Apparel Manufacturing Productivity: Where do we stand?
If one wishes to compete in an athletic event in the Olympic games, the first thing one needs to know is what the Olympic or World record in that event is and what the minimum qualifying performance is. Similarly, to visualise the level of productivity performance to expect from one’s apparel plant, it is important that one knows what the best performance reported so far has been. These performance benchmarks can inspire individual organizations to equal, if not better them. Organizations may not or need not stop at achieving these benchmarks, but could surpass and create higher standards.
The apparel industry in the Western World made significant efforts to improve their productivity performance between 1950 and 1970. These efforts concentrated on the use of new technology to improve machines and equipment, application of industrial engineering, use of incentive systems, improved training methods and so on… This article aims to briefly recap global productivity benchmarks and evaluate the productivity performance of the Indian apparel industry against these benchmarks.
Apparel Productivity in USA
During the years 1955 to 1960, major efforts were made towards mechanisation of the apparel manufacturing process. This led to a reduction in standard minute value for full sleeve shirt from about 35 minutes in 1930 to as low as 12 minutes in 1960. The mechanical devices that remarkably influenced the sewing operations included:
1. Reciprocating stacker
2. Flip stacker
3. Automatic thread cutter
4. Automatic thread trimmers
5. Needle positioners
6. Edge beaders
7. Pedestal mounts
8. Clamp trucks
9. Sequential buttonholers
10. Automatic button sewers
11. Slide knife
Most sewing operations were improved by using specialized workstations equipped with one or more of these aids to improve productivity. These efforts resulted in a total time of 144.60 minutes for sewing one dozen shirts, an average of 12.05 minutes per shirt, as shown overleaf. These times were achieved using the progressive bundle system where buttonhole and button sewing for collars, cuffs and fronts was done in respective sections in component form. In India, button hole and button sewing is done once the garment is completely sewn.
The 1976 report of AAMA, ‘Quality and Productivity: Cornerstones of Apparel Manufacturing’ illustrates productivity benchmarks for six standard garments. These garments were assumed to be produced with the most modern equipment and construction techniques available. In 1975, the attainable direct labour productivity for dress shirt was estimated at 5.50 per hour. In the case of men’s casual pants, tailored dress slack, Western style jeans and ladies tailored blouse the attainable direct labour productivity per hour was 3.75, 2.37, 7.32 and 5.71, respectively.
The report dealt with productivity and quality together and provided an equation for higher productivity and effective quality control as stated below:
| The 12-Minute Shirt | ||
| Operation | Standard Minutes per Dozen | |
| Collar & Band | Collar profile stitch | 3.33 |
| Turn-trim-press | 2.40 | |
| Top stitch | 2.60 | |
| Shape bottom | 1.06 | |
| Hem band | 2.00 | |
| Set band | 4.00 | |
| Turn and check ends | 1.50 | |
| Bead | 1.06 | |
| Trim | 1.35 | |
| Notch | 1.00 | |
| Button hole | 0.70 | |
| Button sew | 0.70 | |
| Cuff | Hem cuff (line) | 2.40 |
| Cuff profile stitch | 2.40 | |
| Turn | 1.35 | |
| Top stitch | 2.00 | |
| Button hole | 1.50 | |
| Button sew | 1.50 | |
| Sleeve | Sleeve gore (lower placket) | 2.70 |
| Set facings (upper placket) | 3.20 | |
| Close & point facing | 10.00 | |
| Back | Set label to yoke | 3.00 |
| Set yokes to back | 3.00 | |
| Front | Set button stay (placket) | 1.60 |
| Centre fronts (front placket) | 3.15 | |
| Crease pockets | 1.60 | |
| Set pockets | 6.00 | |
| Fronts – button hole & sew | 4.60 | |
| Assembly | Joint shoulders | 4.30 |
| Set collar | 4.80 | |
| Close collar | 4.80 | |
| Set sleeve | 4.80 | |
| Close side | 4.80 | |
| Hem bottom | 4.00 | |
| Set cuff | 4.80 | |
| Close cuff | 4.80 | |
| Finish | Trim & inspect | 4.00 |
| Press | 2.00 | |
| Fold | 12.00 | |
| Assort & box | 4.80 | |
| Interim Inspection | 3.00 | |
| TOTAL PER DOZEN | 144.60 | |
| AVERAGE PER UNIT | 12.05 | |
| Source: Modified based on Shirt Making, S.J. Cepelin, Kogos International Corporation, NY. | ||
The European industry also made similar significant efforts to improve productivity. An article by Dr. Manual Gaetan, published in 1984 in ‘Bobbin’, reported the performance achieved by the German apparel industry in terms of production time. In the case of Men’s Dress shirt, time standard at basic technology was 21.80 minutes whereas at modern/optimum technology level it was 15.65 and 11.95 minutes, respectively. These productivity benchmarks from the US and European apparel industry provide a deep insight into the productivity performance achieved in the Western apparel industry between 1960 and 1980. Though these benchmarks are quite old, they still serve as a target for apparel manufacturers all over the world, especially so, when most of these productivity benchmarks are still intact.
| PRODUCTIVITY RATING OF APPAREL MANUFACTURING IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES | |||
| Country | Productivity Rating | Country | Productivity Rating |
| Federal Republic of Germany | 100% | Morocco | 70% |
| France | 100% | Guatemala | 70% |
| USA | 100% | Mexico | 70% |
| United Kingdom | 100% | Mauritius | 70% |
| Italy | 95% | Romania | 70% |
| Hong Kong | 90% | Belarus | 70% |
| Slovenia | 85% | Malaysia | 65% |
| Taiwan | 85% | Nicaragua | 65% |
| Republic of Korea | 85% | Thailand | 65% |
| Poland | 80% | China | 60% |
| Hungary | 80% | Egypt | 60% |
| Czech Republic | 75% | Pakistan | 50% |
| Turkey | 75% | India | 50% |
| Lithuania | 75% | Cambodia | 50% |
| Source: Compiled from 5th Cost Comparison Study of Kurt Salmon Associates Limited.1999. | |||
Kurt Salmon Associates’s (KSA) subsequent study in the ‘90s estimated the productivity levels achieved by the apparel industry in various countries. The result highlights the fact that countries with the highest productivity rating like Germany, USA, France and UK were 250% more productive than the least productive country. India at 50%, falls below Sri Lanka, Thailand and Philippines at 65%.
| Productivity Performance of Shirt Manufacturing at Global, Asian and Indian Industry Level (Productivity in number of shirts produced per 450 minutes shift) | |||
| Machine / Operator Productivity | USA | Asia | India |
| Productivity Mean | 25.00 f | 17.47 c | 9.99 c 10.03 d |
| Best Reported Performance | 29.60 e | 25.87 c | 19.79 d |
| Best Possible Performance Achievable | 41.25 a | 27.12 b | 27.12 b |
a) Based on AAMA estimates, operator productivity with best technology and industrial engineering;
b) Based on GSD data 100% performance at prevalent technology; c) Study by Rajesh Bheda, NIFT, on “Apparel Productivity in Asian Region” based on 1996 data, unpublished; d) Rajesh Bheda ‘Productivity in Indian Apparel Industry: Paradigms and Paragons’ 1997; e) Based on NEDO study ‘Attainable Production Targets’ 1969; f) Estimate as per McKinsey study ‘India: The Growth Imperative’ 2001
ME + EM + ME + EM = HP + EQC
(Modern equipment + Engineered Methods + Motivated Employees + Enlightened Management) = Higher Productivity + Effective Quality Control
Apparel Productivity in the Asian Region
The ICRIER study by Sri Ram Khanna in 1993 clearly brings out the comparative productivity performance of apparel manufacturers from six Asian countries. In products like blouse, dress, shirt, skirt and trouser, the average productivity of Indian apparel manufacturers lag far behind that of manufacturers from South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, China and Thailand. Except in skirts, Hong Kong reported highest productivity performance in the countries compared. Taiwan and Thailand were close behind. Indian performance is the lowest in almost every case and is less than half of the top performance reported.
My 1997 study Productivity Paradigms: An Appraisal of Select Apparel Products in Asian Region, provided further evidence on the productivity performance of Indian apparel industry vis-à-vis its Asian competitors representing Hong Kong, South China, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Bangladesh. As against machine productivity performance of 9.99 shirts per shift in India, Asian factories recorded an average performance of 17.47 shirts per shift. The highest reported productivity performance by a factory was 22.22 shirts for India and 25.87 shirts for the rest of the Asian group whereas the lowest performance was about 5 shirts per shift for both groups.
