Creating a Lean Culture: Tools to Sustain Lean Conversions, Second Edition by David Mann

Author:David Mann [Mann, David]
Language: eng
Format: mobi
Publisher: Productivity Press
Published: 2013-03-03T14:00:00+00:00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

1 2 3 4 5

ve?

.

't ha

orm

ake the project a success?

lan f

ent

il m

e

ch regarding cause?

es

at ap, and/or text here.

un

m

atem

H

ctiv hat w

Obje

rrent St

't want? What do we want but don

plish? W

Cu

Problem St

roject p

ve but don

-3 p

ying to accom

a

Impact on the business?

Insert picture, value stream

What do we ha

.1a

What are we tr

ct Plan:__________________________________________

pdated __/__/__

A3 Proje

U

figure 9

174  ◾  Creating a Lean Culture

figure 9.1b a-3 project plans of a project plan board. rows one through three on this project board are for each value stream in this plant. row four is for plant projects .

active projects are in columns one and two, on-deck projects and kaizen plans in column three. Plans are reviewed weekly. Weekly milestone due dates are noted in gray. Milestones are coded green when completed, red until completed. a note in the blank spot, upper right, says two on-deck kaizen plans required.

CASE STuDY: WORkInG WITHOuT A

RESPOnSE SYSTEM (nuMBER 1)

The first case occurred, not coincidentally, in the plant where the

supervisor “stored” the production-tracking forms on the floor under

his desk. The lean conversion involved switching from a build-com-

plete process at a number of stand-alone two-person workbenches to

a single progressive build assembly line. In the bench-build process,

a number of subassemblies were produced in batches upstream from

assembly, picked into kits based on a schedule, and pushed up to the

benches. The progressive build line incorporated a number of these

subassembly areas in an integrated takt-paced flow production process.

Signals went out to subassembly production from the single schedule

point in the flow process.

It was extremely rare for production to stop in the bench-build

scenario. There was always the option of working ahead based on

the schedule. And, if one bench experienced problems, it was likely

Solving Problems and Improving Processes—Rapidly  ◾  175

the others could keep on producing while the problem load was

pushed aside and the next one brought in. In the flow process, when

there was an interruption, 13 people stood around waiting for the

problem to be identified and fixed. Two temperamental pieces of

automated equipment were built into the flow process. They failed

repeatedly. Worse, the failures were intermittent.

To the credit of the project team designing the new flow process, they

recognized the need to establish a quick response process and told the

support groups they would need their support in a different and more

timely way than in the past. Maintenance, engineering, and materials

management agreed, and for the first several weeks when the “911” calls

went out, the response was timely. A host of flow interruptions quickly

emerged as the new process began operation. There were frequent mate-

rial shortages outright, and material supply errors resulting in mix-ups in the sequence of parts to the various stations on the progressive assembly

line. There were problems with alignment of parts in assembly that used

to be muscled through at the benches. Now, these problems caused

repeated disruptions in flow at the 36-second takt time. The automated

equipment also failed intermittently, causing further interruptions.

It was a pretty typical startup for a lean conversion. The system

was doing what it was supposed to do, exposing flow interruptions.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.