NAEM 2007

Saving Millions Integrating Lean, Ergonomics and Six Sigma (LESS)TM at Boston Scientific
Leonard Sarapas, PE, PH Corporate Director EH&S Scott Smith, CPE, Six Sigma Green Belt Global Ergonomics Practice Leader, EORM

Presentation Topics

Who is Boston Scientific? Strategy of integrating Lean, Ergonomics and Six Sigma (LESSTM) tools into BSCs program Tools and methods used to deploy LESS Results & lessons learned

2007 EORM, Inc..

Who is BSC?

BSC is one of the worlds largest medical device manufacturing companies 29,000+ employees Annual sales of $8 billion/year 22 manufacturing plants located in the USA, Ireland and Costa Rica

2007 EORM, Inc..

In the Beginning - 2004

Ergonomic injuries were the root cause of over 60% of BSCs workplace injuries Ergonomic injuries were costing us over $3 MM in 2004 Disrupt work flow and restricted work activities (Walking Wounded) Organizations goal was to be world-class in all aspects of manufacturing including EH&S

2007 EORM, Inc..

In the Beginning - 2004

BSC was seeking help with reducing injuries within a fairly decentralized company Ergonomics maturity across facilities was not consistent Lean manufacturing was the dominate operational improvement program with some grass roots Six Sigma in development

2007 EORM, Inc..

In the Beginning - 2004

Our goal was to address ergonomic issues without developing a formal ergonomics program We partnered with EORM because of their experience related to large corporate deployments as well as their experience with Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma Together we developed a comprehensive approach to deploying ergonomics that leveraged the Lean and Six Sigma

2007 EORM, Inc..

Strategies for Integration

Uses a combined Lean/Ergo/Six Sigma and floor support approach Not a new or additional program; augments and expands existing skill sets Supports lean core metrics and goals Assessment tools are quick, effective and quantitative Focuses on both ergonomic risk and improving the companys bottom line

2007 EORM, Inc..

BSC Operations Excellence

SQP 9 Panel Core 5 Work Content 40-20-25-50 Waste Elimination

2007 EORM, Inc..

BSCs Strategy for Integration

Step 1
Strategic pilot study to build a strong value statement and buy-in from upper management and Lean Council.

Step 2
Train and create Lean/Ergo Subject Experts

Step 3
Deploy 3 to 5-day Lean/Ergo kaizen events

Step 4
Leverage ergonomics impact to integrate into kaizen and create long-term sustainability

2007 EORM, Inc..

BSCs Tools for Integration

Lean Tools Six Sigma Tools Ergonomic Tools

2007 EORM, Inc..

10

Lean Tool Kit

Cell and workstation Value Stream Maps TAKT Time vs. Cycle Time charts Team Brainstorming/Prioritizing Kaizen Process 3P (Lean/Ergo Events) 8 Wastes
VA & NVA Waste of Motion

5S

Sort, Simplify, Sweep, Standardize, Self-discipline

Heijunka Load leveling Root cause analysis (5Ms and 1P) Poka Yoke Error Proofing WIP Management Multi-process, Multi-machine

2007 EORM, Inc..

11

300-Foot VSM View

Current State
vs

Future State

2007 EORM, Inc..

12

30-Inch VSM View

Current State

VS

Future State

2007 EORM, Inc..

13

TAKT vs. Cycle Time Charts

2007 EORM, Inc..

14

Team Brainstorm vs Lean Metrics

2007 EORM, Inc..

15

Six Sigma Tool Kit

Statistics
Comparison of risk vs cycle time reduction Regression Fitted line plots to look at relationship
between ergonomic risk reduction and cycle time reduction.

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)

Box Plots
Cycle time variation analysis Use in the analysis and improve phase

2007 EORM, Inc..

16

Fitted Line Plots/Box Plots

Fitted Line Plot
Cycle Time Reduction = 14.70 + 0.4234 Risk Reduciton 80
Regression 95% CI 95% PI S R-Sq R-Sq(adj) 12.1263 21.8% 18.1%

Boxplot of Differences
(with Ho and 95% t-confidence interval for the mean)

Cycle Time Reduction

60

40

20
Ho

_ X

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Risk Reduciton 70 80 90 -30 -20 -10 0 10 Differences 20 30 40

Sample Cycle Time Plot with Variation

40

30 Data

Takt Time

20

10

0
Pick Load Align Flux Set C lose C y cle Open Remov e Unload Pass Re-align

2007 EORM, Inc..

17

Ergonomic Tool Kit

Risk Assessments
Rapid screening tools (STARTTM) Comprehensive measurement (STEERTM) 3D Human CAD modeling

Cycle Time Measurement

Quick measurement tool (PASSTM) Comprehensive (MOSTTM)

2007 EORM, Inc..

18

Lean/Ergonomic Tool Kit

START High Level Screening Tool STEER Comprehensive Analysis

2007 EORM, Inc..

19

Lean/Ergonomic Tool Kit

3D Human CAD Modeling

2007 EORM, Inc..

20

Productivity Assessment Simplification Sequence

2007 EORM, Inc..

21

How Does it Fit Together?

Look to the 8 Wastes

Waste of Motion, Over Production, Transporting, Storage

Theory of Constraint Management

Point of Motion Constraints

Bottom line
High ergonomic risk = waste and more time to complete the same task as compared to the same task with reduced barriers

2007 EORM, Inc..

Key: Look at Internal vs External Productivity

22

Sample Results Packing

Before

After

2007 EORM, Inc..

23

Results Predicting Risk (STEER)

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 LH RH LE RE LS RS Before N B L E

After

2007 EORM, Inc..

24

Results Predicting Cycle Time Improvements

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Cycle Time
25

45.78 37.92

Current Actual

15% Reduction in Current Cycle Time

2007 EORM, Inc..

Musculoskeletal Progression

MSD Pain

Reactive Approach Proactive Approach

Discomfort Difficulty Ergonomic Risk Human Limitations

2007 EORM, Inc..

26

Six Sigma View of Musculoskeletal Progression

Defect

A nonfulfillment of an intended requirement or reasonable expectation for use, including safety considerations Class 1 Critical Leads directly to severe injury or catastrophic economic loss Class 2 Serious, leads directly to significant injury or significant economic loss Class 3 Major, major problems with respect to intended normal use Class 4 Minor, minor problems with respect to normal used

Classifications:

Source - The Certified Six Sigma Black Belt Handbook, ASQ Quality Press, 2005

2007 EORM, Inc..

27

Six Sigma View of Musculoskeletal Progression

Defective
An entire unit that fails to meet acceptance criteria (low risk) regardless of the number of defects within a unit

Source - Quality International Six Sigma Black Belt Training, 2005

2007 EORM, Inc..

28

Six Sigma View of MSD Progression

Critical Defect
MSD Pain Discomfort Difficulty

Serious Defect

Proactive Approach

Ergonomic Risk Human Limitations

Minor Defect

Q: How do I get here?

2007 EORM, Inc.. 29

Results Predicting Risk (STEER)

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 LH RH LE RE LS RS Before N B L E

Defects

UCL

After

2007 EORM, Inc..

30

Born Lean Philosophy

Human performance is shaped by the design of:

Tools Parts Workstation layout Process flow

Injuries are just results of poor performance and can be minimized early on Retrofitting is a waste of time and ultimately needs to be minimized

2007 EORM, Inc..

31

Clean Sheet Design

Semi-Pack Workstation Current Design

2007 EORM, Inc..

32

Clean Sheet Design

Current vs. Proposed Changes

High risk potential (defects) was identified very early in the design phase

2007 EORM, Inc..

33

New Paradigm Shift for Ergonomics Related to Lean & Six Sigma
Critical
WM SD

Lagging

Pain Discomfort Difficulty Ergonomic Risk Human Limitations Leading

Minor

2007 EORM, Inc..

34

Summary of Results

Over a two year period, more than 90 high risk operations have been reviewed following the DMAIC process Implemented improvements have generated approximately $6 Million in improved manufacturing Ergonomic improvements have impacted all aspects of lean metrics (scrap reduction, cycle time, efficiency and space)

2007 EORM, Inc..

35

Lessons Learned

For ergonomics to be credible, one must be able to accurately define and measure ergonomic risks and project impact Use the metrics of the organization to your advantage Eliminating waste will reduce risk and reduce time to complete tasks

2007 EORM, Inc..

36

Questions?

2007 EORM, Inc..

37