugeot, France, for XDP 4.90 Diesel Engine.

1982 License from KIA for 4 Speed Transmission Mahindra of tractors; Siro Plast formed.

1983 M&M becomes market leader in Indian tractor market.

1984 Mahindra Hellenic Auto Industries S.A. formed, a JV in Greece to assemble and market UVs inEurope.

1986 Mahindra British Telecom , a JV with British Telecommunications plc (BT), UK formed.

1987 M&M acquired International Instruments Ltd.

1989 Automotive Pressing Unit (now MUSCO Stampings) acquired from GKW.

1991 Introduction of Commander series.

1992 Triton Overwater Transport Agency Ltd. formed, Implementation of the Service Center projectat Kanhe.

1993 MC & NI invited to participate in Steel Service Center Project. JV signed, MSSCL formed.

Mahindra Acres Consulting Engineers Ltd. (MACE) formed - a JV with Acres International,Canada.

MBT International Inc., USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of MBTThe companys maiden international offering the US$ 75m GDR issue.

Introduction of Armada.

1994 Mahindra Realty & Infrastructure Developers Ltd. (MRIDL) formed; Mahindra USA Inc.formed for distribution of tractors in the US; EAC Graphics (India) Ltd., formed in collaborationwith The East Asiatic Company Ltd. A/S, Denmark.


10/13

Year Events

Reorganization of the Group, creating six Strategic Business UnitsMSL Division (Auto Components) hived off to form Mahindra Sona Ltd.

Mahindra Nissan Allwyn Limited merged with the company.

1995 Mahindra Holding & Finance Ltd. (MHFL) becomes a subsidiary to carry out business as aninvestment company.

Technical collaboration with Mitsubishi / Samcor to manufacture L300.

1996 Mahindra Ford India Ltd. (MFIL) - JV with Ford Motor, US, to manufacture passenger cars.

The company made a Foreign Currency Convertible Bond (FCCB) issue of US$ 115 million.

1997 Business connections in US through Mahindra Wallace; A new die shop was inaugurated atNasik.

Inauguration of the Mahindra United World College of India.

1999 Launch of Bijlee a battery-operated, 3-wheeler, environmental-friendly vehicle.

The largest online used vehicle website in India launched by Mahindra Network Services.

The business of Intertrade Division and Mahindra Exports Ltd. combined and renamedMahindra Intertrade Ltd.

Mahindra USA Inc. enters into a strategic alliance with Tong Yang Moolsan to distribute itstractors under the Mahindra brand name.

The company acquires a majority stake in Gujarat Tractors.

2000 The company unveils new logo.

Mahindra Auto Specialties Ltd., a new 100% subsidiary, is formed. M&M sets up its firstsatellite tractor plant at Rudrapur.

The company launches New Age Tractor, the Mahindra Arjun 605 DI (60 HP tractor).

The company launches Bolero GLX, a UV, in response to the needs of the urban consumer.

2001 3-wheeler diesel vehicle Champion is launched by the company.

The company launches Mahindra MaXX an MUV positioned with the caption MaximumSpace, Maximum Comfort.

M&M ties up with Renault for petrol engines. M&M establishes a separate division to provideDefence Solutions.

Source: www.mahindra.com


11/13

Exhibit II

M&MSummary of Operations

( in Rs mill ion)

Year end 31st

MarchPRIVATE1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Income 14,896 17,151 21,135 28,996 36,205 41,280 42,250 44,760 43,529

Material Direct 8,194 9,218 11,457 15,790 19,668 21,514 22,274 22,102 23,586

Material - Indirect 272 322 260 328 441 491 431 455 489

Excise Duty (Net) 2,331 2,306 3,060 4,065 5,007 6,398 6,536 7,732 7,554

Personnel 1,841 2,098 2,339 3,002 3,417 3,875 3,853 4,094 4,156

Interest 595 562 447 482 805 1,229 1,519 1,415 622

Deprecation (Net) 321 351 336 423 630 993 1,120 1,233 1,401

Other Expenses 1,082 1,324 1,527 2,164 2,804 3,486 3,716 4,261 4,434

Extra-ordinary

items- (144) 84 104 - - - 36 -

PBT 261 826 1,792 2,846 3,283 3,295 2,801 3,505 1,286

Tax - 148 623 1165 1190 780 515 870 880

Prior period items (22) - (34) (57) - - (27) - -

Balance Profit 239 679 1135 1623 2093 2,515 2,260 2,635 1,206Dividends 108 184 342 441 560 625 631 675 670

Equity

Dividend(%)30 45 65 45 50 55 55 55 55

EPS (Rupees) 6.64 16.64 21.61 16.98 20.56 24.33 21.85 23.85 10.91

Vehicles Prod.

(units)38,813 49,155 47,760 65,405 74,653 77,510 70,639 76,983 63,146

Vehicles Sold

(units)38,887 48,292 49,235 63,623 75,568 76,954 70,548 76,437 62,927

Tractors Prod.(units) 35,454 32,925 40,051 49,651 58,028 71,468 66,211 73,222 80,261

Tractors Sold

(units)34,052 32,875 41,006 50,005 57,379 67,780 69,362 70,571 79,237

Source: www.mahindra.com


12/13

Additional Readings & References:

1. Radhakrishnan N and M Karthikeyan, The Remaking of M&M, Business India, June 16, 1997.

2. Strategic Management Case Studies on Indian CompaniesVolume IV, ICMR, 2000.

3. M&M Kicks Off Cost Saving Drive, Business Standard, May 17, 2001.

4. Mahindra & MahindraTough Road Ahead?, www.karvy.com.

5. Wadia Jamshed, BPR, www.geocities.com.

6. CRISIL Company ProfileMahindra & Mahindra Ltd., www.debtonnet.com.

7. Mahindra & MahindraFarm Equipment Sector, www.managementor.com.

8. Company Annual Reports.

9. www.indiainfoline.com

10. www.mahindra.com

[1] In September 2002, Rs 48 equaled 1 US $.

[2] Cellular manufacturing allows companies to produce just what is needed withminimum materials, equipment, labor, time and space. This translates to loweroperating costs. In addition, a cell has a simple and direct routing between operations,so bottlenecks can easily be identified and eliminated, reducing lead times. As cells can

accommodate small lots, quality problems are discovered and corrected sooner.

[3] In the batch process, parts are accumulated and processed together repeatedly formanufacturing items of a similar nature. Modular production aims to standardize boththe methods of production system design and the machine units for production systemconstruction. This results in fully integrated component production and assemblysystems, which can be rapidly configured for producing a wide range of products,thereby enhancing productivity.

[4] Total Productivity Management (TPM) is an approach for optimizing theeffectiveness of production means in a structured manner. It entails the effective use of

all company resources to enhance customer satisfaction, in the context of clear businessdirection, an integrated, visible improvement plan, a consistent set of improvementstrategies and an appropriate performance measurement system.

[5] Japanese for change for the better or improvement. A methodology ofcontinuous cost reduction, quality improvement, and delivery time reduction throughshopfloor involvement and rapid action now practiced in businesses worldwide.

[6] Concurrent engineering is a systematic approach to the integrated, concurrentdesign of products and related processes, including manufacturing and supportprocesses. This approach is intended to make developers consider from the outset, all

elements of the product life cycle, from conception through disposal, including quality,cost, schedule, and user requirements.
http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref1http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref1http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref1http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref2http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref2http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref3http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref3http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref4http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref4http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref5http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref5http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref6http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref6http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref6http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref5http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref4http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref3http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref2http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref1


13/13

[7] ERP is a software-driven business management system that helps integrate allfunctions of a business including planning, manufacturing, sales, and marketing. SAPR/3 is a popular ERP software from the Germany based company Systems Applications& Products in data processing (SAP).

Source: http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp
http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref7http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref7http://27.251.26.4/casestudies/mumbai2/OPER0008.asp#_ftnref7

mahindra & mahindra – implementing bpr

Documents

mahindra mohammed

keshub mahindra

mahindra group

benefits of bpr

kandivili plants

flagship company

plants dismal condition

achievehigher productivity