1 2 3 - lean manufacturing

8/13/2019 1 2 3 - Lean Manufacturing

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1-2-3-lean-manufacturing 1/106

Chapter1

Facilitiesn a

ChangingEnvironment

"Thedogmasof our quiet past are nadequateo the

stormypresent. s oursituation s new,we must hinkanew.tt

- Abraham Lincoln

Working facilities are he land, buildings, and equipment that provide

the physical capability to add value. This book is about operationalfacilities used or a wide rangeof business,government, nstitutional,and charitableactivities. It applies o offices, factories,and fast-foodrestaurants.t applies o any acilitythat houses alue-addingoperations.For convenience,ermssuch as

"businessfacility" or"factory" areused,

although the changing nature of work has blured many of thesedistinctions. The

principles herein apply to a wide rangeof situationsthe industrialengineer ommonlyencounters.

Facilitiesareboth durableand expensive,asting for decades ndsometimeseven spanningcenturies.A firm's facilities are among themost expensive f itspossessions.hey representhe argestassettemon most balance heets.

The durability of facilities, their cost, and their primary role inadding value make them an important strategicelement.Just asgunpowder made the fortressesof medieval Europe indefensible,

changes n technology, culture, andpolitics canquickly render today'sindustrial facilities obsolete.Conversely, facilities that adapt to thenatureof their competitiveenvironment canbe a continuing sourceofadvantage or their owners.



Facilit ies lanning

o)o

t

g+a)U,

oF

C)

E E ^._E@

TE)

s\

\

S+fo

e5sG

=

oo

-

y

=I I

o(E

E

Figure .l - StrotegicRelotionships



Facilit iesn A ChangingEnvironment

Figure 1.1 depicts the interaction of facilities, organization,products,andprocesses.he understanding, esign,anddevelopmentof these ariedelementsnto a unctioningbusinessystem re eferredto in variouserms.Among these re:manufacfuring trategy, o{poratereengineering, nd business

rchitecture.The importanceof facilitiesdoesnot lie solely n their costanddurability. They are also the most tangible elementof the businesssystem, he element o which everyonen everyareaof the business anrelate.They canbe a central,commonreferenceor the restrucfuring/reengineering/strategicebate.

Working facilities in modern historyIndustrial facilities

shops that served he needsof individual artisanswere the industrialfacilitiesof the Middle Ages.Theseweresmalland centered roundasingleskill suchasarmoryor saddlemaking. hey hadsimpleandcleararrangements.

Duringthe IndustrialRevolution,powersources nd he movementof raw materialsdeterminedfaciliry design.Textile mills requiredstreamsor waterpower,andcumbersome haftsandbeltsdominatedtheir arrangement. ady ron andsteelmillswere ocatedon waterways,

railroads,or mining siteslcoal, ron ore,and imestone ransportationdominated heir design.

Early large-scale roduction shopssuchas he pickering piano

Factory @g, 1.2) developedn the nineteenthcentury.These large

Figure 1.2 - The Pickering Piono Factory, Boston, Moss, Circo | 870



Facilit ies lanning

buildings urned out high numbersof manufacrured roducts.At one

time, the Pickering factory urned out 400 pianoseachday.

In the earlytwentieth entury, he progression fmass-production

technology required facilities that optimized material flow. The

micro-division of labor made skill less important than efficient

movementof product.

In the secondhalf of this century, nformation and knowledge

began o dominate ndustrialproduction.The educationand skills of

theworKorce n industrializedparts fthe world increased. s aresult,

industrial facilitiesmust now optimize the coordination of people,

processes,ndproducts.

Government facilities

In the Middle Ages, the most important government acilitiesweretown fortresses. heir primary mission was defenseagainst roving

bandsand neighboring iry-states. he fortified town of Rocroi,on the

northernplainof France, s an example.Still argelyintact, t is a asting

testimony o the durability,cost,and obsolescencef these ortresses.

With the adventofgunpowder,battle echnoloryadvanced. ew

tacticsevolvedand armiesbecamemore disciplined.These massive

works drained the treasuries f many dukes and kings and became

indefensibleand obsolete.By the time of the Renaissance,ortresseshad evolved nto palaces. heir primary missionwas comfort for the

inhabitants, as well as the projection of power and prestige.The

buildersofmany governmentalbuildingswanted o intimidate potential

enemies, oth foreign and domestic.

Governments no longer can survive only through warfare or the

threat of warfare.Their constituentsdemandaddedvalue n a wide

range of human activity. Accordingly, many governmental facilities

now arebeing designedor efficient operations ather han projection

of power.

The United StatesPostalService rovidesan excellentexample.

Post officesbuilt in the early part of this century were architectural

landmarks.Their mission was to display the power, stability, and

prestige f the federalgovernment.Postal acilitiesbuilt todayarenear

transportation entersand optimizemail flow. Their primarymission

is the efficient distribution of mail.

Knowl e dge-based fa ci tiesFacilities n which knowledge s the primary meansof work have

always eenmorevaried han other types.The medievalmonastery,

for example)was a primary depositoryof knowledge n its time.



Facilitiesn A ChangingEnvironment

The church used this knowledge to vie with governments forpower and influence.

During the Renaissancend Industrial Revolution,knowledgebecamean important source or commercialcompetitiveadvantage.Individual professionals

uchasdoctors, awyers,and financierswereprimary keepers f knowledge.Other knowledge esided n libraries.Factoriesmbeddedt in their facilitiesandprocesses.eterF. Druckerwas among he first to rccognize he increasing alueofwhat he termed"knowledge

work." He put forth these deas n his landmarkwork, ThePracticeofManagement,n 1955. Knowledgework dependsprimarilyon brainpower rather than manual skills or strength. In today'smanufacturingenvironment,most work requiring pure strength ofmusclehas ong beenautomatedaway.Much of the work that once

required manual dexterity has been taken over by computerizedequipmentsuchasnumerically ontrolledmachine oolsor coordinatemeasuringmachines. herefore, nowledge nd he nformationbehindit now havebecomeprimarysources fvalue n their own right. Manyorganizationsexist for the solepurposeof processing nformation anddistributing t. Their facilitiesshouldreflectandenhance his role.

Facilitiesn a changing nvironment

Facilitydesigners avealwaysworkedwith materials, roducts,processes,information,andpeople. heirtaskis to arrangeworkprocessesn andand n buildings or optimum performance. his hasnot changedandwill not change,but rapid shifts in technology, politics, and culturerequire a more fundamentalunderstandingand analysis rom thefacility designer. t no longer is sufficient(if it everwas) to copy anassemblyine ust becauset wassuccessfulomewhere lse.

In additionto the ong-term trend toward ncreased nowledge-

basedwork, other rendsofa stretigicnatureareaffectingbusiness.hefacility plannershould catalyze r leadan organization'sadaptationtoever-changing urroundings.

The environmental imperative

Harmony with the environment s an increasinglymportant businessconcernthat will not go away.Population growth is a principal factordictating this concern; he spreadof the suburbs hrough increasedmobility is another. Organizafions hat surviveandprosper n coming

yearswill anticipateand eadwith their environmentalpolicies.

Location requirement changesInformation is the raw material of the knowledge worker. With the



6 Facilities lanning

confluenceof information processingand communication, the

information superhighway as opened.The ability to distributevast

amountsof information makes t less mportant for facilities o locate

near the sourceof information. This is similar to the distribution of

materials n an earlierday.As material ransportationbecamemore

efficient.manufacturers ould ocate arther from their sources.

Knowledge-basedacilitiesnow locatewhere heir workerswish

to live-often far from traditional industry. Industries that require

specialized nowledgeoftenconvergen smallareas:manufacturers f

overhead ranes ongregaten Milwaukee,Wisconsin;Wichita, Kansas,

hasa high concentrationofvinyl printers for decorativedecals;and"Silicon

Valley" n California s the home for many electronics lants.

These changesaffectglobal facilitiesplanning decisions uch as site

selectionandplanning.

The changing nature of work

As products becomemore sophisticated, heir knowledge component

becomesmore important. It is no longer enough to manufacture a

commodity product.Competition demands ariety, requentchange,and

distribution systemshatdeliverphysicalproduct,service, ndknowledge.

The natureofworkhas changed. oday, ndividuals eldomwork

alone. Knowledge teams are necessaryn product design, processdesign, inance, ndeven aw.Teams,by their nature, equireproximiry.

Facilities can inhibit or promote teamwork.They can smooth the

operation of complexand etherealknowledgeprocessesr they can

isolate eopleandprevent ommunication.

The socio-technical system

Socio-technical ystems ave alwaysexisted,althoughfew managers

recognized he phenomenon ntil recently.Management houghtwas

caughtn theNewtonianconcepthat organizations ere ike machines,

giant clockrvork mechanisms hat ticked away in a predictable,

mechanicalmanner.EricTrist ofthe Tavistock nstitutedevelopedhe

socio-technical dea in the early 1950s. Teamwork, total quality

managementTQ{), and other echniquesor employeenvolvement

have heir roots n the conceptofthe socio-technical ystem fiS.1.3).

The socialsystem ncludespeopleand their habitual attitudes,

values,behavioral styles,and relationships. t is the formal power

strucfure depicted on otganization charts and the informal structurederived rom knowledgeandpersonal nfluence.The technicalsystem

includes machinery, processes, rocedures,and their physical

arrangement layout).



Facilit iesn A ChangingEnvironment

Eo

?t

o

a(E'6oa

Eo+to

a(E

.9tr-coP

o

oo

aG'e

d)

'6

a

Figure1.3 Socio-Technicol ysternsEric Trist, 1952)



Facilities lanning

To be effective,the social and technical systemsmust integrate

and assistone another.Facilitiesplanning playsa major role in this

integration.Businesses herepeoplehave solatedworkstations,arge

inventory buffers, and few sequential processeshave difficulty

implementing teamwork. A manufacturing work cell that requires

extensiveeamworkwill not produce n an environmentof suspicion,

individual rewards,and command-control.

N on-h erarchi ca orga niz ation s

Hierarchical organizationswith functional divisions of work evolved

from the Roman Legions, he Catholic Church, andmedievalguilds.

Such organizations are ill-suited for today's work, where the work

product requires nput from many functional specialties nd where

coordinationbetweenspecialtiess a primary requirement'While TqM emphasizescross-functional teamwork, more

fundamental reengineeringemphasizeselimination of functional

structures in the organization This puts special demands on the

facilitiesplanner.Non-hierarchicalorganizationsmust constantly hange

to accommodate hangesn business olumeand product ife cycles.

In these organizations here is less division between traditional

managementand labor functions.Many engineersand otherswho

traditionally worked in office areasnow have their desks n themanufacturing plant. Many of today's high-tech manufacturing

operationsdemand more cleanliness nd order than the traditional

office. Therefore, facilitiesmust be more open with few walls and

barriers.Theyrequireconstant earrangemento accommodate hanging

work cells and changing team structures.

Global business restructurtng reengineering, and facilities

Thanks in part to the changingnatureofwork, globaleconomics, nd

technologicaladvances,arge-scaleestructurings occurring n many

organizatrons. s a result,many acilities hat areno onger contributing

to companymissionswill close.Other facilitieswill be built. Many

more will haveproducts ealignedandprocesseseengineered.

Facilitiesplanning s often a arge-scaleeengineering roject. t

is an opportunity to rethink processesswell assuPPorting lements.

During a acilitiesplanningproject,he designersanhelpmanagement

clarifr missionsand rationalizeproduct ines.

Layout is an integral part of reengineering and restructuring.Meaningful restructuring equires orrespondinghangesn the ayout.

Conversely,a ayout redesigncanbe he catalyst or restructuring.

Many symptomsofinappropriatebusiness rchitectureappearas ayout




or materialhandling ssues. actoryayoutcandemonstratehe need orreengineeringo an organization eluctant o tear tselfapartandrebuild.

Approaches to facility planning

Those who plan and build facilities ake many approaches. ome are

highly organized;othersaread hoc. Examplesofapproaches fig.7.4) areexperiential,masterbuilding, cloning,bottom-up,systematic, ndstrategic.

Experiential

In this approach, eopleplan their facilitiesbasedon pastexperience,common sense, nd instinct. In any organization,he experience fseniormemberss valuable or information on what hasworked andwhat has not worked in the past. Otganizations,aswell as ndividuals,

need his experienceo function.A faciliry designed rom experienceaps nto the rich knowledge

of thosewho havegone beforel however,experience-basedacilitiesplanninghas imitations.Experience, ydefinition, sbased n the past,and new technologyandorganization tructures an make t obsolete.In addition,planningby experiencesusuallyunorganized.t frequentlyis he resultof the memories fonlyone or a ewindividuals,and othersmayhavehadadditionalor contradictory xperiences.uchhindrances,aswell as orgotten details,haunt theseefforts.

In planning a major facility, experience annotbe ignored butmust be gathered rom the widest field of experience ossibleandappliedwith judgment and discretion.

Master building

Master building focuseson consrructionand buildings. The finalproduct soften mpressive ndsometimes work of art, but it may notfit theoperational eeds fthe enterprise.Masterbuilderscanbe ound

at many levels in both large and small organizations: a companypresident building a new headquartersor a department managerfocusing on technological mpressivenessather than actual needs.Using abuildingto displayfinancial trength, echnological rowess, rartistic accomplishments a legitimate orm of advertising.However,this purposeshouldbe balancedwith other business eeds.

Cloning

Cloning simply duplicates an existing facllity or portion of it. Thisapproachs ast. fthe existingfaciliryis rovenand fconditionsare hesame,this type works well. McDonald's uses cloning to build itshamburger

factories"throughout he world. For most acilities,however,



I O Facilities lanning

C'

G

Eoo

o

.9C')o(lt

og3

@

oo(E

=

ct).EE

I

()

Figure1.4 Spoceplonning pprooches

cloninghas imited usebecauseites, rocesses,ndpeoplearedifferent.

Cloning shouldbe appliedonly when appropriate.

Bottom up

The bottom-up approachstartswith the details.How many desks?

How many and which machines?How many people?From them,




departmentalunits and, eventually, he overall acility plan are built. Itis a satisfactory pproachf the derailsand how theywill be assembledinto a argersystem reknown, fthere is time, and fthe detailswill notchange.such conditionsare often met for smaller acilities n stableenvironments.

Bottom-up planning does not lend itself to new operationsstrategies. ecause ll detailshave o be workedout before inal designand construction, onstructionead imesareoften too long. On largeprojects, he detailsbecomeso overwhelming t is often difficult tomaintain schedules.

Systematic

Systematicayoutplanning (SLP) usesprocedures, onventions,and

phases. t helps ayout plannersknow what to do at eachstep of aproject. This provides ayout planning with systemand strucrure,saving ime andeffort. However,many ayoutscreatedwith systematicmethodologyare simply better versionsof what went before.Theprimaryconcerns how to arrange locksof space. more undamentalissue s what blocksof space houldbe arranged.

Strategic

The strategic pproachstop-down. t sets olicy irst andaranges hetechnology, organization, and facilities to support it. Starting withbusiness ndcorporate trateg'yuchasglobalsite ocation, t moves ooperations trate yand inisheswith detailsike ocarions f equipmentand furniture.

A strategic pproachsdirectand haspurpose. t allowseveryoneinvolved in the project to follow a common direction. Used alone,however,strategicdirection is insufficient. It does not tell facilirydesigners nd thosewho use he facilitieswhat to do.

FacPIan

The FacPlanmethodcombines he bestof variousapproaches.t hassystemand structureand addsstrategicdimension. t taps nto theexperience nd knowledgeof thosewho use he facilities. t canworkfrom detail to generaland viceversawhen appropriate.

FacPlanusesa hierarchyof detail evels. t focuses n strategicissuesat the appropriate ime and minutiae at the appropriate ime,

usingamodelprojectplan oguideandsrrucrure ach roject.Proceduralflow chartsguide heplanner hrougheach askandassistwithdecisionmaking.Charts, orms,anddesignaidscontribute o the organizationof information.

1 1



1 2 Faci l i t ies lanning

The ndustrial nginee/s ole n facilityplanningThe central,strategic ole offacilitiesplacesheir designersn a unique

position. Industrial engineers an assumenarrow roles as technical

equipmentarrangers r they can take broader oles as educators nd

catalysts or or gan\zationalstrate ic debate.

The latter requiresmore han skills n layoutdesignand echnical

procedure.Strategicperspective, ell-developed nterpersonal kills,

patience,and understanding re alsonecessary.

This work providesnsight nto the basic echnicalools ndustrial

engineers eed or facilitiesplanning.The broaderskills will reguire

experie ce, nsight, maturity, and education.



Chapter2

The Frameworkor

Facilities esign

The completedesignof a facility requireswork from many disciplineswithin an organization:sales and marketing, purchasing, humanresource, accounting, nd more.More visible s he work of architects,structuralengineers, rocess ngineers, nd management.Architects

and structuralengineers heck soil conditions, building codes,and

infrastructure, etailing he structure, ppearance,nd nternalsof thebuildingandsite.Processngineers ayplan heproductionprocedures.To guide and coordinateall theseefforts,management etsstrategicpolicies.

Industrial engineers lsoplay key roles.They often manage heoverallprojectand report to top management, nd they may performsomeor all of the above asks.Most importantly, hey plan the useofspace. hesespace lans,atvarious etail evels, ecome hecenterpiece

for coordinating he entireproject.

The levels of spatial design

Layout, or space lanning, s the central ocusof facilitiesdesignanddominates he thoughtsof mostmanagers. ut factoryor office ayoutis only one detail level. Ideally, a facility design proceeds rom thegeneral o the particular-from global site location to workstation.Largerstrategicssues redecided irst.

It is useful o think of space lanning in five levelsas shown in

figure 2.1.Figures2.2 through 2.6 show qpical ourputsat each evel.These range from the global maps of site location to engineeringdrawingsof tools and workstations.



1 4 Facilities lanning

=CL

:o

.l

g

o

o

ul

o bE C

o o= o

o=U)

o).EIf

d)

U'g E

o 9F. n F

d ) ( Er r O-

o

c

.9G'o

j

o

fo-U'

(E

.9CL

F

oo=a

. t ao,ql oc . = L

€g ' z= g ( U

do,l

og C

o go =

o orr Q,.

o E€*Eo' t=

al,

: o

, e ( Ur- c)

oJ

.=

.=C)

€ cc O

#€E a

q)g

o ' =

a E(L

O)-c f

E g' i ( d

Eo = -

E,q: v >

: i : q: U Jq ) -

o

o( I ' o )

o oi o

b o

6o

Gll

_ 9(,

oCL

U'

o

=Eo

> . 9- =

r O

, ;g

Figure2, | - The Levelsof Space Plonning



The Framework orFacilities esign 1 5

Level I -Global site locationDuring global ocation, he site ocation evel, he firm decideswhereto locate acilitiesand determines heir missions.A facility missionstatement is a concisesummary of products, processes, nd key

manufacfuring tasks.A facility rarely canperform more than two orthreekey manufacturingaskswell. The missionstatementsthereforean important guide for facilitiesplannersand othersas hey considervariousdesign rade-offs.

Otheroutputsat his evelusuallyncludeareport o management.For multiple sites,mapsshowingsite ocationsand customeiactivityarecommon.Figure2.2 illustrates.

The costof space lanning at Level 1 is small.Global locationusually nvolvesa ew top executives ndone or fwo industrial engineersor consultants.Each level below requiresmore and more people,analysis, nd detailedengineering.Yet, the corporatebudgetpro..r,frequentlydemandshat all significantplanningbe delayed rriil uft.,a decisions made oproceedwith siteacquisition. hose evelswith the

Proposed

South American PlantSite Specification

Contents

1 O Mission

2.0 General

Requirements

3.0 Land Features

4.O Building

5.O Transponation

6.0 l.ltilities

7,0 Labor

8.O Communlty

9.0 Suppl leG

1O.O Environmental

O Manufacturing

I Distribution-9u

l Proposed

MissionStatement

Midwest Plant& Warehouse

MissionStatementBrussels

Warehouse

Mission

StatementShenandoahPlant

The ShenandoahFaci l i tywi l l

manufacture the Eliteproduct l ine for highvolume customers n

the Eastern UnitedStates. lt will strive to

be the primary

suppl ier for ou rindustry for high

qual i ty OEM material .

Figure 2.2 - Level | - Site Location



1 6 Facilit ies lanning

most strategic mpact and the lowestplanning cost receive he least

attention.Consequently,he decisions ith the most strategicmpact

are sometimesmade with the least reliableknowledge.

Overall businessstrategy s most important at the global level.

Determining the number and ocationof sites equires ar more thansimply searching or the lowest labor rates and largest tax breaks.

Available labor skiils and attitudes toward work, supporting services

suchas ool productionandmaterial upply, ndpolitics,andsometimes

geopolitics,must alsobe majorconsiderations.or example,f a plant

is located n the wrong countr/r it may becomea geopoliticalpawn.

Technologicalprowesscould then shift to other regions. f there is

political instability locally, it can destroy a firm's ability to produce.

Important raw materialsmight bedepleted r replaced. uchproblems

are not easy o correct.

Appropriate planningresults n facilitiesoptimizedfor the markets

and located near the most important resources-resources hat,

increasingly, nvolve knowledge,skills, and infrastructure rather than

raw materials.

Level 2-Supra-space plan

At the supra-space lan level,site planning takesplace.This includes

number,size,and ocationofbuildings,aswell as nfrastructure uchasroads, water, gas, and rail. This plan should look ahead to plant

expansions nd eventual itesaturation.

The documents from a site planning project almost always

include a site drawing (fig. 2.3). Frequently, they involve a seriesof

drawings showing past,present,and future configurations(there may

be severaloptions for these).A major site study alsomight include

narrativeson site history and descriptionsof the considerations nd

rationale or the siteplans.At this level, planning still has long-term and far-reaching

consequences.well-designed nfrastructuresupports uture expansion

or conversion o new products.Proper ocation and building design

provide or logicalexpansionn suitable ncrements.

Level 3-Macro-space plan

At the macro-spaceplan level, a macro-layout (fig. 2.4) plans each

building, structure, r othersub-unitof the site.Usually his s he most

important level of planning, for it sets he focus,or basicorganization,

of the factory.The designers efineand ocateoperatingdepartments

and determine overallmaterial flow.

Macro-space landecisionsmay esult n new-product lexibility,



The FrameworkFor FacilitiesDesign 1 7

ffi onur" II 2azzssr

W onur" II 56000 r

Figure2.? - Level2, Site PlonningMaster Site Plon, Shenondooh Plont, Stonewatl Corp.

lowercosts, igh quality,or a lexible abor.Fundamentalmacro-spaceplandecisions sually reeasiero correct hansite-level ecisions. till,a poorlyplanned acilitycanbring high handlingcosts, onfusion,andinflexibility. Theseproblems, n rurn, can causedifficulty in launchingnew products, erratic deliveries,and too much inventory. Correctingsuch problems may require a complete rearrangementwith majorinvestmentsn process quipmentand infrastructure.

Level 4-Micro-space plan

The locationof specificequipmentand furniture s determined n themicro-spaceplan. The emphasisshifts from gross material flow to

personalspaceand communication.Socio-technicalconsiderationsdominate. fproduction teamsarean mportant elementofthe operationsstratery, the work at this level may inhibit or discourage eamwork.Figure2.5 showsa space lan for an operatingdepartment.




O z e

ProjectReport

ilacro.Layout&

MaterialHandllng

O m

ElectronEngineer ing orp.Macro-Layout pt ionA

Macro-LayoutptionB

Macro-Layout ptionC

Figure 2.4 - Level 3, Mocro LoyoutProject Report Mocro-Loyout ond Moteriol Hondling

Level 5-Sub-micro-space plan

Individual workstations and workers are he concernof the fifth level.

Here, workstationsaredesignedor efficiency,effectiveness, ndsafety.

Ideally, the industrial engineerplans for the correct tools in the most

appropriate places,using fixtures that properly hold the work piece.Materials are introduced at optimal locations and large items are

providedwith appropriatematerial handling aids.Some ypical outputs

are shown in figure 2.6.



TheFrameworkorFacilities esign 1 9

ili l .

uil-ir9 l i a

tfll,

6

g i' , "t A

A d ;

ai

- 6 . "3 9 Eg E 3

I E 6 t | - |

F tk l t f i EI' | g ' - : / - - '

I o i "

, E l l F : lt l L / 9

_ l I - Fi )

t . /

' . l> i l : ' - -,/ ', *ai d E5.tf i E d a L i

- i3 ' . ,Y$-nFL- n/ EL5'ri u J l - P

\ / \\ : 6 l

, i t s ' F

EEE:

t 5: l; ;

Figure2,5- Level4, Micro-LayoutMaypro Monufocturing Pump Mochining 6ept. Detail Loyout



20 Facilit ies lanning

WorkcellOperstions

Plan

sraouoMn atnc a36a,agw

>taFo@ €Q@tsEM d

T Eiliiiiu-;;-ll h t u tI o o sirrrid I

I Pg i ; i . ' " * ' II ''.*', Eee€ |

Ei. ro. l Produdlon

P ? : : H '3 r t*i#l

I Ert.rn.l cont.ln.r. | | || :|vV di^ lf--Tirii-irFrtd-u i--l

l i I conrol I

Lr:---------ll ? qfl$ II Ert.'n.l r.t.il.l I

l ^ _ r . n a r r n s l l Il 9 q 1 6 6 l -

I ft"r: ll f, *:lr.:r;-" Il - - l l l o " d - . . 0 ' - " I

1 " " - - ' l l " ' - ' l

l._3-e%*tT"-j_jl'-":*-l

T J - . - ^ r r y r - * B l| ? s:T-*' II o . a { e L I

I y:lf.i'* |f-6driye*.-lI r r * r r d I

l P r n P It-----5i;;ii6------1I t ";..".,-GF"."' lI t rdb.hi i I

Io c { n d r c g d

I

l- c'.Fd--l

I t ,o,uq II o 'drtur r4fr |

l " ' * " - " 1

"*'/rc

DiaphnagmPump AssemblgW onks ld l i on # I

Figure2.5- Level5, Worl<stotionLoyout



The Framework orFacilities esign 2' l

Levels 4 and 5 are the more detailed evelsof spaceplanning;therefore,equipmentand ssues remore ocalized.When.h"rrg., "r"necessary,here susuallylessanger fmajorproduction nterruptions.

The phasing of spacedesignIdeally, designprogressesrom the global level to the sub-micro level

in distinct, sequential hases. t the end of eachphase, he design s"frozen"by consensus. his seftles he more global issues irsiand

allowssmoothprogresswithout continuallyrevisitingunresolvedssues.It alsopreventsdetails from overwhelming the prolect. Figure 2.7(A)illustrateshis ogicalprogression ndshows he strategicmpactofthework in eachphase.Strategic mpact affects he ong-term ab1fityof thefirm to competeandprofit.

. Industrial engineersarelyhave he opportunityto designafacilityin accordance ith the normalphasingshown n figure2.7(A).Thereare severaleasonsor this. Sitesandbuildings hat haveevolvedovermanyyears utlive echnologies nd heir originalpurpose,and hereforemust be rearranged. nother reasonmaybe management'selief hatthe existingspace lan is simplynot optimal. In both cases, lanning

(A)

Ol.. .a I

ta--l

/\ ln*--l\ -\ lct l l I

snrorc rmnacf\lHiii-l

I

t l

i l l

IV

V

I

t l

i l l

IV

V

(B)

lr.#:l

l-6--l

lsfiiii,l

Time --|>

(c)

Time -- *

(D)

I

t l

i l l'V

V

lEil-l

M |;;i--l

lsr"rrii-l

Time -.|>

I

t l

i l l

IV

V

IE.b"r

lgl t . I

lr'fr--l

Er-l

Time -| >

Figure 2.7 - Time Phosingthe Design Leyels




beginsat the macro-spacelan evel.Figure2.7(B) llustrates his.The

phasingdemonstratedn figure2.7(B) alsooccurswhen management

makesglobalandsite-level ecisions ithout the benefitof adviceand

counsel rom their facilitiesplanner(s).

The size and organizationstructureof cells n a macro-space lan

maybe ndeterminablewhen processesnd strategies reuntried.This

oftenhappenswhenfirms makea transition rom functional o cellular

manufacruring. ilot cellsmust henbe developedo prove he concept

or technology.Figure 2.7(C) reflects his. A cell or micro-space lan

(Level4) then becomeshe first phase.Upon completionof th is pilot,

peoplecanagreeon the generalapproach. hen the designer an shift

back to Level 3 and preparea macro-space lan. The details of

remainingcellsare defined n their optimal sequence.

The phasingdemonstratedn figure 2.7(D) is commonfor largeoffice layout projects. First, the details of workstation layout are

established. his may come rom standardizing pace nd equipment

based n eachperson's osition n a hierarchy.Secretaries,or example,

may get a 175-square-footworkstationwith filing spaceand word

processing quipment,while a Grade engineer etsa11O-square-foot

cubicle and a supervisor,a 15O-square-foot ubicle. From the

organizationchartsandstaffing orecasts,he spaceor eachdepartment

andthe arrangement etweendepartments an hen be developed. tthis point, the projectmovesupward n detail to the globalor' more

commonly,macro- evel.

Separatinghe work into phases nd evelss the idealapproach.

Nevertheless,heremaybe someoverlap.For example,he space lan

of a particularwork cell maynot fit the boundaries reviouslydecided

in the macro phase.This may then require minor changes o the

previouslydesigned ndagreed pon macro-spacelan.For theseand

other reasons, hasingshouldbe flexible.

Proper phasingshouldbe consideredn the earliest tages f the

project, perhapsafter the initial discussions nd certainlybeforeany

significantwork effort begins.Here are someguidelines:' work from the most general o the mostspecificevel(highest

to lowest)unless pecial onditionsdictateotherwise;' clearlycommunicate he phasingplan to all participants;' resist he temptation o jump aheadbeforea particularphase

is complete;

' obtainagreement n theplanfor eachphase eforemovingonto the next phase;and

' rccognize hat there may be someoverlapbetweenphases.



The FrameworkForFacilitiesDesign 23

ThespaceplanelementsEvery spaceplan at each evelhas our fundamentarelementsand twoderived elements.The fundamentalelementsare:spacelanning unitsqPys): ffiniyies, spa-ce,ndconstraints.When developinga spaci plan,the desgners i rstdefine and denti$' SPUs.Theyth.r, .rrJrr"t. "ffi nities.using the affinities, hey oin SPUs o form oneor mo c afi n y diagrams.The affiniry,or configuration,diagram s he firstofthe derivei eleirerrts.Space dded o theconfigurationdiagramproduces spacelanprimitire,the second derived element. constraints applied io tit. spaceplanprimitive produce he space lan. Figure2.8 shows his progression.

@,'"::',1." $n,@l:::ffi Pwarerrouo

Configuralion

Spaceplan rimit ive

FFTspace

ffi

Figure2.8 - Elementsof o Spoceplan



2 4 Faci l i t ies lanning

The conceptof fundamentaland derivedelementss valid at al l

levels.However, t ismostusefulanddirectat hemacro-andsite evels.

The chapters hat follow explore ts application.

Spaceplanning

unitsSPUsare he entitiesarranged y space lan designers. t the macro-

level, heyare eferred o ascells.The systematic ayout planning ISLP]

system sed he termacti'uity rea.)Acell mightbe aworkdepartment'

a srorage pace, building feature,or a fixed tem. Eachcell nitially is

represeted by a symboland dentifier.

Nlost of thesesymbolsare aken rom ANSI Y15.3M-1979,the

American National Standards nstitute standard or process harts,

which show the tlpe of activity that acts on a product. For space

planning, he symbol hat best epresentshe space'sominantactivity

ir rrsed. igrrt.2.8 showshe symbols,heir meanings, ndcolorcodes'

The standard ymbolsepresent peration, ransport, nspection,

delay, and storage.For spaceplanning, t'"voadditional symbols-

handling and product cells-are added. The handling symbol

designatesareasusedfor repackaging, ransfers,or other elements

that are partly transport and partly operation. The product cell

designates paceusedfor multiple activitieson a singleproduct or

smallgroup of products.The definition of SPUs s one of the moststrategic asks n facility planning.This definition decides he basic

organtzationof the factory.

Affinities

Affinities represet various actors hat demandclosenessetweenany

two cells n a spaceplan. For example,communicationor personal

interactionbetweenworkersmight giverise o anaffinity. Affinities are

ratedusing a six-levelscale,with numericalvalues anging from +4 to

-1. The scalehas our positive evels hat mean sPUs shouldbe close.

Suchhigh-valueaffinitiesmayresult rom frequentmaterialmovement

betweenhe cells.Negative atingsmean hat the SPUsshouldbeapart.

There also s a neutral ating,0.

A vowel scale,A-E-I-O-U-X, may also be used for rating

affinities;this scalewas irst popularizedby RichardMuther. Here,"A"

represents he highest affinity rating,"IJ"

represents neutral affinity,

"nd"X"

i, " rregative ffinity. This scale asa mnemonicadvantage- he

vowelshavecorrespondingword associations s llustrated n ft gute2.9.

Chapter3 discusseshe methods or evaluatingaffinities.

Figure 2.9 shows he affinity conventionsdevelopedby building

on the original SLP system.The multi-line representationworks well



The FrameworkFor FacilitiesDesign 25

DescriptlonVowelRating

ScalarRating

ManualGraphic

CADGraphic

Color

Absolute A 4

2, Red

Exceptional E 3/ /

Yellov

lmportant I 2/ / Green

Ordinary o 1 Blue

UnimportantU 0 (None)(None)(None)

Apart x N/A f aa Black

Figure2.9 - Affinity Conyentions

for manual graphics.On many CAD systemsand other computer

graphicssoftware, t is easier o usevarying ine widths, gray scales, nd

color. When color is available, t dramatically llustrates the nature of

the affinity network.

Figure 2.10 shows he typical range of affinity distributions for

macro-and micro-layouts.

Affinity diagrom

SPUs combine with affinities to form an affinity diagram-the first

of the derived elements. This diagram is an idealized spatial

arrangement hat eventuallybecomesa spaceplan. In the diagram,

symbols epresentSPUs and ines representaffinities between hem.

A single ine is the lowest value affinity and a four-part line is the

highest.Squiggly ines epresent egative ffinities.Theseconventions

are llustrated n figure 2.9.Using an iterativeprocess, he designermanipulates he diagram

to create an optimal or near-optimal arrangement.A near-optimal

arrangementhasvery short high valueaffinities at the expense flower




value affinities. t minimizes he crossing f affinity lines

Figure 2.11 illustrates he iterative mprovementof an affinity

diagram. t is interesting hat many computerizedplanning systems

emphasizehis specific rocess hen, n fact, t is the partofthe layout

processo which computersare eastsuited.

Space

Each SPU hasa unique space equirement.Some SPUsmay require

onlv a few square eet, while othersmay require ensor hundredsof

thousands f square eet.

The natureofspaceand he calculationsequiredchangeswith each

pianning evel.At the higher evels, paces"elastic,"and he calculations

maynot need o be asaccurate. t the ower evels, pace anbemorerigid

but also essdefinite. For example,a particularmachineor desk equiresacertainamountofspace,and he designer annotmake t fit in less pace.

In other instances,a pieceof equipmentmay require a certain type of

space ecauset has a peculiarshape, uchas a U. But, under certain

conditions, other items may also it in that U shape.

50o/o

40o.h

20Yo

10o/o

0o/o

Figure2.10- Usual Affinity Distribution



The FrameworkFor FacilitiesDesign 27

Thespaceplon primitiveWhen spacesadded o the affinitydiagram, t distorts he diagram ntothe space lan primitive. It is an dealized epresentation nddoesnotincludedesignconstraints.

Constraints

Designconstraints re hoseconditions hat limit an idealspace lan.Such constraintsmight be building size and shape,columns,floorloading,utility configurations, xternal eatures, nd manyothers.

Space plan

The fusionof a space lan primitive and constraints roducesa spaceplan.Several iablespace lansshouldemerge.A setof cells,affiniiies,

and constraints may give rise to severalequally valid configurationdiagrams ndprimitives.Eachoftheseprimitivesmay esult n multiplemacro-space lans. The nature of the designproblem precludesanoptimal space lan, except n the simplestsituations.

The designer's xperiences a key factor, or it helpshim or herdecidewhich configurations ave he mostpotential. t helpsscalehemyriadof possible pace lansdown to a reasonable umber.

Figure2.11 llustrateshecomplete rogressionrom fundamental

)

Figure2.1 - Optimizing o Configurotion Diogrom




elementsof cells,space, ffinities,and constraintso the macro-space

plan.Theseelements ndthe progression revalid for anysize acility

and at any level.

The design projectThe elements f facility space lansaresimple;executionof the tasks

required o develop hem is not. Rarelydo the tasksneatlycorrespond

to the developmentas describedabove.At each evel of design, he

approachchanges o accommodatehe amount of detail, available

information, and the dominant ssues.

At each evel, an approach hat fits a wide range of projectsand

siruationscanbe developed. hese are calledmodel rojec*.With minor

variations, he model project for a macro-space lan, for example,

applies o almostanymacro-space lan regardless f size,complexity,

or industry. Similarly, the model projects for cell design and site

planningapply o almostany cell designor site-planningproject.The

scope, esources, ethods, ormality,and ime required aryaccording

to sizeandcomplexiry.The sequence, rocedures, nd deliverables re

essentially onstant.Model projects or each evel of design can be

found n Chapters ,4,5,6, and7.



Chapter3

TheMacro-Space-Plan

The macro-space-plan ften is the mosr important level of facilityplanning. It sets the fundamental organization of the factory andpatterns of material flow with long-term effects.From personnelturnover o quality o delivery, hemacro-space-plannfluences lmosteverymeasureof facility and organizationperformance.

Donewell, t isa platform for reengineering usiness.t can orcereexaminationof markets,products, and processes.t can achievequantum improvements n productivityand profit. It can position afirm for profitability and growth. Done superficially, t can leave realissues nquestioned.

This chapterexplainshow to designmacro-space-planssing astructured, tep-by-step pproachhat results n a near-optimalspaceplan andwideacceptancefthe results. his approach asseveralparts:

conceptualframetuork, modelprojectp/ans, taskprocedures,onventions,and designoolsand aids.

Chapter2 introducedthe conceptual rameworkwith its levelsofdetail hat narrow heproject o a manageableevel.These undamentaland derivedelements how how a space lan dwelops. Arranging thelevels n phases elpsplan theproject. n the pages hat follow, macro-space-planning-one of the more important phases-is examined.With a model project plan, tasks are arranged.Procedure diagramsillustratehow to conducteach ask.The technical ools and other aidsprovide hemeanso complete ach ask.Figure3.1 s he modelprojectplan for a macro-layout.t shows he required asksand heir sequence.This modelevolvedrom thesystematicayoutplanning(SLP) approachdeveloped y RichardMuther almost hirtyyearsago. t hasbeenused




for hundreds of projectsand suffices or almost any size and type of

macro-space-plan. rom project to project, the depth of analysis

changes longwith the methods or each ask, he resources) nd the

time. Occasionally, project equires few additional asks.However,

the basicstructureand sequenceemain he same.Each task has a two-part identificationnumber.The two digits

before he decimalshowthe asklevel. he digits ollowingthe decimal

identifythe specific ask, oughlyin sequence.ask03.04, or example,

is the fourth taskat Level 3, the macro-space-plan.

The tasksofthe modelprojectoccur n threedistinctgroups:data

acquisition, trategy evelopment, nd ayoutplanning.Thesegroups

arenear he top of figure 3.1.Two tasks,03.01 and 03.27,areoutside

thesegroups.Task 03.01 starts he project,with plansfor activities,

timing, and esources.ask03.21 s he actual election fthe preferred

lavout option. It closes he projectand allowspreparation or Level4,

the micro-space-plan.

A procedurediagram s providedfor some asks.For example,

figure 3.3 is the procedurediagramfor Task 03.02.Such diagrams

illustrate he logic flow and sub-tasksequired.These procedures re

sometimesterative.Most early ayout modelsemphasizedhe third

taskgroup,where geometricarrangementakesplace.Of course,his

is important, but far more important is the determinationof whatspaceso arrange.The definition of these ayout cellsestablisheshe

organizationofa faciliry'swork. Embodied in cell definition, it has ar

more mpact on facility performance.

Figure 3.1 alsoguidesdesignershrough their first layoutsusing

the systemdescribedn this chapter.The design ask at hand should

always be the central focus and any temptations to jump ahead

prematurely o other tasksshouldbe resisted.Completed tasftsalso

shouldnot be revisited.Figure 3.1 helpsdesigners oncentrate n thecurrent task, ts procedurediagram,and specificdiscussions.f each

task s done n propersequence,he space lanwill take shapeandthe

projectobjectivewill be reached.

It is vital to keepmanagershroughout the organization nformed

during the entire planningprocess, responsibility estsuited o the

designer. Many facility projects result in fundamental changesand

restructuring.Managers ndothersneed ime to learnnewinformation

andform newviews. f theyarenot kept nformed and nvolved n the

learning and reasoning rocess, greement nd consensus ill not be

achieved. his could result n the rejectionof an excellentayout.

There areseveralormal and nformalwaysofinvolving managers.

Formal methods nclude using a steeringcommitteeto oversee nd



The Macro-Space-Plan 3 1

review progressand adding updatemeetings to the model project. Akickoff meeting can follow Task 03.01. During such a meeting, keymembers of the organization could review tasks and confirm thatresourcesare available.An additional meeting, at which time factual

datawouldbepresentedn a non-threateningmanner,might followthe

=o(g

J

tr.9(

EL

otr

.49vtg

O H

Figure3.1 - Macro-Spoce-plonModel Project




dataacquisition asks.

A formal meeting is valuable or developingoperationsstrategy

andcanbean mportant consensusuilder.Agreementandcommitment

to the operationsstrategyarevital for later agreementon a faciliry plan.

Task 03.21, he evaluation nd selection f space lan options, s alsoa good consensusbuilder. Extensive interviews and informal

conversations ith managers nd others hroughout the organization

are also mportant.

IntroducingCosmosProductsCosmosProducts s the companyusedas a model in this chapter o

illustrate he processesffacilitiesplanningat themacro-level.Cosmos

Productsconvertshigh-gradevinyl film into decorativematerial.The

firm has wo broadproduct ineswith differentprocesses, arkets, nd

distribution channels.Roll products-pin-striping material n many

colors, patterns,widths, and combinations-sell in the automotive

afte market.Customsheet roducts ell o manufacturershat use hem

for labels, ogos, and decoration.Manufacturersof campers'boats,

chainsaws,andagriculturalequipmentare ypicalcustomers.Cosmos

often prepareshe artwork for thesecustomers.Customproductsare

flat sheets f materialwith imprinting, adhesiveanda paperbacking.

CosmosProductsstartedas a small operationabout twenry-fiveyearsago.The firm hasgrown significantly eachyear at ̂ n averageate

of 22percent.To accommodatehis growth, therehavebeena number

of additions o the currentfaciliry. In recentyears'managementhas

experienced ifficulty that hasmanifestedtself n too much nventory'

shippingdelays, nd generalconfusion.

The company's urrentproject s reengineeringhe faciliry and

relatedDrocesses.he obiectives re o: reducematerialhandlingcosts;

reduce'operating .orrrl i-prove delivery performance; irip.or'.teamwork, communication, and quality; allow for new products;

accommodate 998production;and deliver he projectundera budget

of $800,000. he steering ommittee or this projectconsists f; O. W.

Holmes, presidentandchiefexecutive fficer; .Marshall, chieffinancial

officer; W. Burger, vice president,operations;and E. Warren, vice

president,sales nd marketing.

Planninghe projectTask 03.01, PlanProject,"develops specifi projectplan.Developing

a soundmacro-space-planemands ignificant esources.n this step,

the dispositionof those esourcess mappedout.The model project n

figure 3.1-works for almost everymacro-space-planproject, whether




\--''[

N

Nf

Ip -

I N

N s s

N__N - - - _ -

----R 3 E E 3 g 3 N I d(

9

Eoe.Eo-

o

6

.6

Eo.o

:o

o

o.

o)oo

a

o

;.5o

o

oo

o

o

e

=

cc

o

-a

oY

oE

o

o

Ea

zE

to

I

RxEo-€Io

o

5o

od

.9

Ir

0zI6

6

U

:E6

o

=oN-=G

o

o=

E

e

ooo

oo

o

Iooo

-U

o

.:

o

oo

t@o

o

oo

G

6

oo

@J

p

=

ocl

o

;

oE

o

oY

o

oo

oj

oooso

o

U

I

oNq e o E F

qoq

@

di

F @ oI

o.

o

Figure3.2 - FocilityRe-Engineering




means ime andcommonunderstandingshat mustbeginearly n orderto bear ruit at the end ofthe project.

Product-volume ana lysis

Product-volume (P- ) analysisexamines he current and future timeframes or the products and their volumes.This analysishelps thedesigner nderstandhe relationships etween arious roducts.High-volumeand ow-volumeproducts, or example,may requiredifferentequipment and production modes.The analysisalso defines uturerequirements, elps select he bestplanninghorizon, and allows forchanges eyond he immediatespace lan.

The results f theP-V analysis rovide mportant nput for manylater tasks,and, therefore,shouldbe completedearly n the project.Facility designers hat have been long-time employeessometimesbelieve hey know the productswell enough to skip this task,but thisis not recommended.

The procedure iagram or product-volumeanalysiss n figure3.3.Block1 documentshegathering finformation.Thismaybeaccomplishedin the following ways:visuallyexamininga rangeof finished products;reviewing salescatalogsand other information for an overviewof theproduct line; and interviewing salesand marketing people. It is also

important to obrain overallsales olumehistory (usually, ive to ten yearsisadequate).Where marketsand echnologies rechanging apidly, vyo othreeyearsmay be a moreappropriateime frame.

Sales orecasts or the following five to ten yearsshould alsoberequested. n absence f this nformation ndicates ncertainty. t mayrequiremultiplecontingenciesn the faciliryplan.Unfortunately,salespeopleand other managersmaybe unwilling to commit to a forecast.In sucha situation,high, low, andoptimistic forecasts ould be asked

for, with the explanation that they areneeded for facility planningpurposes nd extremeaccuracys unnecessary.

A request or a sales orecastmay touch off a flurry of executiveactivity becausehe requestednformation may nor exist or may bequestionable.Generating he numberswill help build managementawareness.t is sometimes he beginning of an important strategicdebatehat ultimately eadso better acilityplans.This debatealsocanleadto important andprofound changesn managementhinking.

In Block 2, the forecastdata s plotted on a line chart alongwithsales istories. f theyareavailable, primisticandpessimisticorecasts

shouldalsobe added.After examining he chart,plotting a regressionline like that in figure 3.4 may be helpful. Where seasonalitys aconcern,a separate hart couldbe used o show monthly sales or the




past wo to four years.Visualpresentation s moremeaningful han a ist

ofnumbers.A simplechartoften reveals reviouslyunrecognizedrends.

In Block 3, the productsareexamined or appropriate rouping.

If the facility will only produce a few products, such grouping is

unnecessary.ost facilities, owever, avemanyproductsorvariationsin anywhere rom three to fifly groups. Preferably, hesegroups have

commonmanufacturingcharacteristics swell ascustomer equirements.

Sometimeshe distribution channeldetermines ales roups.

During this task, the groups may have either a marketing or

manufacturing rientation,orboth. A marketingorientationmeans he

items within a group are similar for the customer.A manufacturing

orientationmeanshe temswithin agrouparesimilarformanufacturing

purposes.These groups m y or may not be the same. Sometimes

2

GroupedProdud tofile. Dollars. Pi@es. OtherLhib

Figure3.3- Tosk3.01, Product-Yolume nolysis




Thousands40

35

30

25

2A

1 5

1 0

5

08&g&'1 $3€ra1q" -l rf *f+,1f . : : rr: :at -t : i i ' : t , : -r i l i r :a*ia

i : :s. : : : : . " : t rr: : : l l : . rt : . . . r. : : : r ' . - i : : ' - :. l

1 9 8 71 9 8 81 9 8 91 9 9 0 1 9 9 1 1 9 9 21 9 9 3 1 9 9 41 9 9 5 1 9 9 61 9 9 7

Figure 3.4 - Soles HistorylForecost

operationspeopleadoptproductgroupsoriginallydevisedby marketing.This cancomplicate he manufacturing rocess nnecessarily.

Once he groupshavebeendetermined, groupedproductprofileshouldbe prepared.Suchaprofile takes he form ofa rankedbarchartshowingsales olume or eachgroup fig.3.5).Sales olume s measurablein dollars,pieces, r other convenientunits. Several rofilesshowingdifferentunits suchas onsor palletsmavbe helpful.A second -axison the chart showscumulativepercentage.

A moredetailed roductprofile,Block4, alsomight proveuseful.There aresituationswhen aproduct group hassignificant sales olume,

but individual products n the group have few (or no) sales.The forecasts nd P-V analysis ecome he agreed ponbasis or

process esign, paceequirements, torageequirements, nd materialflow analysis.t is important to confirm the forecasts nd other P-Vdatawith managers nd especially ith the key decision-makers.

The P-V analysiscan assistwith the development of themanufacturing strategy.High volume and low variety suggesthigh-speedproduction line equipment. Low volume with high varietysuggests functional ayout.High varietyand a wide rangeofvolumessuggest ellularmanufacturing.Seasonalariationnecessitatespecifistrategies or inventory and capacity.The section on manufacturing




strateg'ywill explore hese ssuesmore fully.

A few short paragraphsor bullets can summarrzethe findings

from the P-V analysis sshown n figure 3.3, Block 5.

Figures3.3 hrough3.5 llustratedeliverablesorthe CosmosProduct

Volume Task The following is its P-V summary,anotherdeliverable.

CosmosProductsProduct-volumeumma yThe 22 percent growth rate is expected o slow somewhat during the

next three years.The 1997 forecast olume of 35,000 units will be the

first faciliryplanninghorizon. Cosmoshasabout 10,000 ine items n

the product database. heseareinl92 groupsaccording o significant

feafuressuch as basematerial,color, and width. Thirty-four groups

represent 0 percentofsales.Ofthe 192 groups,63 generateess han

$200per month of income.We may havesignificantopportunity tontionalize the product offering or modify our inventory policy.

Existing process analysis

Task 03.03,Existing

Process nalysis,"nvolvesrackingworkproduct

activity,or thesequencesn which outsideentitiesacton anorganization's

work product. For manufacturingspaceplans, the work product is

usuallya physicalproduct. n otherspace lans, he work productmay

be intangible such as an information packet. n a hospital, he workproduct maybe a patient.

Existing process nalysis ocuments he process urrently n place.

However, fthe product s new,suchaprocessmay not exist,and a similar

5i)@

a@

.E

q

6 3 0 @

F

2W

I(re

0

ProduclGpup

Figure3.5 - Product Profile



The Macro-Space-Plan

product andprocess houldbestudied. fboth product andprocess aveno current benchmarks,an initial proposal for the processshould beselected.The eady completionof this taskcreatesa reference oint forprocessmprovementsanda space lan. The space lan designerusuallyperforms this taskwith assistancerom production people.This bringsdetailedknowledgeof actual loor operations o the process.

_Figure3.6 shows he procedu e for analyzing he existingprocess.

one or more flow processcharts are constructedduring ihis task.Modified ANSI conventions see ig. 3.7) areused n this chartingsystem,wherebysymbols epresentdifferent typesofevents hat involvea work product.

The operationsymbolmodifies the work product in a way thatadvancest towardsa finished state.The transp,rt symbor hows a

physicalmovementofthe workproduct-usually a significantdisrance,such as ten feet or more. The bandling symbol epresents orting,positioning, or some other short movement. nspection checks orquality.The delay ymbol epresents omething hat haltstheprocessora time. Often, this is a work-in-process taging.

Storage s a longerwait, usually n a designated reawhere thelocation and material have records. A short horizontal line at thebeginningofthe process howstems rom suppliers utside he process

under study.vertical lineson the chart showthe sequence fivents.Horizontal arrows showwhere several tems of work product merge.Text to the right of eachsymboldescribeshe event.Thesenotesalsomight ndicate ime, henumberofpeople, rotherrelevantnformation.

Process hartsand material low chartsshouldnot be confused.There s a notabledifference.with process harts, he symbolsarenotlocationsor workstationsor evenmachines.only the text haswho,what, andwhere nformation.The linesdo nor representmovementofthe work product; nstead, hey represent nly ^ ,.qu.rr." of events.

Constructing the chart(s)meansgathering nitial informationbeforehand; his is illustratedby Block 1 in figure 3.6. Someof thiscomesrom the P-vanalysis Task03.02)andsome romlookingattheprocess nd talking with knowledgeable eople;

-Block2 (fig.3.6) of theprocedure eginsaddressinghe question

of how manyandwhich products o analyze.Itasksf theie areproductgroupswith similar processes.he answershould be basedon theobservations nd knowledgecurrentlyavailable.Somesituationsmay

present housands r tensofthousandsofproducts.A definiteanswermay norbepossiblewithout extensive nalysis,

w-hich s unnecessaryt this point. Suppose,or example,an injectionplanning facility were being planned.The plant supplies67 molded

39




itemsbut each tem comesnanyof 79 colors. his givesa otal of 7,273

item, or SKU, numbers.However,the plant usesquick color change

equipmentand hashoned heir skills n colorchanges. or manufacturing

purposes, olor is not a differentiator. The molderscan make anygiven

piecen any coloror a successionf colorswithout difficulty. The 19

colorsof eachpart would thereforebe groupedas f they were a single

product. f suchgroupscannotbe identified,Block 3 is the next steP.

Block 3 asks f there are ewer than2i products. f there are,each

ProcessChart

Figure3.6 - Task 3.03, AnolyzeCurrent Process




process harts,elementprofiles,and written findingsaredeliverables.

The following is the Cosmosprocess ummary:

CosmosProducts:Existing rocesssummotyThe valueadded ndex(VAI) for roll products s 13 percent'The VAI

for commercial roductss 20 percent.Theseareboth quite ow.There

area substantial umberofopportunities o reduceransport'handling,

and storageelements.

In ro11 roducts, he processesequirespecialequipment'This

equipment s relatively mallscale.Changeoverimesrange rom five

to forty-five minutes.

For commercial roducts, rocess calesverysmall n themanual

operations t pick-and-pee1. ie-cutting operates n a mediumscale.

Silk-screeninguses arge-scale resses.We may wish to investigatesmallerscale rocessesor silk-screening.

Slit-and-sheet perations ll usea singleslitterthat is quite fast.

Both commercialandroll productsuse he samematerial.Optimizing

the use of each roll savessignificantwastage. t seems o dictate

continueduseof a commonslit-and-she t ̂ tea or all products.

The processcharts for Cosmos Products arc fairly simple. In

additionto themodifiedANSI conventions,igure 3.7shows heprocess

for one of Cosmos's oll products-a vinyl stockmaterial or signsandotherdecoration.Figure 3.8charts he processor a multi-color, die-cut

decal,a ypicalproduct rom oneofCosmos'scommercialmarkets.These

decalsdecorateautomobilesand other outdoor equipment.This single

chart represents everalhousanddistinct products.

With complexprocesses,t is often tempting to combine tems,

therebyreducing he complexityof the chart. Simplifying the chart,

however,s not the sameassimplifring the process.Much of the value

of aprocess hart s ts accurateepresentationf the full complexityof

a process. t is an important meansof building consensus nd

understanding or a new spaceplan. A readable hart on large-scale

draftingpapermaybenecessaryo conveyhefull scope ndcomplexity

ofthe process.

lnventory analysis

Task 03.04,Inventory

Analysis,"s mportant for at east wo reasons.

First, inventory s usually he primary or secondary apitalconsumer'

often vying with facilities for this dubioushonor. Second,almosteverydifficulty, problem,or defectn the business ystem ventually omeso

rest in inventory. Inventory thus canbe an indicator of the efficacyof

the business ystem.



TheMacro-Space-Plan 43

The inventoryanalysis ses inancial and warehouse ata.Thefirst step n the analysiss to preparea chartthat showshistorical annualinventory turns, usually for five to ten years or even further if theinformation is readilyavailable.nventory turns are he total inventoryfrom thefirm'sbalance

heet ivided nto thetotal salesor thepreviousyear.salesnformationusually omesrom the ncomestatemint.Theindustryaverageor the nventory urn also houldbe istedon thechart.The inventory urns for cosmosProductsare llustrated n figure 3.9.

Hi n l

Vea l l ce l l l nes a . e : eque nce\ 0T mat ea l : . movement

F o l L o w CNF p. oduc l o . vengn € r n o w a. o l ucT g a o u p

Me. ge ch3 . l l l ems on l g whent h o . h L c i . : l t 6 m c m 6 . - o

TDaRil . srcrrgeI

FM Sto.e -l Ic 0u6l1ru AEslra.c60 6 1 2 w k s ) o 2 s

t. : l r 'e r ] ou."e p or0 1 0 h . ) a g t 2 ? h r

sLr -l- ^specr03: h.

To- lMermdra r6S'9 " . I ,n " " r sro . "q "V

To fachins - Descr lo l t .n0 r 0

s

P e r r o r d t e=\

r --6 : 0 h r

A2A 6 .

P Pdrrs sr t raqe

Ac.osE Tabt6 0p i tona l In fo rmaJlo .

oue € l ln€

* of i lachhes* 0i Pe$le

I op€rlron I

I Invenlofq Lev€l

| . P ' o d d r E 6 c h P l r h

|tsandrhq Eqlrpn€i l

Legend

Q op*.." Qr-ar"sn -u u e 4 I n s p e c i

I r-p-' Psro'"0'

4 " . , . ^ - -

1Z /88 /94

C har^ t l ngC onv en t l ons

05 0

0 1 0 h .

0 0 1 h .

g \ a 6 .

1 2 4 0 4 s

S / f4 NB-e A c t l o n E x a m p l e s

? 0 o e . a t r o n ValueS d w , Cu t Pa l n t ,Soiden Packege

)' d n s P o . l

f'1oves Some

Dls iance

o n v e g , F o n k T . u c k

O l R T r u c k

,l

.l

Check Fo . V l < ^ l T n q ^ o . 1

D lmenslon Inspec l

)De l ag

Delag /Ho ldW I P H o l d , o u e u e

v Waaehouse, TnackI ^ . : t a d q f ^ . : - a

l ' - E l € n e n iI I I lehs

HandLeTraasfer

0 . So . t

R a P a r l a a a P > r a

0n Convegor

C , t r a t o o n c T n r

39l6 WvandofeK d n s a s C l r , M 0 6 l l l l

Figure .7 - Tosk?.03,ProductProcessChort




One or more nventoryprofiles ike that in figure 3.10 shouldbe

prepared.These are pie charts or bar graphs hat show the current

distribution of inventory across everal lassifications. production

class rofile shouldshow nventory by raw material,purchasedtems,

finished goods,and work-in-process WIP). A product classprofileshows nventory by product or product group. Other classifications,

suchascustomerWq areuseful n special ituations.

What does nventory analysisdetermine?Trends in inventory

historv can help size storaseareas or the new facilitv or layout. Such

9 . ; F Hi g :

c t c r g g e

Figure3.8 - ProcessChon for a Multi-color, Die-cut Decol



The Macro-Space-Plan 45

lnventory Thousands f Un ts) Inventory urns30

20

1 5

"f

- - . - *, t ' '

I

30

25

'2A

1 5

1 0

5

IndustryAverage-/- ru rns

-:-.,r*r_,-..

- 7

+ lnv l l n i t c

)€ Inv Turns

1 0

5

0r98g 1990 199r 1992 1993 1994 1995 i996 1992 rgs"8

Figure3.9 - lnventory HistorylForecost

Average nventory nEquivalentStorageUnits

PurchasedN,4atls237 7y.

Work-ln-Process628 18%

Productron tage

Figure .10- lnventoryAnalysis




The analyst suallyperformsTask 03.06, SpaceAnalysis,',with

assistancerom thosewho are familiar with operations.The analysisbeginswith acurrent drawing of the facility, preferablyonethat showsmajor departmentsand,perhaps,detailsof equipmentand furniture

locations.The colorsor patterns n figure 2.9 are hen used o codemarked-offspace n this drawing.A tlpical result s the existingspacediagram or cosmos Products n figure 3.11.The area or "".h ,p"..class s totaledand a space lass rofile similarro the pie chart abeled"Existing

SpaceProfile" n figure3.11 s prepared.

a(-))

C)L

LL

UIoEtt)o

a

oL

ll_

c)

O

L

L

EOCOE

O

c)aroo

a

o=g

I O

E - .

r €E

;

E

:

D

;d

V

c

I

oO

o5o

c

Eo

o

o

o

O

;o

L

o_a

D.=LN

;

Figure3.1 - ExistingSpoce Diogram or Cosmosproducts




The collection and presentationof this information can alert

managerso key ssues. s with the other nformationacquisitionasks,

this is an important resultof the spaceanalysis. he analystshould

encouragemanagerso beginaskingsuchquestions s:

' Why do we use40 percent of our facility for storage,yet weconstantly fall short on customerdelivery?' Why are aislesn our facility so disjointed and chaotic?' Why doesProductA require18 percentof our facilitys space

but only generatespercentofour sales nd0.5percentofour profit?

The following is the space nalysis ummary or CosmosProducts'

CosmosProducts:Existing pocesummory

I\{uch of our spaceappears isconnected nd scattered. heexisting

spacediagramshowsno clear,undedying plan. The proPortionsof

spaceuse are better than in many other industries,but could be

improved.Significantopporrunitiesmay exist n reducingstorage nd

traffic areas.Some parts of the plant havenarrow aisles.Others have

overlywide aisles hat becomeWIP storageareas.

Organization analysis

Task 03.06,"OrganizationAnalysis,"hasseveral urposes.t canhelp

determine he sizeof support acilitiessuchas estrooms ndcafeterias.

In office ayouts, t maybe essentialor planningspace asedon work

station requirements. t can help evaluate he current and proposed

space lan. It can assistn formulatinga manufacturingstrategyor in

identi4'ing inconsistenciesetweenstrategyand practice.

Organizationanalysis suallybegins ith a completeandcurrent

organizatronchart rom the personneldepartment. t should ncludeall

departmentsand employees hat usethe facility hdown to the lowest

levil. It alsomight includedepartments nd peoplewho resideoutsidethe facility but havea major impact on operations.An examplemight

be a corporateengineeringdepartment that designsprocesses nd

oroducts but is in a remote location. Names and titles for each

productionworkerarenot needed, ut thereshouldbe an approximate

count for eachsupervisor nd department.

Thesechartscanbecomequite argeandmayhave o beplottedon

large-scale rafting paper,but the chart shouldnot bebroken nto small

sheets.This may be convenient or the analystbut it disguiseshe truenature of large, convoluted organizatrcns.Maximum impact is the aim.

Managersmustdevelopandapprove he sftategicbasisof the space lan,

aswellashe spaceplanitselfFigure3.12shows owto constructthe hart.

After the organ\zationchart is complete,the current spaceplan




A messydiagramfig.3.13)demonstratesowmanypeople n the

sameorganization units arescatteredhrough the facility. The diagram

by itself does not tell us whether the facility or the organization is

correct; t shows hat they are nconsistent.

ldentifying physical nfrastructure

Physical nfrastructure supports operations or all or most of the

product line but doesnot contribute directly to the process. or this

f

o

o)

d)

Figure .13- OrganizationalAnalysis




reason, hysical nfrastructureelements o not appearon the processcharts. Infrastructure seldom relates to a single product or productgroup. Examplesare: cafeteria,maintenancedepartment,heating,ventilating andair conditioning space, ndelectricalswitchgear ooms.

Theseelements renecessaryor operations nd heyareessentialo thespaceplan, yet they areeasy o overlook.A physicalnfrastructure hecklist fig. 3.1a) helpscatalog hese

features.using this form involvesstepping hrough thelist with a smallgroup of knowledgeablepeople.Qrestions to askare:

. Is each tem in the current acility?

. Will a similar tem be neede in the newfacility or space lan?This list will be input for the celldefinition task ater n the project.

Utll l t log

I Ouldmr SubshtionO lnd6r Bubtrtion3(s)D Switcho..r F6nO Molor Conkot C.nr.rO Udi.t.iruilibt. por.t

o 1 1 5 v , . o hO 2$v. l - ;htr 230v. 3-ihD .60v, 3-;na 16ot27rv 3.gn

'Jllili'r"-'o

O Nlturrl Lighi

a orinrDcwat.r

O C6li.C Tor.r

o

Sl..m:D Boibr B@mD Oi.ribution sy3r.m

O Fu.l Storag.E Fu.l O:r PhnrO Oil TinksO Coal 9toreo.D oth.t

cuting c@hnl:0 C.nt.l FinririonO Chip S.pu.lionD Chip Conv.yors

aSFc. H.rtinO Intu..F.d H.ltinqO At Condiltontno

-

O ou.l cofl.crbtO Loc.l Erhau.tlO.n.r l V.ntilerion

olhd Utiliti.s:

O OthorD -

a P.r.onn.l IlEmploym.nt OflicO Crcdii unionD Libfrrya Tr.ininC Facilltils

O Cal.t.i.a v.ndino ArsI toungcTBrcat aoomO Etacutiv. Diniry F@

H .hh:tr Erclrcis. FoomO Jqging Trsck

trilai""r c"nt",O Ols$l.r Alrrna Fi. Eqrassa sprintii' co.rot3O FL. 9r.tiontr fo.nldolF.ttour Sh.[.t

Human

W.rhr@ms/Sho*ars

a Edplry.. i.*ins

Intornal Tran3port

a P.d.lrianI P.ll.l Tructa Fork TrucMncrol

t f,:f,3":,l::''O Clnhl OiEpalch

8ui[-ln Handtino:O OY.rh.ed c;an.sO F .ighl El.vetdrO sc |.B Oth..:

Ptoductlona Prducilon offic.gO Tool FooDO Toor CdbD Cr .n Roona c.ntal Msinr.nidc.

Sloreg.:O Prck.elng Mil./lts

Hbiji[;:""iillL?,3'O lncid.;r.bo_-_--o-=--

Administratlon

a cont....c. Foom.

tr Cu.tomd S.ilicD Di.plry RmmO Trainidc C.nt..

Siorrg.O ArchO S.crO caiaE Micri0 suryo -D _

Caiab0u./OiBptay

surylur Furnitora & Equl ilant

| ouali ty II a Ou:hryL.borlori.s II O Gio. Cllibr.lio. II O Fo'mulation b. I

ID Dbc..p.nrMd.ilar

I

I E--_- |

Extcrnal TransportD Fril SidincO f.il Dc*O Truck furnsr@nda TrEr oetD Trwk Pr*inoE Ttu* Aal.O Truck Mii.t mno

Trrck Ae6./Es.. sI Ado AccslEoru..

lAdoPsd i4

-

U -o _o - - -

I ProductevelopmentI o P,dorytsshop I

| fl5;::r:ir::,iri" II o = - - |

l o _ - . = - - |

Figure3.14- Physical nfrastructure Checklist




Analyzing material flow

In this task, nformationfrom the process nalysiss superimposed n

the current spaceplan. The resulting diagramsbring attention to

materialmovementopportunities. hey also ndicate he need or more

cellularor line productionmodes.This taskalsoprovidesa baselineor

measuring andling mprovementdue o the new acilityor space lan.

Forthis ask, heprocessharts ndlayouts evelopedinTask03.03

andTask 03.06shouldbe used o select ne or more tems o represent

tlpical productsor parts.Lines andarrowsshould racemovementacross

the ayout.The numberofmoves or eachtem shouldbe countedand he

movementdistance or each tem totaled. f the analysissperformed or

many tems, he resultsshouldbe averaged. igure3.15 s an example. t

showsong moves, rossovers,ndbacktracking. his faciJity assignificant

improvement opportunity. Moves between organizational epartmentsalso ndicate mprovementoppornrnity.

Managers are often unaware of the severity of material flow

problems.This analysiswill document hese ssuesn a dramatrcway.

I t helps management ake another step towards consensus,

understanding, nd support.Other typesof material low diagrams re

alsouseful or a more completepicture of the currentmaterial low.

Other issuesOther issues anaffect he ayout.Theyusuallyarisen initial discussion

or during data acquisition.Someexamples re:' a schedulingsystem hat dictatesbatch movement hrough

the plant;' difficulties n hiring skilledpeople hat maypusha company

toward automation;and' external regulationssuch as those in the pharmaceutical

industrythat may dictate unctional operations.Experience ndjudgmentare he bestguides. t minimum, abrief

listing of these ssuess necessary.hey may need significantanalysis.

Thestrategic rameworkAn operationsstrateg'ys the dominant approachor philosophy hat

guides he designof the manufacturing r business ystem.Operations

strategies ften determine he competitiveness ndultimate fate of an

organizatron Strategyleadso structure,aswell as he arrangementand

interconnection f business lements. uchelementsmightbemachine ,

information systems, eople,or facilities.

Strategies xtendoverlongperiods-yearsor decades. heyencompass

all the products and processes,ermeatingeveryareaand aspectofthe




organization They affectand determinethe behaviorof individuals.Operations strateg'ymay be explicit or implicit. An explicit

strateg'ys stated,orally or in writing. Properly promulgated, t guidesdecision-makersn their dailywork,building acommon ramework orboth operational

and structuraldecisions.An implicit strategy, y conrrast,s not written or publici zedassuch. t oftenresultsrom commonunderstandingsboutwhatmattersfor the business. heseunderstandingsmay be rational or senseless,effectiveor ineffective, onsistent r contradictory.

6

a

tr

: g

0C

Iooo

o

ooL

il

tn-F

(-/l-o

o

o_

tt)oE(,o

(J

co

@

0zFo

oo

-6

a

O o PO c"r- l

tnt -

r a E- t l ?l l o

0 ) l o

, u ( J 6

L r r

- 5 == = :

oooco

a

@

.oE

o

c

oc

oo7

o:

ooo

o

0

E

6z

3d

0c.9o

oo

O

c

o

o

(D

l t /

Figure .15- ExistingMateriol FIow




An implicit strategys determinedonly by watching patternsof

decisionsand behaviorover time. For example,has he organization

evolvedalong unctional ather han product ines? s new equipment

predominantlyhigh-speedand large-scale?s the schedulingsystem

batch-oriented?Even the absence fpatterns is a pattern.Managements responsibleor operations trateg'y.op managers

can abdicate he task of enunciating hat strateg/,but they cannot

relinquish esponsibility or the result.

Determining the framework of an organization'soperations

strateg'v ingeson the identification of heymanufacturingasks,focus

opportunities,ndan operationstrateg umlnar or statement).

Key manufacturing tasks and focus opportunities

The design of a manufacturingplant or businesss like any otherengineeringdesign. t optimizes performanceon somedimensions,

while reducingoptimizationon others.The business nvironmentand

available echnologvplace imits on the design.

This has an analogy n aircraft design.Aerospaceengineerscan

designan aircraft hat fliesat Mach 3.0 or one that carries 50 people.

They candesignan aircraft hat circles he globeon a ew hundredgallons

of fuel or one that lands on a 500-foot runway. However, they cannot

designan aircraft hat doesall ofthe above.n the 1960sSecretary fDefense Robert McNamara tried to buy such a multi-puqposeaircraft

called he TFX. This aircraft did not achievemany goals.

Yet, manvmanagers emand actorieshat producemanyproducts

quickly for manv customers, t the highestqualityand the lowestcost

with output changing rom day to day. Sucha factory acks ocus.A

business peration arelyperformswell on more than two or threeof

thesekey dimensions.An unfocused actoryhas oo many tasksor too

manyproductsor too manyprocessechnologies r too many disparatecustomers.t is often oo arge or effectivemanagement. uchafactory

rarelyperformsany askwell.

Manufacturing focusconcerns he organizationof products and

processes.n the early7970s,WickhamSkinner eco$nizedhat large

factorieswith manyproductsusuallyperformedpoorly. Severalactors

contribute o this effect:

1. A wider range of products usually brings more variery in the

process.This requiresgreatercomplexity n handling, storage,

tooling, changeovers,ndskill requirements.t affects lmostevery

facetofoperations.

2. Awider rangeofproductsoftenmustserve isparate ustomers nd



3 .

TheMacro-Space-Plan 5 5

markets.One market may regarddelivery speedasa top prioritywhile another demandsquality or customization.Such variedmarketcriteria ncreasehediffi cultyfor manufacturingand decreaseeffectiveness.

Economiesof scalearethe usual ationale or increasing actorysize.Economyof scale efers o the increasing fficiencyasplantiandprorcessesrow n sizeandoutput.The ideawaspopularized yHenry Ford'smass roductionmethods.Wickham Skinnercoinedthe term

"dis-economiesofscale." ncreasing cale ringssuchdis-

economies s ncreased oordinationeffort, isolationof specialtydepartments,and isolation from customers.As a factorygrowsbeyond 300 to 500 persons, he dis-economiesof scalesoon

overcomehe economies.

Larger actories avegreaterdistances etweendepartments. hisincreases aterialhandlingcostsandexacerbateshe solationandcoordinationdiffi culties.

5. unfocused actories ftenhaveextensiveeftical ntegration.verticalintegration with a wider product rangerequiresmore disparate

processes.his requires ar more technicalmastery han a morefocusedoperation.

A focused factory strives for a narrower range of products,customers, r processes.he result s a factory hat is smallerand hasfew key manufacturing tasks.

In recentyears,Skinner's onceptofthe focusedactoryhasbeenextended.Focus is an issuewhen organizing any combination ofproducts, echnology,and people. t

applies o serviceoperations, ofactories, nd o departmentswithin the factory.Itapplieso workstationswithin eachdepartment.The issue s: by what criteriashallwe divideour space, eople,and machinesnto manageable nits?

Thereareseveralpossibleesponses.omeexamples re:products,processes,markets, customers,geographic areas, and supportrequirements.For a morecomplete iscussion foperations ocus, eferto the first chapter of the Handbookof commercialand IndustrialFac i tiesM anagemen .

For the macro-space-planof a factorfi the focus choice usuallynarrows oproductorprocess. product-focusedplantgroupsoperationsinto departmentshat focuson products.Eachdepartmentmust haveall equipmentand skills for all operationt,y.t only processa single

4.



\


than process focus. However, firms seldom realize the theoreticalutilization advantage fprocess ocusbecause fthe complexschedulingrequired. In practice, here are severalapproacheso mitigate the

apparentunder-utilizationof product ocus.One way s to designcellsthat maximize he use

ofmajor

equipmentwhile sacrificingusageonlessexpensive eripheralequipment.

Product focus requires a wider range of employee skills andknowledge. his mayplace arge rainingburdens n firms that convertfrom processocus.However, he teamworkand ob enrichment hatresult reduces urnover. Process ocus, on the other hand, allowsconcentrationon processskills, and highly complex and technicalprocessesometimes eed his concentration.

Process-focusedrganizations lpically have erylong throughput

times.As a result, hey cannotrespondquickly to changesn productmix, volume, or special equirements.Many process-focusedlantscounter this with extensive nventories,even though inventory isexpensivend arelyreduceshe responseime on customized roducts.Product ocusallows irmsto eliminate inished-goodsnventorywhileimproving deliveryperformanceand reliability.

Processocus s more lexible,at east n theory.However,severalmeansexist o achieve ood flexibility n product-focusedayouts.For

example, he useof small-scale,mobile equipmentcan allow productfocused ells o be ormed,disassembled,nd re-formednewproducts.

Product ocusgenerallyachieves igh quality evels.This resultsfrom quick feedback,good communication,easycoordination,andhigh commitment.Processocussometimesmayhaveaqualityadv^nt^gefor complexor technicalprocesses.

Product ocus s mostcompatiblewith newerapproachesased nteamworkand empowerment.Processocus ends tself to traditional

commandandcontrolmanagement tyles, ften requiringa substantialhierarchy o dealwith increased oordinationand complexiry.The concepts ffocus and keymanufacturing asksare nterrelated.

Focus dentifies he most important dimensionsand optimizes hem.The business ddresses narrowermarket,but addressest very well.The keymanufacturing asksstatewhat manufacturingmust do well tosurvive n the market.

Process lementsare he equipment,people,and operations hat addvalue o aproduct.They direcdytransformmaterials,nformation, andparts.

Operati ons strategy sum m a y

A sound operationsstrategyaddressesour areas:mission,?rlcess,i nfr as ruc ure, andfa c ies(physical nfras ructure). The site mission




states, n a few paragraphs, he purposeof the site. It identifies

customers,products, and processes.t defines one to three key

manufacturing asks hat directly correlateo successn the marketplace.

The missionstatementalsomight addressmportant external ssues

suchasenvironmental olicy.The remainderof theoperations trateg'y

summary lows from the mission statement. t stateshow the firm

intends o achieve he key manufacfuring asks.

Infrastructure supports he process ut doesnot directly affect he

product.Non-physical nfrastructure overs wide varietyof elements.

It refers o peopleand nformation systems. xamplesare:scheduling

systems,raining operations, ersonneldepartments, nd tool design

capability.

Physical nfrastructure, s tangibleand is generallysynonymous

with facilities.Buildings, utility systems, oads, and docks are notdirectly n the process tream; ather, hey supportall processes.

A good summaryaddressesachmajor opicat a policy evel.Few

companies aveastrategy ummarysufficient or facility designpurposes.

For suchpurposes,hoseelements f strategyandstructure hat relate

to facilitiesneed o beemphasized. or example, ompensationystems

havemajor effectson organizatronalbehavior ut little consequenceor

the facility plan.

Figure 3.16 providesa structure or a strategy tatement.Suchastatement ormallyconsists fone o fourpages ummarizingthe irm's

intentions or eachstructuralelement.Figure3.77 s the statement or

CosmosProducts.

The absence fan effective ummarypresentshe acilities lanner

with difficult options:'proceed without a summary;'guide management s hey developa stratery;'

write a summarybasedon an idea of what it should say;or' write a summarybasedon what probablywill happen.

Development ofa strategy ummary elieson all ofthe information

collectedduring the first taskgroup.Even this may be insufficient or

a completestatement.Strategicdevelopments a high-level askthat

encompasseslmosteveryaspect f the business.

ldentifying operations strategy

Figure3.18 s heprocedure iagramorTask03.10,Identi$'Operations

Strategy."Block 1 ofthe diagrambeginswith the assembly finformationin a form suitable for a report or presentation.The operations trateg))

outline,Block 2, is alsoneeded.

Block 3, the current position summary,shows he company's




presentstatus.A managementeamshould assistwith this step or atleastconcur hat the summary eflectshe company's urrentsifuation.

Blocks4through6 determinemanagement'seadinessorchange.It is not enough or management, r certain ndividuals, o expressneed for change.The management eam also must be capableofcarrying hroughwith change. he successf a space lan depends nthe organization'sability to support t. For example,a cellularspace lanthat dependson kanbanproductioncontrol and small ot sizesneeds

TechTools

strategyandstructureKey ssues

1.0 Site MissionL l SiteFoils

.1.2 Products' 1.3 Maikets. Volu€s' Gaglaphy

1.4 Multi-Site Integration

1.5 K€y Mmufacturing Tmks1.6 Extemal Strategic ssues

1.7 Political

1.8 Enviromental

I.9 Comunity Involvement

2.0 Process

2.1 Production ode(s).Prcject

. Fuclional

.Cel lula

. Toyota

. Line

. Continuou

2.2 Proess Scale

2.3 Setup/Lot Size

2.4 Capacity. t€ad. T n c k

' lag. R*de

- l l

-t

2.5 Qulity Capability

2.6 T$hnology Level

^-N-IW7\1]\ \All\Z Z1\

w- - -

3.0 Infrastructure3.1 QualityApproach

. Quality Poli@

. qdity at Sou@

3.2 Persomel Policies. Tshtri€l Skill Depth. Tohniel Skill B@dth. Ifferp€mnal Skills. Employm€nt Sffily. CompeNtion. Tnidng'PerfomeMffircnt

. Safety

. Erhi6

3.3 Organization Structure. Fwtional. Producl

. Othq

. D€pth

3.4 Orgmiation Style.Exploitiv€

.B@rcntic

. Consultatiw

. Pdicipativ€

3.5 Acounting Policies. P f f i

. J& C61itrg

. Aclivity-Based A@uilirg

. Overhqd Alletion

. Deision Critsia

. ItuowledgSaelnvestreots

.INqbryAwting

3.6 Production Control. Mrke{coiders, Makb-tcstck.Physicallink

. Br@d€n

. Keban

. MRP

. Reorlcr Point

3.7 SupplierPolicies. S€lEtiooc.iteria. Single / Multiple Soltffi

. Conm Time HoriaN

. Scheduliry Appr@h

. ShippitrgPolici6

4.1 SiteFocus. Prcduct. P f f i

. I{arket. Cpgnphic

. Other

4.2 Site Ircation & Size

4.3 Tmsportation Acc€ss

4.4 Utility Systems

4.5 Expmsion Policies

4.6 Nil Product Flexibility

4.7 New Proess Fluibility

4.8 Resle / DisposalPolicy

4.9 Haadous Waste Policy

4. 0 Endromental Issues

@4.0 Facilities

Figure3.f6 - Strotegy ond Structure Key lssues




rapid setup techniquesand participative management.Management

may not have he wherewithal to adopt these echniques.

If managementhasan acceptable trateg'y umma{I, this summary

shouldbeused n subsequentpace lanwork. Ifmanagementexpresses

a desire or operationsstrategiesdifferent from current practices, heir

readinesso make equiredchangesmustbeevaluated. his is a difficult

and sensitive ecision hat requires earsofexperience n institutional

change.Designerswho lack such experience hould seekcounsel rom

the management eam or others n the organization.

MlsslonSib #l ha Mo di$ind missiw @cpondilg

to our &o mjor tr8k6. The* e:

Roll Product - Supply qr ostoren with the

largd vriety of rcll prcdu* in or irdusry wilh

24-hour ship@t atd quality withh lhe top 20% in

our iidusry.

Comercid Produs- Supply high quality

vinyl dcals ad ap,plqua b small dd nrdim sia

|mufamrcF. OrigiMlity dd quality of artistic

d6ign is il itrtcgral pd of dr prcdud mix. We

expd b ship to'/o ofall orderswilhin twe{Ekr

at a reliability of 98ol.. Our products will @fom

to rEogEzad qualfty sbrdards.

At Cm w q @t to be a good ngighbor a|d

integnl pa of or muity. Com6 shold b€

lilM 6. sdbhctory mployers.

ProcassRoll Ploducte Cffic will striv€ for a

produd-f@sod opcdion with the dctprid of

prinBry slittDg *trich seruc both Roll and

Cmial opcroim. we will h.w a mix of large

ard $utl s€lc cquipM in G@p T@tmlo$/

@lls. Rapd stup i5 a importart prioity for

equipdd sl€ti@ ald op€Blio. We will attqnpt

d avFage cquipMt utiliation bwq 60% atd

85%. we will add pr(Bs eprcity 6-12 mths

ahad of daMnd. Pffis shouldharc a M

€gability iDdsxof L4. We wil ffi gEduly to

high€r bh@logj/ p|ffi puitbd they re@NisM wifi dr f{w ffitcgy, @st ustified ad

haw ad.q@ spport.

Co||ercid Producte Cm6 will triw for

ptodud-foq8 witlin thc limits s€tby plrc and

mviourroal requimts. This my diclate

physical *pmio bawo silkscming ad

subsequd opcdi@. Prinary slitring nd sbet

cunirg wiU |@in p|lss f@used. Our prlss

scale will be a mix of largc aDdsnEll @cpordmg

to th€ ordcr mix. Rapil s€tup s d important

priority o the ruller *ale, lw volme pre.

We will attqnpt o arcnge utili*io of 807e90%

m larg$scale silks|q priffi aDd50olc?0% d

dlFi equipMt. We will add snBll-scale equipmotin advd@ of del@d dd brgFscale equipmd

wfio dqMnd is prc@. All cquipM will haw a

midmm oapability index of 1.4. we will strive for

fte laK sd highd t4hDl€y lwel on large{ca.le

silksHing.

IntraslructureC('ffi will triw for a produd.focue4

shallw, multatiw ard infonna.l orgeiz*i@. We

will gradully move Mrds a ptticipatire

ffi+aed org&i4i@ ovc the M five yec.

Our Ming s)ffi shqld a@mmodat

aciivity-bded 6ting using @st &iveB for

overlsd allstio. Wc will u* prcj* mirg forc@ial work ud p|1ss @sting for roll

products. We @ogniz€ the limitatioE of

omtiooal mmtirg systans for maagmt

dsisic.

Prcduaio ontrol will us MRP-ty?€

schcdrli4 for mcial produ* dd supplieN.

We *i[ u$ krnbd s]ffi for inbrul schcduling

of 6ll opediG. Cfficial produd will b€

sidly mkefrrder. Roll prodrd will u$ strEll6"i"h€d goodsst@ls for the highct volw E0o/o f

lim itans. Tlrc mining 20% of lw-volme rcll

produc wiu b6 trEde ro or&r. Unusually large

or&rs ofrcll pJoduG will have c{md€d deliverid

ald be rade to or&r.

At Cffi we will trirc br l@g-bm

reldidBhip wilh rcliable $ppli6. We will sldsupplicF @ lb€ b6is ofquality, d€lirery rcliability

aDd @$ in tld order.

Facllltles

Sit€ fqs will folN @rpoftlwel stEr€gis

d w siB develop. All sib, nw dd in dF fuhre

will haw a ruimm of 200 fiplcyH. Site #l

requic only limired capability for nw prcduc{s

and prms. Significa*ly difrpr@t prws,

such a a esting openrioo" sbotrld hare a separate

sib.

Figure3.17- Physicol nfrastructureStdternent



TheMacro-Space-Plan 6 1

An organizationmay not want changeor maynot be positionedfor change. f so, he operations trateg.yummaryshould dentify theapproach hat is most ikely to be adopted n practice.

If the organizatron desiresand is ready for significant change,initiating a strategic ebatesa good dea.This debate hould

concludewith a proposedoperations trategJ ummary hat will help the spaceplan designercarryout the new strategyduring the facilitiesplan.

. ftr tu6 qndrys

. tu6n$9.P&

. ftdudlMnbryP*

. d9 chn

.@b6bb$b

' Rl hndrq $mmry

3

tubry roby $nmry

Figure3. I 8 - Tosk3.10, ldentify Operotions Strotegyd Structure




One sub-task of Task 03.10 is the identification of focus

opportunities.The conceptoffocus applies o space lans,organi.zatron

,t-rrr.tur"r, and other elementsof the enterprise.Developing an

appropriatestrategy or facility planning means dentifying the most

uppropriut. focus-for the facilities at each level. Thisis not a final

unalyris.Rather, it guides and gives preferreddirections to space

plannersas hey proceedwith their work.

The flo- piocess harts rom Task 03.03canhelp sort this out'

Figure3.19 shows he process harts or the manufacture f cosmetic

I

O

o

L

c

I

o

o

ml

oI

co

o

E U

l

-oioo 3 ' '

: i $

Ot r>A r- E r C

o o o

=OJ

Figure .19- Task?,03,ProductProcessChort




operationsare hose oo smalland varied or dedicated lants or GT

cells. Process-focusedellsare then developed or these tems. An

alternatives a ob-shop departmentsimilar o a prototypeshop.

Some space plans involve a great number of products and

components, erhapshousandsr tensofthousands.n these ituations,

practicalitymay not allowa detailedanalysis t this point in the macro-

Slngle Protucts \th Adeou.te Volum€

Process Scale I

Z A.o Thefe \

'S l r lngs '0 fS lmi la .

Figure3.20 -Proceduresfor ldentifying FocusOpportunities




space-planproject. The objective for this sub-task is to identi$'opportunities,not to makedecisions.

For CosmosProducts, hetwo distinctproduct ines-roll productsand commercialproducts-separated naturally into focused actories.However, the slit-and-sheetoperationservedboth product lines. Manylog rolls, when slit, becamestock for both product lines.The narrowwidths necessaryor roll products are a naturalbyproductof slitting forthe wider commercial tems. Maintenance, quality, and severalotherfunctionscannotbesplit economically.For this reason,he design eam'saim became wo semi-focused actorieswithin the same acility, i.e.,plants-within-plant. Severalunctionalareas erve oth focused actories.

Roll productoperationsend hemselves ell to GT cells.However,the large number of items precludesa completeGT analysisat the

macro-space-planevel.The team herefore eveloped composite el lfor roll operations,with the ntention of analyzingtheproces n greaterdetail and designingGT sub-cells t the next design evel.

In commercialproducts, he silk-screen perations all for tightenvironmental ontrol. n addition, he existingsilk-screen resses selarge-scale, igh-technologyequipment.The teamdecided o put twocomposite ells n the commercialarea.The first composite ellwouldinclude silk-screenand any related operations in the controlled

environment.A secondcompositecell would havepost-silk-screenoperationssuch as thermal die-cut, pick-and-peel,and packaging.Thesesmaller-scalerocesses ould be arrangednto GT cells.

Designing the space plan

With adequatenformation and an agreed-upon trateg-y,he actualspaceplan can be designed.The activity to this point may haveconsumedas much as half of the time and resources vailable o theproject. Nevertheless, hese expenditureswere good investments.Managers from all areashave new perspectives.The factual data hastemperedemotions. As the spaceplans develop, debateshould beconstructiveand rational.The final selectionwill enjoy wide supportthanks o management's roaderunderstanding f both business ndtechnical ssues.

Defining space plan cells and processes

Task03.11, rthedefinitionofspaceplanningunitsSPUs),s hemost

fundamentaland important task n space lanning. It establishesheorganizationofspace nd must fit with a correspondingorg anizationofpeopleand processes. oreover,all subsequent ork flows from thistask. An omission or error invalidatesall of the work that follows.




A procedure hart or this task s n figure3.21.Blocks1 through

3 call for assemblingdeliverables rom all previous tasks. Block 4

reviewsoperationsstrategy. f the strategystatement avorsa process-

focused functional)space lan,planners houldproceedo Block5 and

skip Blocks 11 through 23.

In Block 5, functional and support cells or the spaceplan are

identified by examining he cell definition summary(fig. 3.22), the

space nalysis,he infrastructure hecklist, he process harts,and the

@"r:il* @gi;l@i:$*ii: Pf*treu*

Figure .21- Tosk3. I, DefineSPUsd Processes




organizaironchart. We look for activities,people,or equipment thatwill requirespace.For eachsuch tem, a cell couldbe defined,or theitem could be combinedwith others nto an SPU. Generally. en tothirty SPUsshouldbe identified

In the SPU definition summaV, the spaceplanners shouldidentiSreachSPU with a nameand numberand showthose hat are

included.The spaceplannermay alsospecifyexclusions. he columns

Not€s

oa

Codes

R& D

Strategy olnt ra a

o oOrg Chart

Proceas a a rt o a t , EXrStrng o o o

u

rt

oL 2(l, tr,

H&- U6 Y(J, l-g RUX

2^2ro]yr { L0tu

uddH

2ort)0lU

9oJ $ .vro

)

l0(,tD

L\(lJ

0t Jl-

u)

D= )I r S

$6 HU U

o

(F

< =0 +

l al

$HHdxgs\

$pA U

:a0l pN Pp\ UurS1 l \o qU pF J

s\t

rfi

bN B)l r{)

fisJ Vs l L

TB

spF FL f

V rp..1q,xq )

ud

$R^dS:

E*$

$0l )

6psri

X*d d

u)

I o2 $r+:i

* odu

z

o

- rfl1 2

a .Y

o (rfj sl}Z (lJJ N

t o

N

aal

ttjq

0tU(,

*IFHtso

- i isd P 6V O J

Rio E2iE

F$$r l:

hg(, (,

P

s

Ato

YP$Nl- IJ

? G

E$EEFns

o o oIo s

oI

o o o

N

ffil

flW,Figure3.22 - Cell Definition Summary




that show he source f thecelldefinitionshouldbe examinede.g., oes

this activity show up on the organization hart, process hart, or both?).

If the operationsstrategysummarycalls or a product-focused

spaceplan (line, cellular, or Toyota), support cellsstill need to be

identified. However, a product-focused pace lan may absorbmany

indirect activitieswithin the product-focused ells.For example,n an

electronics lant, assembly-integrate-testellseachhad one ofseven

majorproducts.Schedulers,estengineers, ndprocess ngineers at n

the cells. A subsequentorganization ealignmenthad these people

report to cell managers ather han functional managers.

If the plan's strategycalls for product focus, planners should

oroceed o Block 11 to decidewhether a current cell definition is

iatisfactory. If the factory has previously operated with product-

focusedcells, rearranging hem may be all that is needed.Suitabledefinitions may have been developedduring Task 03.10,

"IdentiS,

FocusOpportunities."Now, additional product-focused ells should

be defined. f the current definition is unsatisfactory,he next step s

Block 13.

For a product-focusedpace lan, he plannercandefineproduct-

focusedcellsat the macro- or micro-level.Defining work cellsat the

macro-levels satisfactoryf the likely result s a manageable umber

and f the effort reouired s reasonable. ometimeshis is not the case.For example, n adiquatedefinition might requirean extensive roup

technologyanalysis, hich s nappropriate t he macro-level.Or the e

might bemanysmallcells hat aredifficult to arrange.f so, he planner

should considerusing one or more composite el1s.

A compositecell consists f several mallercells. n the Cosmos

Products example,post-screenoperationsand roll operations end

themselveso cellularmanufacture.Designing he individual cellsand

deciding which productsgo in them is a prolonged,detailed, and

difficult task hat, n this casehasbeenpostponed ntil the nextdesign

level.Therefore,post-screen perations nd roll operations avebeen

definedascomposite ells.This wasnot absolutely ecessary. group

technologyanalysismight havebeenconductedat this macro-level o

identify familiesand define he subcells.

If compositecells are not used at the macro-level,Blocks 14

through 16are he nextstep.Planners valuatehe numberofproducts

and select n appropriate nalysisool. For a smallnumberofproducts,

twenfy or less,he planners houldgo to Block 20, chart he processoreach,and hen use he process harts n Blocks18 and 19. n Block 18,

the space lanner dentifiespreliminarypart families; n Block 19, the

cellsare defined.




For a moderatenumberofproducts, ess han 100but more thantwenfy,production flow analysiss used.The process hen moves oBlock 18 for definingproduct familiesand Block 19 for defining thecorresponding ells.

_ Y""y products (more than 100) will probably require aclassification nd codinganalysis. his is anextensive ndertakingbutonewith significantbenefits.

After defining SPUs, it is time ro review the processesorimprovement. The processanalysisat this level may be general.Examining he processurthermaybedoneduring the detailingof thelayoutat the micro-level.

In Block 7, the spaceplanner determineskey equipmentrequirements. his is not alwaysa complete ist; rather, t identifies

1aj9r equipment hat occupies ignificantspaceor needssignificantfunding. In Block 8, capaciry s checked.Normally, this apaciryanalysiss confined o key equipmentor known bottlenecks.piocess

charts or anysignificantprocess evisions nd a list of keyequipmentmight alsobe helpful.

When complete,a cell definition summary is in place. Celldefinition should ncludeeveryspace r featurenecessaryor the ner"plant. t isnot always nelaborate ocument.Everyonenvolvedshould

know what eachSPU conrainsandwhat it will not contain.Thesearethe building blocks or the new ayout.

Because ell definition is so crucialro the remaining activities,planners houldcirculatet widely or commenrand nput. In addition,decision-makers ustapprovetbefore space lanningcango forward.

Cosmos ell andprocessdefinitionPart of the cell definition for cosmos Products s illustrated n figure

3.22.The operational ellscomedirectly rom the focusstudyofrask03.11.other cellsarederived rom the existingprocessh"rt, and thephysical nfrastructure checklist.

For example,SPU 01 is silk-screenoperations. t includessilk-screenprinting, drlang, baking, and humidifying and excludesscreenpreparationandsubsequentperations. he teamcreatedhis sPU fromthe existingspacediagramand also rom the existingprocess hart.

Cell04 ispost-screen perations.t includeshermaldie-cutting,pick-and-peel, masking, labeling, inspection, and packaging.Th1existingspace lan had no areawith this label.This spu was derivedfrom the process hartsand the strategy tatement.

Figure3.23 s the revised rocess heet or cosmos'smulti-colorcommercial amily of products.comparing this illustrarionto figure




3.8revealshat thevalueadded ndex(VAI) has ncreasedrom 0.20 o

0.30. The number of elements has decreased rom 78 to 50.

Improvements fthis magnitude 30 o 50 percent)arenot uncommon

in layout-reengineering rojects.The dotted envelopesn figure 3'23

represent he cellswhere the processactivitiesoccur. Most ofthe

g 6 )

f Fo >

Iq ir I

F 9

a ; 3

* + x o +o H ; c vd t i r d

I E

l_ a

6 o o . . . . - - -- -

;; a

a'

d : . :U A : " E 9 ] E F ' . E ] ; + F 5

V ' A E A O O L 6 : I

3 6

:

P i

o l

l

+ F

[ [

a)

Foof)

On

s lc o o

l O

< ^ -> l v

5 P

3 f

Figure 3.23 - Revised Process For Multi-Color Die Cut Product




processmprovements t cosmosare rom the eliminationoftransport,storage'and delayelements,which are renderedunnecessary henprocessesccur n the same ocation.This is the powerof a product-focusedspace lan.

Materialflow analysisIn Task03.12,theanalyst sesnformationgathered arlier o calculatematerial low berween ach ombinationof SPU pairs.Additional datamaybe neededor this calculationo establishhe affinitiesassociatedwith material flow. Figure 3.24 shows he procedure or this analysis.

In manufacturing,materialflow is usuallyan important factor inlayout.For non-manufacturing pace lans,materialho* -"y not berelevant,and this taskprobablywill not apply.Berween he extremes,the relative mportance of material flow for establishingaffinities willvary considerably.

Material flowvaluesareoneof two inputsfor affinitv develooment.Asspace landesign rogressesndseveralptionsareunderconsideration,the materialflow analysis anassistn evaluating heseoptions. Later,flow calculations rovide a basis or handling tyri.- design.

From the P-Vsummary,process harrsandobservaiionBlock 1)materials are classified nto manageablegroups (Block 2). This

classification ssistsn developing commonunit for measuringlow,the equivalentlow unit (EFU). A classification ummary s oneof thedeliverablesor Task 03.72.

Usually these groups number less than twenty-five. They arebased n material-handling haracteristics.trucruraishapesmight beone group in a metal-working factory. It would include steel andaluminumshapeshat are en to twentyfeet n length.Another groupmight be smallparts-items definedas ess han four ounces ttd l.ttthan three nches

on anydimension.In Block 3 of the procedure, lannerschoosean EFU. This is atwo-part measure:material-unitsper time-unit suchaspailetsper day(metalworking); cartonsper hour (grocerydistributionj; tor* p* d,iy(steel oundry);or totesper day(electronics).

When there s one type of material, his step s easy. tuses thenormal unit suchas ons or pieces. uch situationr"r. rare,however.Most layoutsdealwith a wide rangeof materialmovement.

Materials also may changeform. A sheet metal cabinet forcomputersbeginsasa flat sheet hat is difficult to handle.cutting andforming increaseshe difficulry and bulk by an order of magnilude.Paint makes t delicateand susceptibleo damage.packagiirgthenallows t to be nestedand stacked, endering it lesi delicate."




Figure 3.25 illustrates hesechanges n a quantified schematic

flow diagram.The lines epresentmovement,and heirwidth represents

the flow rate in equivalentpalletsper week. The flow rate in units per

week s constant hroughout he process. owever, he changen size,

features, delicacy, and packaging changeshe equivalent flow as it

moves rom one ooeration o the next.

5

OalaSource. ProcessChafrs. P-V Oata

MRPDatabaae. Rout ingOataba6e. Obaervation

. Handl in0Records

. Work Sampl ing

. Schedul€Est imates

. opinion

Extaol Data

Figure .24 -Task3.l2, AnalyzeMaterial Flow




The sourceof data s determined n Block 4 of Fig. 3.24. Forsimple flow situations, he P-v analysisand processchartsprovide allthe necessarynformation. In complex situations, the proiess chartsmaybe too manyor too complex;sometimesmoves akeplace hat arenot in the official process.These must be identified

from other datasources uchas he MRP database,materialhandling records,direct

0.6 EFU/Day1.0EFU/Day Stacked Sheots

On Pallot

5.0 EFU/DayShearedBlanks, EachItem On Separate Pallst

8.0 EFU/Day Punch6dand Formed,Non-Stackable

40.0EFU/Day Weld€d Cabinets

60.0 EFU/Day Susceotable oPaintDamage

30.0EFUDay

30.0EFU/Day

ToCustomer

Figure3.25- Changesn Material Flow




observation, r random samplingasoutlined n Block 5.

Block 6 marks he extractionof data.Again, for simplesituations,

only the process hartsand the P-V information arenecessary.or each

moveon the process hart, he plannerdeterminesf a similarmovewill

existwhen he new SPUsareused.He or she hendeterminesheflow unit

andthe number of flow units perdayrequired o meet he sales orecast.

Other data sourcesmay need significantmanipulation. Each

space lan project s uniquewith respect o flow data.Experience nd

common sense re he main guides.

Block 7 formats the data, usually on a comPuterspreadsheet r

database.n Block 8, he lowis calibratedusingtheAEIOLIXconventions(seeig.2.9).This is doneon arankedbargraphwithhe SPUpairsalong

one axisand lowrates on the other.The rating shouldbedonemanually.

The affinity distribution in figure 2.10 should be used only asa guide,because ther factorsalso are nvolved. For example,discontinuities n

the curve naturally divide one rating from another.A{finity pairs that

havezero flow between hem get a"IJ"

rating.

The procedureorTask03.12 s llustratedbytheCosmosproject.

Basedon the nformation rom Block 1, the materialswere lassified s

follows:

Log Ro lrThese vinyl stockrolls are36 inches ong and abott 12

inches n diameter.They weigh about200 pounds.SIit Rolts-Vinyl stock rolls are rolls that have been slit and

rewoundon smaller ores. hey range rom 6 to 20 nchesn length and

less han 5 inches n diameter.Weights are ess han 40 pounds.

Roll PacLages-:fhese repacked oll productssimilar o cellophane

tapeor masking ape The largestareabout5 inches n diameterand4

inches n length. Most aremuch smaller.

Sbeets-Theseargesheets fvinyl stockor decalmaterial,average24

inchesby 60inchesand remain lat throughout he process ndshipping.

PackagedSheerr-Theseare decal sheetspackaged n corrugated

boxes.The boxesand packingsignificantly ncreaseheir volumebut

reduce he delicacy equired n handling.

Much ofthe materialhandling n the plant s doneusinghandcarts

with four-wheelcastors, oahandcartwas sedasanEFU. This offered

severaladvantage .It was easy o visualize he handcartbeing used or

all materialsand to developconversion actors rom that vision. In the

newlayout,handcarts ndoubtedlywould emain heprimarymeans f

movement.Table 3.1 s the outputof Block 7 and he deliverableor Block 9

on the procedurediagram.This table shows he material flow analysis

for CosmosProducts.The materialclassesre at the top left. Next to




EFU=Equivalentand artsLogRolls 0.500SlitRolls 0.071RollPackagesSheetsPackagedheets

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (c) (H) fl) (J) (K) (D (M)Fwd Rev Tot Flo Flo Flol N_F N_FTot To t

From Units Units EFU EFUsVow Num N-F Vow NumNum ow-To Unirs /Day lDay Fact /Day Rtg Rtg Ratio Rtg Rtg Scr Rtg

0.0040.1670.250

69.0 0]769.0 0.17

u 0 1 . 2 5 A 4 2 . 0 0 Et 2 1 . 2 5 A 4 3 . 2 5 At 2 1 2 5 E 3 2 . 7 5 E

u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0u 0 1 . 2 5 | 2 1 . 0 0 Iu 0 1 . 2 5 | 2 1 . 0 0 |u 0 1 . 2 5 | 2 1 . 0 0u 0 | 2 5 | 2 1 . 0 0 |u 0 1 . 2 5 E 3 1 . 5 0 |u 0 1 . 2 5 A 4 2 . 0 0 E0 1 1 2 5 E 3 2 . 1 3 Eu 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0A 4 1 . 2 5 | 2 3 . 5 0 Ao

'l1.25 U 0 0.63 |

u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0uo 1 .25 | 2 i .00 |uo 1 .25 0 1 0 .50 0

u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0E 3 1 . 2 5 E 3 3 . 3 8 Au 0 1 . 2 5 | 2 1 . 0 0 |u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 5 0 0u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0t 2 1 . 2 5 | 2 2 . 2 5 El 2 1 . 2 5 | 2 2 . 2 5 E

0 1 1 . 2 5 U 0 0 . 6 3 |u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0

u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0l 2 1 . 2 5 0 1 1 . 7 5 E

u 0 1 . 2 5 0 I 0 . 5 0 0A 4 1 . 2 5 | 2 3 . 5 0 Au 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0u 0 1 . 2 5 E 3 1 . 5 0 |u 0 1 . 2 5 | 2 1 . 0 0 Iu 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0

u 0 1 . 2 5 0 1 0 . 5 0 0

11.5'11.5

c . l.11

01-0201-04 SHTS01-05 SHTS01-08Q1-1201-13

01-1401-1502-1103-04O3-05 SLITS03-0603-08 PKGS03-10 PMAT03-1203-1303-14

03-1504-09 SHTSo4-1104-1204-'13o4-1404-1505-06 SLITS05-07 LOGS05-09 LOGS05-1305-1405-1507-10 LOGS07-1208-09 PKGS 2134.008-1208-1309-1009-1210-1411-1211-13

12-13

0.01 19.2o.25 1.8

o.25 17

0.11 10,10.50 11.70.50 0.1

0.50 11.7

0.01 19.2

TABLE3.1

7.3

46.0 46.023.4

0.2




eachclass escriptors the EFU conversionactor,which convertshe

materialunit into an EFU. Each conversionactor s the nverseof the

number of flow units that fit onto the cart.A cart usuallycarriesnvo log

rolls, or example, o ts conversionactor s 0.5.The SPU pairsare n

column A of table 3.1. Column B shows he flow units-slit rolls,

sheets, tc. Columns C andD indicate he flow rate.

Pathsshouldbespecified sing wo numericalSPU dentifiers.n the

Cosmosexample, 3 referso roll operations, nd06refers o intermediate

storage. he flowpath betweenhem s 03 to 06.To avoidduplicationand

possible rrors,planners houlduseonly the forwardpath-the SPUwith

the lowest number followed by each SPU numberedabove t. When

materialmoves rom ahighernumberedSPUto a ower numberedSPU,

it is calledreverse low. The total material flow is the sum of the forward

and reverse lows. Column F in the Cosmosmodel is the flow totalsmultiplied by the EFU factor.This result s the averagelow rate n EFUs

perday. Column G shows he vowel rating for each low path.

Figure3.26showshe flow calibration or CosmosProducts. his

is Block 8 on the procedure hart and is typicalofa product focused

layout. t has a smallnumberof high flow ratesand many SPU pairs

with zero low. Process-focusedayoutshavea muchbroaderdistribution

of flows commensurate ith their complexnatures.

0 3 > 0 8 0 B > 0 9 0 4 > 0 9 0 5 > 0 7 0 7 > 1 0 0 1 > 0 4 0 1 > 0 5 0 5 > 0 6 0 3 > 0 5 0 3 > r 0 0 5 > 0 9

From-To SPUS

Figure 3.25 - Moteriol Flow Colibrotion




Identifyi ng non-flow affin itiesMaterial flow is only one of many factors that give rise to affinities.other factorsare ntangibleand moredifficult to quantifr. Examplesoftheseactors re: ersonal ommunication;heneed o transferperionnelbetweencellsor departments;movement o and from the cafeteria rrestrooms;quality feedback;oint teamworkcommunications; ccessby outsidevisitorslRF communicationsequirement;and other site-specificneeds.

Figure3-27shows chart or recordingnon-flow affinities hat arsomay be usedto documenrflow affinitie, J, total affinities. Diagonalsrepresent achSPU.When theycross,hey orm a diamond. n theupperhalf of the diamond, the affiniry rating is recordedusing the vowel or

Figure?.27- Affinity Chor-t




number scaleshown n figure 2.9.The lowerhalf of the diamond is the

place o record he primary factor(s) hat gave ise to the affinity.

These non-flow affinities are independent of material flow

requirements. he problem ies n capturing hem.In Task03.14 they

aremergedwith affinitiesfor an overallor total affinity rating.A survey,

consensusmeeting,or personalevaluationmay alsobe used.

A consensusmeetingthat assemblesepresentativesrom each

department r SPU s usuallyhe bestapproachor accomplishing ask

03.13.The analystactsas acilitator.Using the affinity chartof figure

3.27 he or sheexplainshe need or affinity ratings, he chart,and the

desireddistribution.The group considers achpair of SPUs,one at a

time, and discusseshe relationships.

Using the conventions n figure 2.9' they decideon a rating.

Initially, thesediscussions re rather long. After five to ten ratings,however, the group will begin to agreereadily. A scribe recordsthe

ratingsandkeeps he group focusedby displaying he current SPU pair

oncards.Frequently,corollaryissuesrise'Thesemayresultinconstraints

or even evisionsof the SPU definition.

Participantsn a consensus eetingemergeeeling hat theyhave

beenpart of the overallproject.This is important. When they seehow

their input led directly to a sPaceplan, they will have increased

commitment to the space lans hat finally emerge.Another methodofidentifying non-flow affinities nvolves ending

questionnaireso representativesn eachdepartment.The questionnaire

askshem to list other departments, reas, ndpeople hat mustbenear

each other. The resultsare then assembled,nterpreted,and ratings

developed sing he scaleand conventionsn figure 2.9.This method

is effective for large projects with fifty or more SPUs and many

affinities. However, it does not allow the participants to develop a

commonunderstandinghroughdiscussion. he participantsmaynot

trust the judgment of the person who intelprets the surveysand

corollary ssuesmay not bebrought out.

A third method spersonal valuation,which usesa singleudge

to determineaffinities.He or shemusthave ntimateknowledgeofthe

operations. his often s the analyst, ut he or shemayalsobe a strong

leader, erhapshe plantmanager r CEO. This is a quickmethodand

may be effective for small projects. This, however, does not build

consensusnd may be divisive.Corollary ssuesmay remainhidden.

Merging affinities

Two sets faffinitiesnowexist.The developmentofflowaffinities sed

a quantitativeapproach.Non-flow affinitiesby their nature precludea




quantitative pproach ndwere dentifiedby a consensusr someothernon-quantitative pproach. hesemustnowbemergednto a singlesetof affinities(fig.3.28). This is Task 03.14.

A spreadsheetreatedby hand or computer s usually he moststraightforward method of merging. Table i.2 is an extensionof thespreadsheetn table 3.1. These columns are put in after columnsA through D.

Column E: Vowel Non-Flow Rating (Enter Manuallv)Column F: Numeric Non-Flow Rati"g (Enter tr,t""u"ity;Column G: FlodNon-Flow Ratio(EnterManually)ColumnH: MergedScore:Col.Ax Col. F + Col. p x (f - Col. F)Column I: Merged Vowel Rating (Enter Manually)Plannersshould add rows for all remaining combinationsof

SPUs,sort he rows n themergedscore olumn(col. u) in descendingorder,andplot themerged cores n a rankedbarchart.From thechart.

EFU=Equivalentand artsLogRolls

Sli tRolls0.5000.071

RollPackages 0.004

Sheets u . l o /Packagedheets 0.250

From-To Units

(ct (DlFwd Rev

Units/ Units/

Day Day

(El (Ft (ct tH)Tot Flo Flo

EFU EFUs/ VowNum

Fact Day Rtg Rtg

(BlA)

03-08 PKGS

08-09 PKGS04-09 SHTS

05-07 LOGS

07-10 LOGS

01-04 SHTS

01-05 SHTS

05-06 SLITS

03-05 SLITS

03_10 PMAT

05-09 LOGS

2134.0

21234.069.0

zJ .4

23.4

69.0A q n

46.0 46.0

46.0

TABLE3.2

0.01 19.2

0.01 19.20.25 17.3

0.50 11.7

0.50 11.7

0.17 11.5

0.17 11.5

0.11 10.1

0.11 5.1

0.25 1.8

0.50 0.1

A 4

A 4t r J

t z

t 2t 2t 2t 2

o 1o 1

o 1




they shouldassigna mergedvowelrating (Col. I).

Deciding the relative importance of flow and non-flow factors

depends n the ndustry,process,ndother nfluences. eavyindustries

such as steel or shipbuilding warrant a flodnon-flow ratio up to 2.0.

Office areas nd ndustries hat dependheavilyon personalcontactmay

have atios as ow as0.5.

3

D e t e r m n e F l o w /

N o n - F l o wR a t i o

4

M e r g e U s i n OW e i g h t e d

A v e r g a e T e c h n i q u e

P r e p a r e A t f i n i t y

D i s t r i bu t aon a r c h a i l

8

D e i v e r a b l e i

. M e r g e d A f f i n i t y C h a r i

O r. MergedAf f i n i t y i6 t

Figure .28 Tosk 03.14,MergeAffinities




Generally, he same lodnon-flowratio should be used or all the

affinities on the spaceplan. Occasionally,however, specific affinities

may have o be modified for special ircumstances.

Next, the total affinities must be rated. When assigning the

mergedvowel rating, the analystshouldconsider wo factors. First, heor she should strive for a workable distribution of ratings similar to

thoseshown n figure 2.9,\n addition, a searchor natural breaksor

discontinuities n the distribution avoidshaving nearly dentical scores

with different ratings.Accuracy s not paramount n this process.

Developing a configuration diagram

In Task 03.15, merged ratings are used to develop a configuration

diagram.The configurationdiagram s he firstofthe derivedelements.

It comes rom cell definitions,affinities,and experience. he graphicswork may be done on a CAD system or other software. However,

manual development s straightforward and often quicker.

To develop he affinitydiagram, the analystplaceshe A affinities

and their associated PU symbols irst, then adds he E affinities.At

this point, rearranging he diagram s desirable.Next, the I affinities are

addedand the diagram s rearrangedagain. He or she inisheswith the

O affinities, which usually will have ittle effect on the diagram..

Striving for short distancesbetween he As and Es with minimalcrossing s a worthwhile goal. Multiple crossingsmight create raffic

congestionon the final spaceplan. Lower value affinities probably will

have onger distances. he high valueA and E affinities will have short

distances. ttempting to fit this diagram nto a buiiding environment at

thispoint is not advised. omeexcellent rrangementsmaybeovedooked.

Figure 3.29 illustratesthe diagram developed or the Cosmos

project. Step 1 features he SPU symbols.Step 2 shows he A and E

affinities n an undesirable rrangement.Step3 shows he rearrangementof the A and E affinities and the addition of the I affinities. Another

rearrangements llustrated n Step4. Finally, n Step5, theaffinitieshave

beenrearangedagain,and the O af{inities added.

The Cosmosconfigurationdiagram n figure3.29 s only one of

many possible diagrams hat usesthis combination of SPUs and

affinities. t canbe mirrored or rotated.There may be other positions

for the SPUs that give the same or better results.Some of these

variationswill fit thebuilding be ter than others.However, it isbestnot

to ump aheadand anticipate he shapeofthe building. It is worthwhile

to ask severalpeople to develop diagrams, thereby ensuring a wide

selectionof possibilities.




q)

q)(ul

(Uo rE

u,o

'-

:

oCDc(E

(

oE

€ G

€ €r u @06

< Eo Eo l c(6 iF

( L <

IiiT"--l "i. .i,

fti$$il\:r:1ilrIiiitttiiritlt:t

v

/k\t-

€ €

F aFa-

vE @= e o

o ' =

g E @(Do-

/d

v-;

oo)c(

(

oE,

oUr

oo

.E

o E

Figure3.29- Affinity Diogram



TheMacro-Space-Plan

Space calculation

Space s the third fundamental elementof a space lan. It is a imitedresource; here is only so much spaceunder a roof, on a site, or in a

department.Whether the spaces and on a site or spacen a building,

it is usuallyexpensiveAlthough spaces three-dimensional, most spaceplans ignore

the vertical dimension.This is acceptablen all but a few situations.

Most layoutsattempt to optimize the useof spaceaswell as tsarrangement.A complete space lan requiresnot only the location ofSPUs,but their size and shapeaswell. The spaceoccupiedby SPUsusually prevents the designer from honoring all affinities

B3

tro - - -H s F F = S . s : : F F p p E E . e+ . € € € F F € € € € € E b € h € E? . C o o o \ 2 I a a a a a - o i 6 9 a o

l Z f c c c F F c c C C c c c c F c o= o (o (o ( ;i ;i (o (o ( cg o o o o ;r g Io o = F a t s f r i F F ; i t r } . , & . . F d - a

9 l ^ r o@ E 6 o 9 { o o R P o o l * o o , ^ - o s

E , E E g F F E S E E F g S E S F E- E . . , c

H _ E 0 S € e A x E o P R R * o . . bi - w =. : (o .oor , f i b b S 3 R i g 3 R 3

zE - b o

t - E o E ' ' , f i ' H e' E H H q g ' { E * E " .F ? 3 * F a t . P u o * 6 i vr F EE E H g xEq l Hf , E ? V , ? F = € 8 6 : E 8 € H #, " GE PE 6 E# 5 EE € Ed Se 5 8 8 3 8 8 b 8 8 P = s p s p e

TABLE3.3




simultaneously.enveenhem, tforcescompromisesbove ndbeyondthosearrivedat n the configurationdiagram.The space eeds f SPUsmay distort evena neadyperfectdiagram.

Task03.16calculatesizeofthe requiredspaceor eachSPU,usually

in squareeetor squaremeters.Calculationofspace equirements ses neor more of six methods.These methodsare:elemental alculation.isuale ima ing, transformation, pacetandards,roportioning,or ratioforecasing.Table 3.3 showsCosmos Products'space equirementsand how theanalysts sedseveralmethods or the calculation.

Elementol colculotionThis method, llustrated n figure3.30, startsat the most detailedevel.Eachpieceof fumiture or equipmentassignedo an SPU is measured. hese

dimensionsare hen added ogether or the total amount of space.Spaceoraisles,miscellaneoustorage,r otherneeds realso nduded n thesum.Thisaddedspace ften s a percentagef the basicequipment pace.

Elementalcalculations simpleandstraightforward.However, t hasits limitations. For one, t takesconsiderableime and effort. Uncertainforecastscan make it difficult to determine how much furniture orequipmentwilloccupythe pace. lementalestimatingis rimarilya short-term methodology.Most industriesuse t for one to threeyears n the

future.Beyond hat, other methodsareequallyandperhapsmorereliable

DevelopEquipmentlnformation

Capacity/Process/Sales nformation

Figure?,30- ComputingSpoce,Elementol Colculation



uollDurfls3 pns1l'atodg tugndwo2 - 16'9 atntg

rrrIrIrIr

rrr

ls 9e9'eg= 68eX 9rZ

ocuouodx3ebpelnouy

nn"rt_*,ua

r"r"rle II

III

F

Suruueld aqt JI'uer{I 's}ueruerrnbar&p-}uasard ot dn uoDerolp

acuds agl Surrq ol peppt sr ]uacrad uaa 'parsa8uof,puz pep/\4,orf,

sr EaJE qr reqr salef,rpur orlz^Jasqo tae; arenbs00t't sl a8urots

ssaco.rd r IJo 4. rogaruds luaJJnJ lugl asoddns alduzxa rog

'pauruzxeegppoqs fSolour{f,a}uerrnruuql aceds sel ooJoru aau zur

rrgl selSolouqJel 4.eu uu 'suorluraplsuoJluuor]rppzeJBxrur pnpord

puu uorlf,npord ur sa8uzq3 'ertds palserrr o Surpnorualo sE r{f,ns

suorlrpuocSuqsrxe oJ pzr.u q snulsluarursnfpy'spaau rrurySurrralord

ro3 srscqer{t sE er{} sesnpu" nds SuqsrxeuE roJ tuauarrnber aruds

E sDIEIrouSrsep€ :poqleu uorltruJoJsuzl aql selensnllr gg'g ainSrg

uonDutJolsuDJf

'poqleur sII{t q}I.l \snolln?f,,{-ra.,r,qplnor{ss.reuuEd aruauadxeur'larla,t.ogalernJf,B guBJr'rauueld peruarradxo

uE Jo spuer{ aqr uI 'rFlrJJrp auof,ag lutu Arrnrf,E lseJeroC 'acuds

agr dncro sualr IIu us urru uaqru. norJoqul q uEJ1r nq 'sualr a8rel

ltay u lq patzurruopnds uE JoJInjasn,{:ensl SurtuurtsaFnsr1'selrrrsnll

1g'garnSrgnds rtqr;og perrnbaracrdsplol aql sarnsearu

uerp pu? tsluauralrnberacrds uaurdrnbaJouruJpuu ta8urols spualzu

pue lssacreaJuzuolurerusalsreog sNnfpe au8rsapaqa 'uouern8guor

FuIJ aqr alqtuoseJou peeu lueruaSuerreer{J'suorlullulsur

Julrr.ursyo a8pay'rouq ur rueu€pnlreq ro srqol Surprorrr lnolel u uo salqdrual

egrsareldauft sepaqJ'ruoudnba_apcra8rq ro,fieturrd po $ sql uauo-eJnlIuJnS puu uaurdmba uasarda.r1selelduielsasnSuqururtse[Ensr1

6uttotunsaDnslA

98 ueg6-acedg-orceWqf




Figure 3.33 - Computing Space, Standard Dato

Handling\Storage 334"/o

SecondaryProcess 3023o/o

Primary rocess2419"/o

Standard roportionsOf Existing acility

New Facility

Figure?.34- Computing Space,Proportioning




ProportioningCertain typesofspacecalculationuseproportions effectively.The spacefor a given SPU comes from the calculation of another space. For

example, islesmightbe apercentagefproductionspace, r conferenceroom spacemay be a

portionof

office space. igure 3.34 llustrates.Proportioning workswell when the history to support t exists. t

usually applies to only a few types of space,however. Proportioning

requires ittle effort.

Ratio forecasting

Ratio forecasting seshistorical rends o forecast pace.n this method,business arameters nd spaceare correlatedover time. Such ratios maychangegradually overthe years.The analyst hen projects he trend of this

ratio into future yearsand uses hat projection to calculatespace.Ratio forecasting,which is based on historical data, is most

appropriate or long-term site plans. t has imited use or short-term

space alculations.

ThespaceplanprimitiveThe next step n the progression s the space lanprimitive, which involves

adding space o the configuration diagram(s). The space equirements

come rom the calculations ndspace ummary(Task03.16). he CosmosProductsspace lan primitive is illustrated n figure 3.35.

The spaceplan primitive begins with a configuration diagram.Using an appropriatescale,designersplace a squareor rectanglewiththe SPUs calculatedareaneareach SPU symbol. In step2, designerseither moveeachspaceblockunderneath the SPU symbol or move the

SPU symbol over each space block. As the space plan primitivedevelops, twill have o be stretched o accommodate he spacewithout

overlaps.The resultshould be a compact arrangement hat honors theaffinities as closely as possible. Although designers should begin

anticipating a building shapeat this time, they should not strive for a

final layout.

ConstraintsMany factors hat affecta macro-layoutdo not fit the conceptsof SPUs,space, nd affinities.These areconstraints.Someexamples re:

. Column spacingof 32 feet restrictsthe placementof aisles

and someequipment.' High electrical oad restrictsthe placementof heat treat

ovens o certain areaswith adequateelectricalservice.. A cold climate dictates hat dock doors should not have




F oE 5c ' ) O. c U @o a )> Q

. = ( Uc o -E C D{ os Oo ( U= o _5 " u

v

Figure3.35- CosmosSpaceplanprimitive




northernexposure.' zoning requirements pecify hat docksnot face he street;' floor loading restricts he placementof certainequipment;' explosionhazarddictates that ahazatdouschemical room

havean explosion ent on an outsidewall; and' the companypresident equests window for his office'

A form for identif ing constraintsTask03.19) s shown n figure3.36.

The SPUsare istedon the eft and acrosshe toP' majorcategories re

0la

Eo

7N

zsNqs

z?)v6

t-Ia$.u)4 9?NI1 99?2,

sr

o

I

i9?2)V AgV:

$

L

Ilurerlsuoc

tslq)

u

(

:q

UN

aq)

0l

K'o

u

2saolU

rn

Fas

l-

$

E(E

;J

s$0tv

N

$P

Ets t l -

$ l g

$ l (

8 l i${U ' I

f i t <

6 l t

R I :

uU2

q)

L

i

ogvrt2tIIi

3=@

f r l "

Figure3.35- Constraint Summory




identified.These nclude siteconditions,utilities,handlingmethods,personnel,proceduresand controls, shaperario, and oihers. Theaccumulated roject documentation or eachspu and categoryarereviewed,and the constraintsare isted.A bullet or checkassociates

eachconstraintwith a particularsPU. some constraintsapply to allSPUs. In this situation the bullet goes n rhe "general"rtw. The

following is a descriptionof CosmosProducts orrftrairrts:Aestheticy'The nafureof cosmos products s artistic.Therefore,

the aesthetics f the building andsurroundingss important. cosmoswants to present tself well to customersand other visitors.A pleasantsurroundingwill help aftract he bestcommercialartists.The aestheticsissueapplieso shippingandreceivingareas, hich areoftenunsightly. talsoapplies o the artwork,administration,andemployee

ervice"areas.TruckAccess-Thiss anothersitecondition.Trucks needaccessto both shippingand eceiving. osmos s ortunate n this respect. hesitehasgood accessn both the north and southsides.

Forkrrucks--Handling in someareas ses orklift trucks.Adequateaislewidthson the mainaisles ndselectedepartrnental isles renecessaq/.

c ar s-s mallcartsconveymaterialsn manyareas.Here, narroweraisleswill suffice.

EasyAccess-Thissa personnelssue.Administration,employee

service,andmaintenance ll requireeasyandnviting accessorpeople.Press ines-Aspect ratio refers o the relative ength andwidtl of

SPUs. Silk-screen rinting operations equirea mini*mum enqth toaccommodatehe ongpressines.

Utilitier-Certain sPUsrequirewater,sewer, ndairconditioning.Next, this constraintsummaryand he space lanprimitive will be

used o preparespace lan options.

Designingmacro-space-plans]h9.space

plan primitive now must fit into a building outline. Thebuilding may existor it maybe a proposed trucrure.

_Preparing pace lanoptionsbeginswith overlayinghe building

:":]tl.with a space lan primitive.The space locksareshaped o fi i

building walls,columns,andother featur.r.Th" constraintsr.--uryshouldbe consultedduring the placementof eachSpU.

_For each pace lanprimitive, hereprobablywillbeseveral iable

layouts.All variationsof the primitives, ncludingmirror imagesandrotations,shouldbe examined.

I_tmaybe difficult to matchspace, onor constraints, nd designan orderlyarrangement.n general,designers houldstrive or clean,rectangularareas. pace equirementsmay have o be compromised.




The original spacecalculationsare usually lexiblewithin a reasonable

range-10 to 20 percent.

Oneofthe macro-space-planptions Option 1) rom theCosmos

project is illustrated in figure 3.37. This option is based on the

operations trategy, hich called or aproduct-focusedpace lanusingcellularmanufacturing echniques nd focused actories.

The soace etween he two originalbuildinqs s now enclosedo

u..o--od"te the increasedspace"requiremen;

and also to allow

O=coo.t

ocU

oE

)=_

f

-so_c)

oo

- a+T J

- c )

4 ; <

o O--l

- oL

o_

coo . ^

6 Co

- aS O

coo

a

ao

L

a

aC

9ft

Ooc

oE

n o- 6

o=6o

t

s

.9o

a=3,

* o

N ^

OO

(t

=6

- z

Figure3.?7- Option I of the Mocro-SpocePlons

for the CosmosProject




improvedmaterial low between hebuildingsand o the shippingandreceivingdocks.Eachof the old buildingshasbecom. u ,.-ilfoi,rr.df?,:oty,with roll productson the left andcommerciar roductson theright. In the centerare slit-and-sheetoperations, hi.h serveboth

focusedactories. ervice acilitiessuchasqualityassurance,mployeeservices, nd maintenanceare also in u i.ntr"l location. Ariwork,administration,andemployee ervicesace he street.This satisfiesheaesthetic onstraints.

co

a

:aa

C

9

6 qo u

L Oc

oc'd

o?

oo

L

C

o

a

Na

oC't

6o

t

ao

]

o

a

oE

U

oE

:a

)o

=L

@s

c

9

m'-E

N

oo

o

a

=

;€N

Ds

L

a

0ooo

O

oo

0

EI

o.=.=

L

a

o=

3o

O

Oa

oca

aL

oa

Oo

o

a

o

o6oE

o

C

=

c

6

s

o.=I

a

)o

co

oa

N

a

o

c

)00

)=€-o

o

+ Z

Figure?.38- Option 2 of the Mocro-Spoceplansfor the Cosrnosproject




Some Cosmosmanagershad reservations bout the product-

focusedstrategyadopted in Task 03.10. Therefore, an additional

macro-space-planasedon continuingthe process-focusedpproach'n", pr.p"..d. The resultwasO ption2 (fig.3.38),which mitigated heir

.orri.rnr and demonstratedhe relativeadvantagesnd disadvantagesof processand product focus. t was preparedas a second,parallel

proJect tarting romTask03.10.The process-focusedtrategy tatement

produceda differentsetof sPUs, affinities,and space equirements.

Option 2 retains he aislesystemandmanyof the goodfeatures

of Ontion 1. Functionaland semi-functionalareas uchas shipping,

receiving, nd artworkhavemanyof the same haracteristics.hey are

often n the same ocation.Some unctionalSPUssuchasstorage reas

need significantly more space.Processareaschangetheir names,

characters, pace equirements,and other characteristics.Option 2

needsabout 10 percentmore space han option 1. This additional

spaces in a building expansion n the eastside.

For mostmacro-space-planningrojects,herewill be hree o six

fundamentally different options and severalvariations.using the

existing ayout-or simplydoing nothing*is alwaysan option' Even

when the existingspace lan s no longerviable, t makesa convenient

baselineorgauging mprovement. he Cosmos roject eamdeveloped

several ther options,which arenot included n this book.

Aisles

Aisles presentspecialproblems.They should be straight and wide

.r,o.rgh fot two-way traffic. Usually, the bestapproach dentifies main

aislesas a separateSPU. Designers hen place hem on the macro-

space-plan.Departmentalaisles,on the other hand, are within the

spacecalculations or eachSPU. Aisles adjacent o walls are often

undesirable ecausehey serveonly oneside.An alternateapproach ncludesall aislesas Part of the SPUs'

Designers hen placesPUs on the plan, recognizing hat thosemain

aisles enerallywill follow the SPUboundaries.

ihe straightforwardCosmosspace lans n figures3.37 and3'38

use he first method.Main aisles avea separatealculationand every

SPU s adjacento a main aisle.A central oopallowscontinuous raffic

in both directions.A singledead-endaisleserves creen repandpart

of the silk-screening peration.This aisle ystemwill allowsubsequent

layoutchangeswithout disturbing he basic low pattern.

ldentifying ey material andlingssues

Material handling and layout are intertwined. The best handling




system epends n the space lanandthebestspace lan maydependon handiingmethods.often, a ayout hat doesnotworkwitir manualhandling becomes iablewith automatedor conveyorizedhandling.

This presentsa chicken-or-the-eggproblem. Are handling

equipment and containers selectedbefore the rayout? s the layoutdesigned irst andthe handling system hen serected?sually, the bestapproach is to design the layout assuming conventionai p"rh"p,manual handling. This optimizes material flow and often eliminatesthe needfor complexand expensivehandling systems.

. lowever,particularhandling issues hat drasticaly affectspace

plan selectionmustbe dentified.For example, pneumatic ransportsystemhasdifferent requirements han a system hat uses orktrucksfor conveyingbulk material.one space lan might

be the best or forktruck handling,while anothermight bebest otih. prr..r-atic system.A space lan shouldbedesignedandselected ifore the handling

system s finalized.To do this, however,maymeanassuminga generaltlpe of handling systemprior to layout design.

To accomplish ask03.20,examine."ih ofthe proposedayoutoptions and askthe following questions:

. What typesof handling systemsareviablefor eachoption?

. Would aparticularhandling systemaffectone ayout option

more than another?. Would a different handlingsystemallownew ayoutoptions?

,lf aparticular handling systemaffectsall layout opiior^ equally,

selection fthat systemsnot a key ssue.n sucha case,he evaluationofthe options is the nextstep n the space lan. Ifa particularhandlingsystemwould give oneoption a significant advantageover the others,suchselection s a key issue. n sucha case, urthir investigation srecommended, erhaps ccompaniedy apreliminarydesignandcost

estimate or the handling system.This approachallows-"rr"g.rrrerrtto selecthebest ayoutat themacro-levelwithout completelydeiigninghandling systemsor all the options.

Deciding n the bestspaceplanSeveralvi-abfeoptions now exist for the macro-space-plan.Manyothersprobably havealreadybeenscreened ut during ."ili", parts ofthe designprocess.The designershouldnarrow the choice o ihr.. tosixsignificantly different options.Each

option mayhaveseveralminorvariations.Managementandothers nvolved n theproject then decidewhich to use.This is donefor severaleasons:

' managementoften criticizes he engineeringstaff for tunnelvision.Engineersmay ock onto an deaearly n aproject.A




wide varietyofoptions shows hat the designeror design eam

has considereda wide range of possibilities;' asking for a selection rom amongoptions is usuallymore

palatable han asking for approvalofa preordaineddesign;

. the processof decision-makingbuilds consensus' uPPort'andionfidence. This Preventsater attemPtsat redesignby

thosewho felt left out of the processland' the decisionprocessmay Seneratehybrid plans,which are

often superior to the original designs.

Figure 3.39 shows the procedure for evaluation.The spaceplan

optionsare he"input" listed n Block 1. Block2 assemblesdecision eam.

In Block 4, the team reviews the project's original objectives-

These original objectives may be specific,directly measurable,and

SpacePlanA

m

Figure3.39- Computing Space,VisualEstimotion




applicableto the evaluation, or they may be global and difficult tomeasure.They may require sub-objectives or a good evaluation.Theinformation developed uring nformationgatheringmayhavemodifi edthe objectives.The debatesduring the strategydevelopmentalso mayhavechanged bjectives. he decisioneamadopts heoriginalobjectives

or reviseshem asappropriate.Flowing from theobjectivesaredecisioncriteria.These are actors

that the teamcanevaluate irectly-eitherqualitativelyor quantitatively.They are he basis or the decision.Examplesof decision actorsare:material handling savings, mproved communication, OSHAcompliance, mproved teamwork, initial cost, operating cost, qualityenhancement, mproved delivery reliabiliry, improved delivery speed,and ability to usea particular technology.

A decisioncriterion maybe adecideror a qualifier. Qralifiers aregolno-go criteria:a spaceplan meets he minimum requirementsornot. Performance eyond he minimum creates o additionalbenefits.Performance below the minimum disqualifies the spaceplan fromconsideration. or example,OSHA compliancemight be a qualifier.Layouts that meet the requirementsare acceptable. ayouts that gobeyondOSHA requirements ring no perceived dditionalbenefit.

Deciders bring additional benefits for each increment of

performanceImprovedcost, or example,s usuallya decider.OptionB mayhavean operatingcost advantage ver Option A. Although bothspace lansmeet he budgeted ost mprovementobjectives,Option Bis the preferredspace lan on that dimension.

Block 3 contains he tools for evaluation. n addition to macro-space-planning,hese ools apply to other levelsof facility planning.Among the common tools for evaluationare: material flow analysis(MFA), financial analysis, anking, instinct, positive-negative-interesting PNI), decision reeanalysis, nd weighted actoranalysis.

MFA examineshe arge-scalematerialmovementbetweenSPUs.It developsa measureof associated ost and difficulty. Improvedcommunication and coordination are corollary benefits of improved

material flow. Specific techniques n this category nclude transportwork, flow diagrams,and D-F plots. For the most part, these arequantitativemethods.

Financialanalysisincludesostestimating, eturn on investment(ROI), and payback.These methods are quantitativel however,they

often involve qualitative udgments aswell.A simple anhing, rom mostpreferred o leastpreferred, s often

an effective ool. The ranking canuse qualitative factors,quantitativefactors.or both.




The gut-level reactionor instinctof knowledgeable eoplehas

value.Although it should rarely be usedasa primary evaluation ool, it

may uncoverunseenopportunitiesor problems.

PNI analysis s a variation of the brainstorming technique. Itexamineseach spaceplan factor, focusing irst on the positive features

and then on negative eatures.Finally, it focuseson those that areneitherpositiveor negative-things that are nteresting r unique.Thisanalysis,was developedby Edward DeBono, an expert on thinking

processes.t is simplebut effective. t oftenbringsout hidden features

and builds teamworkand consensus.

Decisionreeanalysissusefulwhen a seriesof probableeventscanaffect he decision.For example,which space lan s best f a particularcontract s won and,afterward, he overallmarket contracts?t helps

evaluatehe cumulativeprobabilityofeachofthe four possible utcomes.Combined with financialanalysis,t is a quantitative ool.

Weigbtedfactornalysis ases decisionon a combinationof thevarious actors,both qualitative nd quantitative. t isbest fthe factorsare ndepe dent,but this s not always ossible. omecompromisingofthisprinciple s acceptable.udgesirst denti$, he factors, hen decidea weight for each,and, astly, ateeachoption.

In addition to the tangible and intangible categories, traregic

issuesmay arise.These are usuallyqualitative.The consequencesfstrategic issuesare often so far-reaching and so important theyovershadow ll other factors.For example,Option A might usea newtechnologv.This technology howsno immediatecostbenefityet theintroduction potentially could revolutionize the industry and place afirm farahead fothers.ShouldOption A beselected?his is adecisionfor top managers nd cannotbe made ightly.

In weighted actoranalysis,he udges hat weigh the factorsmaybe different from those who rate the options. For example, topmanagementmay weigh the factorsbut leave atings o specialists roperatingpeople.

In physics,Heisenberg'sncertainty rinciplestateshat both the

position and state of certain sub-atomicparticlescannotbe known.

Thit ir becausehe process f measurem.rri irtort, either heposition

or state.A parallelphenomenon ccurs n space lanning.The processofjudging and evaluation ften leads o other options.Thus, someorall of the space lansmay changeasa resultof the evaluation rocess.

Or, a hybrid space lan that featureshe bestparts of several riginaloptionsmay emerge.

Block 5 of the procedurediagramexamineshe decisioncriteriaand available ools. Two to four tools appropriate for the evaluation




shouldbe selected.

Block 6 evaluatesall options with respectto the identifiedqualifiers.Any option that fails to meet a qualiS'ingcriterion dropsfrom consideration.

Block 7 evaluateshe optionswith respecto the decidercriteria.

New or hybrid options go on the list of available ptions.After evaluation,one option is selected or development.A

decisionsummary ecappinghe decisionprocess houldbe prepared.The summaryand decisionmakeup Block 10.

Evaluatinghe Cosmos paceplansThe Cosmosdesign eamand steering ommitteemet to evaluateheproposed pace lans.They decided hat both the steeringcommitree

and design team should participate in the evaluation.They firstreviewed he originalprojectobjectives. hesecame rom Task 03.01,"Plan

Project":' reducematerialhandlingcost;. reduceoperatingcosts;. deliverprojectunder budgetof$800,000;' improvedeliveryperformancel. improve eamwork,communication,and quality;'

allow for new products; and' accommodate 998production.

From the originalobjectives,heyderived hesedecisioncriteria:D Material flow

D Direct operatingcostqD Initial cost

D Delivery

D Communication

D Teamwork

D QralityD New product adaptability

a_ Meets 1998 productionrequirement

a_ OSHA/EPA Compliance

A"Q

notationdesignateshe qualifiers.OSHA,/EPA complianceis necessaryor anyspace lan.Those hat fail to meet his qualificationareno longerconsidered. imilarly, he 1998productionrequirement

is a qualifier. nitial cost s both a deciderand qualifier.A space lanmust meet he $800,000 udget imitation to be considered;his is thequalification.nitial costbelow$800,000s abenefit; his s he decider.All the other criteriaare deciders, enotedby a

"D."



100 Faci l i t iesPlanning

The Cosmos eamchosePNI, MFA, cost estimating,payback,and weighted factor analysisas the tools for evaluation.

They analyzedmaterialflowfirst andthenused heresults o assistwith the costestimating. n Step1 ofthe MFA, theydevelopedhe flowdiagrams llustrated n figure 3.40.

These diagramsshow where the flow complexity or the existing

Opr lon# I IProduclrFocused pacePldn

Opt lon #3

Ex is t l ng Lagoul

Figure 3,40 - Moteriol Flow Evaluotion



The Macro-Space-Plan

layout is greatest.Option 2, arevised unctional layout, mprovesthe flowcomplexityand shortens low distance.Option 1 mprovescomplexityandfirther shortenshe total distance.The flow complexity ndex(FCI) countsthe frequencyof flow crossingson the diagram. Option t has an index of0, Option 2 has an FCI of 4, and Option 3 has an FCI of 6. Visualexaminationof thesematerialflow chartsconfirmsthe increasingmaterialflow complexity from Option 1 through Option 3.

Transportwork is the summationofeach low distancemultipliedby the flow rate.The units for Cosmos are EFUs per day. Table 3.4 isthe spreadsheet sed by the team to calculatedistanceand transport

1 0 1

= H EF == fr'r

3EBE

s ilF

ETSE

EE5E

6

D

0

F

Eo o

L

E l l

3 3 E fo l L

@ o) (o ro l-- o)F ro(f) ( f) OO)

F\ LO st OJ O)

l ' - T . O O O l r ) O C 9 $ O ) @ No) t) g? c0 9 9.f 90 r-. to

S 5 ' O 9 f P P 9 > R S P

5 = 5 = 3 ad S o o e r > d g o c i d

q F e q K E c S E r eq ) O @ s t O O ( o O O C D $@ $ c v ) $ N c t

N C

( . / ) V)@ lDa

= 3 = 9 - 3 3 i . 8 9a < o < n o - N ( o s N O J o _

Fr= f l=Y?QPiE6 - a d Y - f 6 ' a = 3 & 5

^ aY 'o -

. = = d ) : : . l '> = i s-?r-

- . ^ . ^ Q c . T c D * o q >

x .= 6_6_X h : i > '= q o)d6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666

a a - - a l i .* = z z c i X . = . = . E S r n( n @ c ' E E ( J O _ A A ( n E _

s | r ) r o @ o o ) ( o r ' - o ) o o )

= = c b c b P + L i , 6 t o t r c b

t

€o)@No

CD

o

C)

TABLE3.4



102 Faci l i t iesPlanning

work for Option 1. The other optionshavesimilar spreadsheets.he

threeoptionshave ransportwo k of 9,647,78,669,and 28,t31 EFU-

feet per day respectively.

Another measure of material flow is the frequency count for

materialmoves.Option t has11 nternalmoves,Option 2has L4, and

Option 3has2I. The total distance raveled or the two representative

products s anothermeasure.Options 1 through 3 have distances f

L,026,7,723,and2,735 eet, espectively. he average umberof trips

per day s 119,732, and 98.

This analysis ssumeshat all trips use he EFU, an equivalent

handcart, s hemeans.When implemented, he ayoutactuallywilluse

severalmethods of handling. However, for estimating, the EF"[J

assumption s a reasonable pproximation.

Figure3.41 sagraphicdisplayoftheMFAresults. Based n everymaterial low measure,Option f. s significantlybetter han Option 2.

Option 2 is significantlybetter than Option 3.

Financial analysis

Table3.5summarizeshe inancial esults or the threeoptions.Option

3-the existing ayout-maintains the status uo.For this reason,here

is no change n either savingsor costs.Option 3 thus provides he

baseline or the financialanalysis.

2 5C0

2 .CC0

1 50 0

1 ,000

500

0

7A

60

50

40

30

2A

1 0

0

IW(Fl EFU/Davr1000) 2 n 1 3 1

, 723Ir ps/Dav

f u l r o 132^nnua Cosl 1$ ) 63 95 7

FL I^ UO 4 00 60 0

Figure3.41 Msteriol HondlingSummory




The centerbuilding is the new constructionbetween he twoexistingbuildings.The teamestimated he costat $35per squareoot.The eastextension or Option 2 will cost about $30 per square ootbecauset doesnot have oadingdocks.

Option 2 wlll need new equipment,valuedat about $23,000,which will cost $21,000 for installation. Option 3 requiresmoreequipment becauseof its cellular nature. Rearrangement ostsare$45,000and $28,000, espectively,or Options 1 and2.

The cellularapproach f Option l will requiresignificant rainingand additionalconsulting eeswhen comparedo Option 2. The teamalsoanticipateda moredifficult start-up.

A contingencyof 15 percent hat allows or unplannedcosts sapplied o the mplementationofboth newoprions.Either Option 1 or

Init ialCashOutflowsDescription

Center ui ldingEastExtensionEquipmentInstal lation

RearrangementTrainingConsult ingStartupContingencies

Total

Annual nflowsDescription

IncreasedalesMaterial andlingDirectLaborOther ndirectWorking apitalOuality

Total

Init ialnflowInventory

Years-To-Payout

Option1Amount

$161,000$0

$176,000$49,500

$45,000$32,000$43,500$100,000$91,050

$698,050

$750,000$22,885$132,000$75,000

$140,000$230,000

$1,349,885

$1,750,000

0.23

Option2Amount

$161,000$307,800

$23,000$7,800

$28,000$0

$20,000$45,000$88,890

$681,490

Option2Amount

$750,000q E FF A

$10,000$37,500

$0$20,000

$826,058

$0

0.82

Option 3Amount

$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0

$0

$0$0$0s0$0$0

$0

$0

nla

Option1Amount

Option 3Amount

TABLE3.5




Option 2 will bring increased alesand production. The net profit for

this is estimatedat $750,000.

Material handling savingscome from the decreasen handling

and transport work. Using the data rom the material flow analysis, he

teamestimated ostsavin sof fi22,885 eryear or Option 1 and$8,558

dollarsperyear or Option2. This assumesour minutesofloading and

unloading or each rip. It assumes n averageransportspeedof 150

feet per minute and an $18.50hourly labor cost. t alsoassumeshat

eachmove has an empty return trip.

Calculations for direct labor, quality, and other indirect labor

savings re ess igorous,but the teamdeveloped onservativestimates

from their experiences.

Option t hasa significant nventoryreductionof ff7.75million.

This is aone-timesavings nd essensheworking capital equired.Theintereston this, at 8 percent,amounts o $140,000peryear.

The payout or Option 1 is 0.23years. he payout or option 2 is

0.82 years.Both payoutsare quick. There is no payout or Option 3

becausehere s no initial investment.

An ROI analysiswould be more rigorous than the payout method.

However, the fastpaybacksor Options 1and 2 indicate that the increased

complexityand effort required or an ROI analysiss unnecessary.

The team eviewed he decisioncriteria o see f the options metall qualifiers. All three options met the regulatory qualifiers. All three

options met the budgetary qualifier. Only Options 1 and 2 will satisfr

1998 production requirements.This signifies that doing nothing,

Option 3, is not a viablecourse f action.Option 3, however,hasbeen

usefulasa baseline or improvementestimates.

Pos ti ve-negative - nte re sting

Having completed he quantitative analyses,he evaluationgroup then

rurned o PNI analysis.Meetingwith a acilitator, heyfocused n each

option and eachaspectn turn.They usedbrainstorming echniqueso

develop the positive, negative,and interesting points for each option.

The resultsare n table 3.6.

Weighted factor analysis

With the quantitative and qualitative analysis complete, the team

rurned to weighted factor analysis,where analysisand opinion are

merged nto a singledecision.Figure 3.42 summarizes he weighted factor results.The team

first reviewed each factor and confirmed the definition. Through

discussion, he members eacheda consensus n the weights. Each




factorhad aweight betweenone and ten.

Operating cost, quality, and delivery receivedhigh weights (tenand nine).These actorshave hemostdirect effect n the marketplace.The group believed hey had the higheststrategicmportance.

Material flow, communication,and teamworkreceivedweights nthe seveno eight ange. hese actors resomewhatrelated. ood material

Option 1Positive

BestMaterial andling

Simpli fcationNeat& CleanGeometryLess nventoryBetterTeamworkFi tsW/TOMFasterThroughputF a c t a r R a c n n n c a

LessSpaceLessCostFaster ayoutBestAnnual ost

EasierupervisionEmployeenvolvementNice isle ystemUsesCurrent oftware

w/Kanbanroductionontrol

OptionPosit ive

Reducedaterial andling

Nice isleSystemNeat& Clean eometryEasyPersonaldjustmentLotsof Space

PNlAnalysisSummary

Option2Negative

Option 3Interesting

Option 3Interesting

AllowsCellular

Transition ater

LowRisk

HighCostAllowsCellularProcrastination

NoThroughputlmprovement

MoreSpace equiredLowerPayoutHigher nnual ostI aqc Fmn l n r roo

InvolvementDoesNot Assit TOM

LessTeamwork

TABLE3,6

HighTraining equired

It MightNot WorkDiff icult djustmentHigher isk



1 0 6 Facilit ies lanning

flow improvescommunicationand simplifiesoperations. t also educes

interdepartmental roblems.Better low andbettercommunicationenhance

teamwork.Material flow also ies o operatingcost.

The team then examined material flow and compared he three

options. With quantitativedata rom the MFA, they quickly achieved

consensus n the ratings. Option 1 receivedan A for material low,

WeightedFactor

Analysis

t'oj""t'fAcitir^/ Re-euaiueeeiu'

\ i t :

lEol

cost't6?eoDucrSAy :

AL ef rzlqt,{ore: cottBliueD acoaEa

to Factor Oplion t1Op l ion 2 Option 13

Optional Oplion 15

F l tl.ATEAJALFLOW g, A 32 I 24 u o

f2 l0tlrluNicA.TioN ) 1 4 o 7 u o

F3 TeAt'twoeK 7 A zt u o u o

F) NEW "?ODUCTE 2 o 2 e 6 e 6

F4 rNiTlrX- 167 3 1 2 e s A 1 2

rs >ieecT o?ee-c61 1 0 E 3o 20 u o

i6 AU/XLiTYs A 3 6 1 g u o

t 7 >€tM€EV l o A 4o o 1 0 u o

Totals 1q4 s4 r (

* Option Descriplion

I CELLUIJAQ

2

3

FUNCTlON/lt

EKST1N64

iltnAF€,)

f.TAYLO?

H,FOAD

Figure3.42- Weighted Foctor Anolysis



The Macro-Space-Plan 1O7

Option 2 received n I, andOption 3, the baseline,eceived U. Theteam repeatedhis processor the other factors.

Deliveryhadsomequantitativebasis.The numberand ength ofmovesfrom the MFA indicated that delivery would improve underOption 3, whereasdeliveryperhapswould seeslight improvementunder Option 2.

Qrality, new products, eamwork,and communicationhad noquantitativeanalysis. evertheless,iscussion nda reviewof the PNIanalysis rought a consensusmong he team members.

They then multiplied each factor weight by each raring andtotaled he score or eachoption.Option 1received 94points,Option2 received94 points, and Option 3 received18 points. From thosescores,he groupconcluded hat Option 1wasbestby alargemargin.

The team could have begun the weighted factor analysis byweighing each actor ndividuallyand rating eachoption. They couldthen average ndcompareheir resultsasabasis or discussion. his isauseful echniquewhen t appearshat ndividualshavewidelydifferingviews. Severalcomputer programsareavailable or this type of multilfactordecisionmaking,but the most mportant results erive rom thediscussions.n most situations, manualcompilation ike that n figure3.42 rs sufficient.

ConclusionThis completeshe discussion f macro-space-planning. any of themethods apply to other levelsof spaceplan design.Material flowanalysis,or example,san mportant tool for Level2,

"SitePlanning."

Weighted factor analysisappliesat all levels.For most facility planning, the macro-space-plans the most

important planning evel. t is wherestrateg.ys definedand the firststeps oward mplementation

1 2 3 - lean manufacturing

Documents