application of lean techniques in a discrete manufacturing environment

7/30/2019 Application of Lean Techniques in a Discrete Manufacturing Environment

1/4


2/4

CONTROL NOVEMBER 200224

Figure 3

Current State

Figure 4

Future State


3/4

CONTROL NOVEMBER 2002 25

A FOUR-PHASE CHANGE MANAGEMENT PLAN

Phase 1: Previous to the value stream analysis exercise andfollowing a management shake up, a team building and peopleskills programme had been rolled out to change organisationalbehaviours and devolve some responsibilities to theshop floor.

Phase 2: Following diagnosis and value stream analysis, amethodology was developed to move away from a pushproduction control system to a simple drum buffer rope

system between winding and lid weld. The idea here was to setthe pace of the whole plant based on customer demand (ordrum beat) and apply that pace at lid weld. Lid weld waschosen as the fictitious bottleneck because several operationssynchronise at this operation. The rope is the schedule atwinding which is the true plant bottleneck. Further a materialscontrol system was developed to prevent stock outs andmaintain production continuity. This has been described in anearlier article Application of Finite Capacity Techniques inan ERP Environment

Additionally, maintaining the FIFO sequence of theschedule through the whole plant a system of colourcoding was developed in the workshops (Phase 3) describedlater.

Phase 3: Following value stream analysis, a future state mapwas developed, Figure 4, and subsequently a programmeof interactive workshops was planned to facilitate thetransition from push to flow with the correspondingincrease of the overall process efficiency rather than workcentre efficiency and the effect being to reduce lead-time to 10days (theoretically 4.3 days possible), reduce cost (4% perunit) and improve delivery reliability (OTIF to >80%). SeeFigure 5.

The continuous improvements techniques of 5S, SMED, OEE,7 Wastes and root cause analysis were appropriately plannedinto a series of Kaizen workshops for each area.

Phase 4: Process Re-engineering of the information flow fromrequest for quote to raising production order. This will bedescribed in a future article.

GAINING COMMITMENT

The next step on the programme was to sell the concept and theideas to management, for without their commitment to theproject; there would be little point proceeding. This was

achieved by giving a short presentation to the senior manage-ment team outlining the issues, a short description of the leantechniques to be used to tackle the issues and a cost benefitanalysis. The cost benefit analysis assumed a full order book,which was forecasted by the sales team. Further by opening upthe bottleneck machines, by reducing set up time and workingbreaks, it was calculated that the factory could handle another14% output without adding costs, excepting the additionalvariable material costs. This equated to a cost saving of 4% perunit on average. In return a small budget was requested forKaizen workshop consumables such as tool boards, paint,

some services and machine moves.

Once management were engaged, the next step was to outlinethe programme to the shop floor team leaders, including thelocal Union Rep. This was done by holding a 11/2 dayseminar, which explained in a two-way dialogue the concept ofJIT manufacturing and the steps involved in achieving JIT inthe workplace namely workplace organisation (5S), flow, linebalancing, bottleneck concepts and set-up reduction. Thisevent concluded with the team leaders drawing up a relay outplan for the capacitor line, and an agreement that they wouldsupport the programme.

Following that step, a short presentation was given to thewhole workforce and staff explaining that the programme of

change was being implemented, the benefits to them and thecompany and the likely impact of the changes on workingpractice.

WORKSHOP EVENTS

A workshop is a pre-planned change event, involving a team ofpeople directly involved in the day-to-day operation of thearea, the team leader and a facilitator. The event usuallylasting between 1 and 5 days dependant upon the scale of thechanges planned. The objectives will be very carefully thoughtout in advance and will be specific, measurable and timed, forexample - identify and created specific locations for all toolsand parts or reduce floor area by 25%. Careful consideration

of the objectives will ensure the workshop maintains its focusduring execution and is not distracted by other issues. All thepreparation to achieve these objectives is then worked outfrom anticipating what the team may want to do to achievethese objectives. For example availability of work servicessupport, purchase of suitable storage bins and shelving. Oncethis has been agreed a briefing will be held explaining to theparticipants the need for change, the objectives, the tools andtechniques, our expectations of them and some idea of thelikely outcomes. This is important for two reasons, firstly ithelps remove some of the anxiety from the change, andsecondly gives people the chance to have their say or addressany concerns about the process before it happens. Both actionscontribute to the probability of ensuing sustainability of theworkshop. In any case the changes are executed during the

workshop event.

EXECUTING THE PLAN

The first workshop to be delivered was workplace organisation(5S) in test. There were three reasons for this. Firstly it is ahigh profile area frequently visited by customers, secondly the4 operators are well educated and likely to be willing disciplesof the change process, and thirdly the improvements andpositive benefits made during the workshop would be visiblyobvious to the whole workforce as test is a natural focal pointof the workforce.

Thereafter each workshop was executed in the same way to theagreed plan, Figure 5. The basic steps to run a workshop are

Detailed assessment of the area

Preparation plan including

Likely materials to be needed

Book meeting rooms

16/9/02ContinuousImprovement

Cross training program

12/8/02

15/7/02

10/6/02

13/5/02

15/4/02

11/3/02

14/1/02

Jan 2002 Shutdown 2002

TestSMED

Relay out for flowSolder Room

Cell design and layout,Wind - Solder

SMED Winding

5S and Visual Production controlImpregnation

Fabrication 5S

Paint & Finish 5Sand layout

Test 5S/Mudahunt

Figure 5

Workshop Programme. Series of Week Long InteractiveWorkshops, which make Step Changes to the Process


4/4

CONTROL NOVEMBER 200226

Plan how to minimise impact on production continuity

Advise team of event

Brief team

Other appropriate preparations

Request Senior Managers & Team Leaders attend wrapup session.

Run workshop (Generally 5 days)

15% Learning slides, eg 5S, SMED etc as appropriate

80% Making the changes

5% Preparation, delivering wrap up presentation,questions

Action plan to deal with unexpected improvementactions or action that are outside of remit of workshop.

RESULTS

Metric Before After Change

Lead-time >20 days 13 days -35%

WIP >1000 250

Changeover time32min 13min 59%

(on bottleneck)

Adherence to daily plan No plan >75% 75%

Production control None Visual

Core skills 86 109 37%

Area released 0 126m2 126m2

No employees involved incontinuous improvement

50 400%

Process efficiency 16.0% 30.7% 91.8%

On Time Delivery 80%

Unplanned cost savings as0 0.15% +0.15%

% revenue

Bottleneck output (theoretical) +14%Cost of implementation N/a 6,000 6,000, 1 off

The planned cost per unit reduction of 4% was unfortunatelynot realised because the previously planned sales forecast wasnot enough to drive the additional output from the bottleneckmachines.

DISCUSSION

Several learning points were made during this campaign.Firstly be very clear about the validity of sales forecasts, theold adage applies, the only thing you can be sure of about a

forecast is that it will change. As seen in the section above, ifincreasing output is the basis of reducing cost then be sure thatthis is going to happen. Fortunately in this case study, thebenefits of the programme had other key competitive benefitsand so the programme was successful. Secondly, it is veryimportant to pitch the pace and level of understanding to thelevel of development of the workforce. It is better to go a littleon the slow side, not to seek perfection, than to try and achievetoo much in one event. What you will loose in progress youwill gain many times over in sustainability and buy in. Thirdly,let people make mistakes, allow them to experiment, butalso give them the time to get it right next time. Fourthly givepeople an idea of what to expect, they wont be able to see theend point in their minds eye, the more you can help them seethis during the briefing the easier it will be for them to see itduring the workshop.

This programme of change is now in its eighteenth month fromconception. Although the planned workshop events have beencompleted, the journey of continuous improvement has juststarted. It has become clear to everyone, the greatest challenge

they face is solving the problem of 4% failures at test and there-work loop caused by leaking welds.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of simple low cost improvementtechniques has been able to significantly improveperformance. Additionally the use of interactive workshopswhere participants are encouraged to take action and learn bydoing has demonstrated sustainability and developed an

interest in the workforce to maintain the momentum ofcontinuous improvement activities.

GLOSSARY

5S, Kaizen technique for achieving and maintaining anorganised workplace

OEE, Overall Equipment Effectiveness, Kaizen technique ofmeasuring the actual good output versus the total timeavailable

SMED, Single Minute Exchange of Die, Kaizen technique forreducing changeover time

Line balancing, matching labour to the rate of customerdemand, often involving multi-machine working

7 Wastes, categorisation of non-value added activities

Drum buffer rope, scheduling methodology which attempts tooptimise the whole manufacturing system by balancing theflow through a manufacturing system rather than the traditionalapproach of optimising each individual workstation to balancetheir various capacities. The outcome is resources onlyproduce what is needed when it is needed, rather than creatingunnecessary work in progress.

REFERENCES

1. Goldratt & Cox, The Race, North River Press, 1986.

2. Goldratt & Cox, The Goal, North River Press, 1984.

3. Shigeo Shingo, A Revolution in Manufacturing: TheSMED System, Productivity Press, 1983.

4. Hiroyuki Hirano, JIT Factory Revolution ProductivityPress, 1987.

5. Rother & Shook, Learning to See The Lean EnterpriseInstitute, 1999.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Many thanks, firstly, to the entire workforce at ABB PTPfor giving new ideas a chance; in particular Phil Kerfootand Joy Bulcock who have supported the programme withdetermination and enthusiasm. Secondly, thanks to myteachers John Darlington, Edward Clements and Phil Vaughn.

About the author

Carl Tomlinson, MIOM, CIPS, AIMechE is Supply Managerat ABB Ltd in Ellesmere Port. He has held SupplyManagement Planning and Inventory roles and has beenan active practitioner of lean techniques within leadingcompanies. Carl started his career in 1985, at the then LucasDiesel System implementing JIT and went on to train in FiniteCapacity Planning using OPT before taking management rolesat JCB Transmissions and Garrett Turbochargers.

application of lean techniques in a discrete manufacturing environment

Documents