THE ANNUAL LOGISTICS CONFERENCE 2007: LEAN

THE BLUNDERS AND RESULTS OF A

LEAN IMPLEMENTATION
J. Olu TAIWO
Operations Director, WILFORD UK
Managing Director, WILFORD HUNGARY
The Starting Point
Our involvement

• A global company with few plants in Europe

• Claims to be doing „lean” for 5 years
• Elements were value-stream mapping and
analysis, 5S and standard work
• No achievements

• Review and assessment of 1 site in Germany

2
The Starting Point
Assessment of German plant
Based on customer products
2 value-streams each for both BMW and Caterpillar
• Broken processes  Fire-fighting
• No structure to support improvement initiative
– One-man show (champion / manager)
– Lack of competence building and team-work
– Absence of policy deployment and operating mechanisms
– Only 3 metrics in use
• Top management forced to self-assess plant operations
• Too much equipment failures and defects
• Bad material from a major supplier
Things are falling apart
3
Setting Matters Straight
Organisational alignment

•Functional responsibility
matrix
• High-level metrics (KPIs)
• Channels of deployment
• Connection with P&L
• Responsibilities

• No need for P-Q / P-L analysis

• No need to level-load

... But where do maintenance and

facilty fit in the scheme of things?

4
The Pilot Project
The Caterpillar value-stream analysis
• Fixed demand per day = 94 units T/T = (8 – 0.5)*3600/(94/3) = 862 sec.

• Working time / shift = 8 hours

• Break-time / shift = 0.5 hours !!!

MLT = 0.599 days

VA = 23.3%

5
The Pilot Project
The Caterpillar value-stream analysis
500,00
443 • No bottleneck (constraint) in
450,00
operations @ current load
400,00
Available capacity / shift

• Operations 10 and 20 may

350,00
quickly become such, if enough
300,00 attention not paid.

223
250,00
200,00

157

148
124
150,00
84

81

77
100,00

76

75

73
70

65

50

44

45
41

41

50,00
0,00

More than required capacity for current load.

21%+ allowance for more capacity, defects handling and maintenance.

6
 The Pilot Project
The Caterpillar value-stream analysis

1000
900
T/T and manual C/T (sec)

800 750 734

700 610 602 Manual C/T (sec)
537 Takt time (sec)
600
480
500
400 355 338
300 250 250 215 220 218
200 172 182
200 121
61
100
0

O 15

30

40
7

0
00

10

P1 1
/2
/
P0

P1

P3

P4

P5

P6

P8

P9
P2

P4

P7

20

20
P1

P1

P1

P1
P1
O

P1
O

O
O
Though every cycle within takt, there is no balance.
Manual cycle times reduction also required.
7
The Pilot Project
The Caterpillar value-stream analysis

• Too much operator movement Stoppages and

• Various options to do operations adjustments
Material 7%
• Machine to utilise not marked-
unavailability
out
30%
Machine
breakdow ns
63%

• Too much machine breakdown

• Specialised team doing all
maintenance activities
• High % of rejects, defects and
rework (21% of availability)

A loss of about €826K altogether per year

8
 Future State for Pilot Project
LOGISTICS

8 Suppliers for
13 parts Monthly sch’dl
Weekly sch’dl PERKINS

Dem=day=105 pcs
3 shifts
8 hrs / shift

o p Pressure test 30 mn brk/ shift

Daily
l o
i er
Monthly
Material handling (pace-maker) loop
l
pp and quality
GEMBA data
Su management Daily shipping sch’dl
Daily?

B & C classes Daily prod sch’dl

SHIPPING

Machining Flow, balance

A class
loop
Maintenance and layout
issues
OP 130
PRESS. TEST PACKAGING
PART ID. B. CAPS ASSY

I . . . . . .
4 pcs
Quality Handling of
Max: 3 days
problems non-conformities
Min: 2 days Max: 3 days
Min: 1,5 days
9
 Future State for Pilot Project
• Demand per day = 105 units
T/T = (8 – 0,5)*3600/(105/3) = 771,5 sec.
• Working time / shift = 8 hours
• Break-time / shift = 0,5 hours !!!
7
# of fixtures (stations)
6

Actual fixture requirement / shift @

5
future load of 35 w ith 5% defect rate • 18 CNCs total
and reliability of 87,5%
3,81
4 3,54 Approximate fixture requirement / • 13 required for
3,08
3
2,94 shift @ future load of 35 w ith 5%
defect rate and reliability of 87,5% future load
2
2,02 2,02
1,65 1,61
• 5 available for
1,13 new projects
1

0
10

40
7

00

15

30
/1

/2
P0

P1

P3

P4

P5

P8
P2

P4

P6

P7

P9

20

20
P1

P1
P1

P1

P1
O

P1

P1
O

O
O

€1.2M worth of machine over-capacity

10
 Actions and Results
• Manual C/T balance (operators load
balanced)
• Machine C/T balance in progress ...
• Operating mechanisms adhered to
• Direct efficiency improving ever
since

• 5S activities incorporated into first 12 150,0%

generation TPM 9
120,0%

• 5S scoring system re-calibrated 90,0%

• Maintenance activities split for 60,0%

operators (cleaning, inspection, 3

30,0%

lubricating and tightening) 0 0,0%

Wk03 Wk04 Wk05Wk06 Wk07 Wk08Wk09 Wk10 Wk11 Wk12Wk13 Wk14 Wk15Wk16 Wk17 Wk18Wk19 Wk20 Wk21

Actual Dir Labour Effy (%) Actual Nr of Operators

Impr Target Dir Labour Effy (%) Linear (Actual Dir Labour Effy (%))

In 3 months a saving of €317K realised

+ 3 machines removed from line 11
 Roll-out Schedule
Improvement in Phases … • Trainings for GMs, operations
Phase I : Competence, Leadership,
Policy deployment, Value Stream
managers and HR in the first phase
mapping, 5S, Heijunka
• Communication schedule
• Proper explanation to the
Phase II : Phase III :
workforce
Standard work, Constraint Jidoka, Pull & Kanban,
elevation, Six sigma / Zero and TPM
Defect

Progress ... Over Time

• CI leaders training in facilitation 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

skills, tools, techniques and 2008- I

methodologies
2008- II
• Certification projects realising at
least €400K on annual basis 2009

• Engagement and performance on a 2010

continuous basis
Phase I Phase II Phase III

12
 Thank you

www.wilfordconsulting.com