|

Assessment of Production Program Feasibility in Aviation Engineering

Authors: Drogovoz P.A., Efimova N.S., Kalachanov V.D. Published: 30.04.2020
Published in issue: #2(131)/2020  

DOI: 10.18698/0236-3941-2020-2-88-108

 
Category: Mechanical Engineering and Machine Science | Chapter: Organization of Production  
Keywords: aviation industry, optimization, key indicators, production program, hi-tech production, knowledge-intensive products, process monitoring

The purpose of the study was to analyze the effective development of the production potential of the domestic industry of aviation engineering. We developed a method for calculating the summarizing indicators of assessing the feasibility of production programs of the aviation industry at the level of technological conversions and types of aircraft production. The application of such method will make it possible to more reasonably determine the material consumption of new types of aviation products and the productivity of new equipment, and, ultimately, assess the feasibility of promising production plans. Monitoring of production indicators of the domestic aviation engineering industry will encourage new research in the field of organizing the development, production and maintenance of hi-tech products, taking into account its specificity. Although plenty of important scientific research has been carried out by scientists in the field of organization of production at enterprises, there are currently unsolved problems of industrial-technological nature

References

[1] Adler P.S. The future of critical management studies: А Paleo-Marxist critique of labour process theory. Organization Studies, 2007, vol. 28, no. 9, pp. 1313--1345. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0170840607080743

[2] Batkovskiy A.M., Kalachanov V.D. Modeling innovation development economic systems. Voprosy radioelektroniki, 2015, no. 2, pp. 258--279 (in Russ.).

[3] Kim J., MacDuffie J.P., Pil F.K. Employee voice and organizational performance: team versus representative influence. Hum. Relat., 2010, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 371--394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0018726709348936

[4] Lee B.H. The political economics of industrial development in the Korean automotive sector. IJATM, 2011, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 137--151. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/ijatm.2011.039541

[5] Li C., Bai Y., Xiang X., et al. To mine coordinated development degrees of high-tech equipment manufacturing industry and logistics industry via an improved grey hierarchy analysis model. J. Grey Syst., 2017, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 105--119.

[6] Lyu J., Wang W., Ren Y., et al. An evaluation method for use phase affordability of aviation equipment. ICSRS, 2016, pp. 42--45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSRS.2016.7815835

[7] Manturov D.V., Efimova N.S. Introduction of systems of information support of the knowledge-intensive production at the production organization in aircraft industry. Vooruzhenie i ekonomika [Armament and Economics], 2012, no. 3, pp. 50--55 (in Russ.). Available at: http://www.viek.ru/19/50-55.pdf

[8] McNamara C. Overview of organizational performance management: guidelines and resources. managementhelp.org: website. Available at: http://managementhelp.org/organizationalperformance/index.html (accessed: 14.10.2019).

[9] De Sousa Damiani J.H. Regional development in Brazil and the challenges facing technology-intensive cities: a proposal for a framework of a municipal innovation system. PICMET, 2016, pp. 510--522. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/PICMET.2016.7806558

[10] Morrissey R., Guarraia P., Pauwels V., et al. Building efficient organizations. bain.com: website. Available at: http://www.bain.com/publications/articles/building-efficient-organizations.aspx (accessed: 14.10.2019).

[11] Nikezic S., Dzeletovic M., Vucinic D. Chester Barnard: Organisational-Management Code for the 21st Century. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sc., 2016, vol. 221, pp. 126--134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.098

[12] Panahifar F., Byrne P.J., Heavey C. ISM analysis of CPFR implementation barriers. Int. J. Prod. Res., 2014, vol. 52, no. 18, pp. 5255--5272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2014.886789

[13] Knutstad G.J., Ravn E. Technology utilization as competitive advantage --- a sociotechnical approach to high performance work systems. Adv. Mat. Res., 2014, vol. 1039, pp. 555--561. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1039.555

[14] Pokrajac S., Nikolic M., Filipovic M. Industrial competitiveness as a basis of Serbian reindustrialization. J. App. Eng. Sc., 2016, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 248--259.

[15] Radu C. Modern instruments for measuring organizational performance. Annals of the University of Oradea: Economic Science, 2010, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 951--956.

[16] Rolfsen M., Langeland C. Successful maintenance practice through team autonomy. Employee Relations. Employee Relations, 2012, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 306--321. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/01425451211217725

[17] Sparrow P., Cooper C. Organizational effectiveness, people and performance: new challenges, new research agendas. JOEPP, 2014, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 2--13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-01-2014-0004

[18] Vonortas N., Zirulia L. Strategic technology alliances and networks. EINT, 2015, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 490--509. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2014.988517

[19] Efimova N.S. Formation of information support methods for processes of science-intensive production development in the conditions of enterprise information security. Vestnik MAI [Aerospace MAI Journal], 2015, no. 2, pp. 214--220 (in Russ.).

[20] Batkovskiy A.M., Fomina A.V., Batkovskiy M.A., et al. Implementation risks in investment projects on boosting high-tech business production capacity: analysis and management. JAES, 2016, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 1200--1209.

[21] Chursin A., Drogovoz P., Sadovskaya T., et al. A linear model of economic and technological shocks in science-intensive industries. JAES, 2017, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 1567--1577.

[22] Chursin A., Drogovoz P., Sadovskaya T., et al. The dynamic model of elements’ interaction within system of science-intensive production under unstable macroeconomic conditions. JAES, 2017, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1520--1530.