Productivity Improvement Program Through Lean Manufacturing

Presented By: Boston Industrial Consulting, Inc.

Agenda For Lean Manufacturing Program

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Program Objective What is Lean Manufacturing? Pressures Requiring Companies to Become Lean. Typical Approach to Cost Reduction Batch Manufacturing vs. Lean Manufacturing Formula for Successful Lean Manufacturing Implementation Obstacles to Avoid Expected Results of Lean Manufacturing Actual Lean Manufacturing Case Study Roadmap to Success

1. Program Objectives
To understand the differences between Lean Manufacturing Systems and the traditional Batch Manufacturing approach. To understand the key requirements of a successful Lean Implementation Program. To present an actual case study that has been successfully executed by Boston Industrial Consulting; reviewing the goals, approach, problems and the results achieved.

2. What is Lean Manufacturing?

Lean is a Team Based continuous improvement process designed for long term maximization of company resources. Lean is an approach to achieving manufacturing excellence based upon the continued elimination of waste. Waste is defined as activities that do not add value to the product. Lean Manufacturing utilizes techniques and principles that improve efficiencies of value added activities.

2. What is Lean Manufacturing?

Value Added Activities:
Transform raw materials and information into parts or products.

Non Value Added Activities:

Consume resources that do not contribute to the physical change of the product.

What is Lean Manufacturing?

Eliminating Waste Waste in Operations: walking,searching,standby,rework,changeover Waste in Layout: distances traveled,backtracking,crowded conditions, redundant handling Waste in Flow of Goods overproduction, W.I.P., Failure to meet std output per hour person

2. What is Lean Manufacturing?

Eliminating Waste Waste in Equipment Line stops, broken down / antiquated, poor production yields Other Waste poor housekeeping practices, damaged materials,improper tools, not having the right information Lead time reduction is achieved by identifying and eliminating waste.

3. Pressures Requiring Companies To Become Lean

Past Conditions Sellers Market Rapid Expansion High Unit Volume High Quality Delivery & Service Financial Muscle Current Reality Buyers Market Slower Growth & Shrinking Markets Flexibility Higher Quality Quicker Delivery and Better Service Asset Utilization

3. Pressures Requiring Companies To Become Lean

1. High Costs
Labor Material Burden - Overhead

2. Poor Quality
Internal between depts. & processes External rework due to vendors, O.V.S.s

3. Late Delivery
Internal Customers on time to satisfy requirements External Customers- on time to satisfy requirements

4. Typical Approach to Cost Reduction

5%

25%

Material Burden Direct Labor

70%

The primary focus is typically on direct labor to achieve Cost Reduction Benefits.

Typical ApproachTo Cost Reduction

10%

35%

Material Burden Direct Labor

55%

Most manufacturing costs are found in Materials: Raw Materials, Purchased Parts, WIP, & F.G. Inventory

5. Batch Mfg Vs. Lean Mfg

1.0 COST & TIME Traditional Manufacturing (Batch and Queue)
OP 3 OP 2 RM OP 1 WIP WIP FG

Total Cost

Lean Manufacturing (One Piece Flow) (Cellular Manufacturing)

RM

Time
OP 3 OP 2 OP 1

FG

Costs increase the longer product is moved,staged and stored.

Total Cost

Time

Batch Mfg. Vs. Lean Mfg.

Batch Characteristics: Expensive Machinery with high throughput capability. Machine Utilization is usually high; the machine runs whether there is a demand for the part or not Long Setup Times which lead to Large Lot Sizes Push System are prevalent creating excessive W.I.P.

Results:
High Capital investment Overproduction Lack of Flexibility to meet customer demands Long Lead Times Excessive W.I.P. Poor utilization of Floor Space Excessive Rework

Batch Mfg. Vs. Lean Mfg.

Lean Characteristics
Kaizen Quick Step Pull Systems Waste Elimination Tact Time/Line Balancing Point of Use / Kanban Work Cells O.P.F. Error Proofing Source Inspection Visual Factory Flexible Low Cost Automation

Resulting In:
Reduced Costs Reduced inventory Reduced Obsolescence Reduced WIP Reduced Cycle Times Reduced Scrap Improved Quality Increased Productivity Improved Utilization of Space Reduced Lead Times Reduced Material Handling

Why Lean Manufacturing?

In Todays Environment the Market Demands:
Low Costs / Price High Quality Greater Variety of Products Faster Response Times

Why Lean Manufacturing?

Pricing: The New Reality
The Old Model: Cost + Profit = Price
(Fixed) (Fixed) (Derived)

The New Model: Price Profit = Cost

(Fixed) (Fixed) (Derived)

In the past the price was derived by the company. Today the price is fixed by the consumer. The challenge is for the manufacturer to meet that price while maintaining a profit. The only solution is to reduce total costs. But how?

Formula For Success

The BIC approach to implementing a Lean program is executed in (5) Steps:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Define the Goals & Establish a Baseline Choose The Pilot Study and Evaluate Operator Training Full Implementation

Formula For Success

Step1: Define Goals & Establish Baseline
With management define the goals and objectives of the program.
Improve profit margin by 20% Improve lead time to the customer by 50% Improve quality by 30% Reduce inventory by 40% Increase productivity 30% Long Lead times Bottlenecks Excessive inventory Quality issues (internal & external) High Costs (labor materials & overhead)

Identify obvious problems:

Formula For Success

Establish a baseline for future comparison
On time delivery to customer % $$ of inventory on hand, # of turns $$ & Number of Returns for defective product Profit Margin

Benchmark
Compared to other departments in the same facility Compared to other facilities in the same company Compared to other companies in the same industry

Formula For Success

Step 2: Choosing The Pilot
Pick an important product, product family, or customer. Perform a Pareto Analysis:
By Volume (QTY) By Sales Dollars By Scrap By Costs By Customer

Divide and Conquer:

Based on Pareto Analysis choose 1 item for study Pick an Item with high probability of success

Formula For Success

Step 3: Study and Evaluate Pilot
Gather data Observe processes Flow Chart Process Perform engineering studies: capacity analysis, labor analysis, Tact time analysis, methods analysis, handling analysis, space analysis and value engineering analysis Interview Key People and identify Key assumptions Identify Bottleneck in process Identify Waste in process Brainstorm with key personnel Document short and long term improvements Make recommendations Quantify savings and benefits Summarize Capital Costs Perform an R.O.I. Present to management for approval

Formula For Success

Step 4: Training
Expose required personnel to techniques of Lean Manufacturing as contained in this document as view training films developed by professional associations such as AME, SME, and IIE. Review proposed operating procedures, layouts and equipment with personnel. Emphasize the expected savings and benefits.

Formula For Success

Step 5: Implementation
Establish Core Project Team
Review scope and objectives for validation Select team leader Select team facilitator

Specify, Bid and Select Equipment

Develop detailed specs for equipment Source vendors for competitive bid Coordinate site visits with venders Make recommendations

Formula For Success

Step 5: IMPLEMENTATION
Develop Detailed Project Schedule
Establish detailed move sequence Coordinate in-house activities to plan Coordinate vender activities to plan Conduct weekly bi weekly meetings as required

Install Equipment
Interface with venders for proper installation Assure equipment conforms to customer specs Develop punch list for debug

Formula For Success

Run pilot for process debug training of personnel Run production Measure results Sign off and approval

Lean Manufacturing Checklist

Data Integrity:
Inventory accuracy 95% B.O.M. accuracy 99% Routing accuracy standards & process

Education:
All operators trained in Lean Individual operators All functional organizations are represented on Teams

Lean Manufacturing Checklist

Material Flow:
Weekly delivery of 80% of materials delivered to Point of Use Parts are produced only at the quantity required Continuous Flow Manufacturing is prevalent throughout

Quality:
All inspection sequences have been eliminated source inspection practiced whenever possible Q.C. departments are replaced with process audit functions

Lean Manufacturing Checklist

Planning:
Daily Rates and level scheduling established and met on due date MRP system is used for internal planning, customer committing, and vendor schedules and capacity planning Management participates in the planning and replanning process and commits to a realistic capacity level Customer service 100% as committed and production equals demand

Process Changes:
Single digit setups established Where feasible work orders are eliminated or simplified and priorities controlled by Demand Pull All functional organizations are represented on Teams

Lean Manufacturing Checklist

Process Changes
Reduction in the number of active vendors and they are part of the production planning process Simplify Manufacturing Process to;
Provide management by sight Identify and surface problems with immediate resolution

Manufacturing is actively involved in the design of the product for manufacturability

Lean Manufacturing Checklist

Process Changes:
Manufacturing Engineering is located on the production floor and immediately available Manufacturing processes are adhered to and formal change processes are established Manufacturing production lines have been relayed out to provide mixed model runs and minimum material handling Compensation for employees is measured on a team contribution basis

Lean Manufacturing Benchmarks

Areas For Improvement
Reduced Raw Material On Hand Reduced W.I.P. Reduced F.G. Inventory Material Flow Distances & Space Reduction Reduction in Vendor Base Increased Productivity Units/Employee Improved Quality (Scrap & Rework) Reduced Cumulative Lead Times

Goal
30% 80% 40% 50% 50% 20% 50% decrease10x the value added time

Actual Results

Obstacles to Avoid
Trying to do Too Much at One Time:
Walk before you run Divide and conquer Minimize the scope of the program

Starting with a Tough Project:

Choose a project with a high probability for success A tough project can stop momentum in its tracks

Setting Unrealistic Goals:

Benchmark compare to other departments in the same facility Compare to other facilities in the same company Compare to other companies within the same industry

Obstacles to Avoid
Lack of a Detailed Execution Plan:
Provides instruction and direction Helps maintain focus A road map to success

Lack of Leadership or a Champion

A person that is committed to success A person that can motivate A person that can lead A person that can empower others A person that can sustain momentum

Obstacles to Avoid
Employees That Are Not Exposed to Lean:
An informed employee usually contributes An educated employee understands why its happening Cross training is essential

People and Resistance to Change:

Unfreeze explain why change is necessary Educate expose to fundamentals of Lean Empower make part of the decision making process Refreeze strong belief in that Lean is the answer

The End Result

A Dynamic workforce that ; Is Focused on Continuous Improvement Is Biased For Action Puts Creativity Before Capital Is Totally Involved

Case Study #1

Moore North America, Inc.

Moore North America, Inc.

Company Profile:
Location: Sales: Space: Products: Dover, New Hampshire $60M 140,000sf Platens, Forms Handling Equipment, Roll Feed Equipment & Contract Manufacturing Fabrication, Machining,Painting and Electrical / Mechanical Assembly

Processes:

Moore North America, Inc.

Approach:
Define the Goals Establish the Baseline, document current conditions Choose The Pilot Study and Evaluation Operator Training Full Implementation

Moore North America, Inc.

Goals and Objectives of Program:
To develop a Master Plan utilizing Lean Manufacturing techniques and principles which will allow for the consolidation and integration of offsite warehouse activities into the main manufacturing site.

Moore North America, Inc.

Current Conditions - Warehousing:
Process Flows - excessive movement of materials to and from 28,000sf off-site warehouse Poor Vendor quality - 66% of supplier items requires incoming inspection, 100% Inspection of purchased equipment Antiquated material handling equipment Excessive amount of obsolete F.G. inventory ($2M) Excessive amount of inactive spare parts inventory (50%) Poor utilization of cube - selective rack throughout Congestion at the docks - lack of lay down areas

Moore North America, Inc.

Current Conditions - Manufacturing:
Batch Manufacturing all subs go to warehouse before proceeding to next operation in the process Large queue areas to stage W.I.P. Poor Planning assuming in finite capacity Too many priorities everything is hot Lack of capacity at critical work centers creating bottlenecks Antiquated and idle equipment prevalent throughout Direct Labor Personnel performing excessive non-value added activities Long Set up times for critical pieces of equipment

Moore North America, Inc.

Current Conditions - Assembly:
Batch assembly throughout Excessive W.I.P. located on assembly floor Sub assembly operations located great distance from where used. Lack of Material availability and frequent parts shortages. B.O.M.s not accurate Poor Planning - Too much material / too little material on hand

Moore North America, Inc.

Current Conditions - Assembly:
Planning assumes infinite capacity at work centers Lack of in-process Quality Systems - subs assemblies not inspected until Final Assembly Lack of formal assembly documentation assemblers are trained on the fly by other employees Lack of formal training Workforce is getting old at the same time, their expertise will be lost when they retire.

Moore North America, Inc.

Baseline:
On time delivery 88% Raw material inventory on hand - $4M Inventory Turns 4 per year Cumulative lead times 30 days Warehouse Floor Space 28,000 F.G. inventory - $15M

Moore North America, Inc.

Choosing The Pilot:
Perform Pareto Analysis (Areas to Study):
Platens Machine Shop Fabrication Assembly Warehouse

Divide and Conquer:

Prioritize areas for study Develop team profile Establish multi functional project team

Program Overview - Results

Program Overview Goal Platens Machining & Fabrication Reduce set up times by 50%, Reduce lot sizes by 50% Assembly Warehouse Reduce costs by 22% Improve workflow Reduce lead times by 50% Reduce Space by 65% Reduce inc. insp By 50% Reduce vendor base Establish vendor qualification specs Move materials to point of use

Studies & Techniques

One piece flow Line balancing Automation Materials cost reduction analysis

Setup reduction Cellular mfg. Kaizen Blitz

Point of use staging, One piece flow mfg. Establish Tact Times Line Balancing

Results

Floor Space 33% WIP 91% Costs -30% Lead time- 75%

Lot size 30% Set up 30% Floor space 28%

Labor 15% Floor space 35% Lead times 50%

Vendor base 30% Inc. inspection 30% Space 80%

Moore North America, Inc.

Program - Platens:
Goals & Objectives
Moore to reduce Platen costs by 12% the first year and 22% over a two year period or Moore would lose the Platen business to a competitor ($2.5M in sales).

Moore North America, Inc.

BIC Approach Platens:
Observe current process Perform engineering studies and evaluation
Detailed time studies operations identify bottleneck Detailed time studies set ups Man machine charts Process flow charts Waste elimination analysis non-value added elements

Gather and analyze data Develop proposed manufacturing process Develop Layout Quantify savings Present finding to management

4 Platen - Current vs. Cellular Manufacturing Cost Comparison

Savings Summary (PN 15300580)

Current Platen Manufacturing $5.41 Materials Floor Space/OH Rework Totals $19.52 $0.55 $25.48

Proposed $3.84 $18.18 $0.38 $22.40

Delta % $1.57 29% $1.34 7% $0.17 30% $3.08 12%

8,501 sq. ft. 5,803 sq. ft. 2,698 33%

4 Platen Current vs. Proposed Benefits Summary

4 ft Platen (PN 15300580)
Tangible Benefits Reduced floor space Reduced WIP / Batch Size Reduced D.L. Cost Improved manufacturing process time Current 8,501 sq.ft. 200 pieces. $5.41 Proposed 5,803 sq.ft. 5 pieces. $3.84 % 33% 98% 29% 29% 60% 29% 30% 75% 88% 34%

0.1128 pcs./hr. 0.08 pcs./hr. 1 hr. 12.5 8% 7.5 hrs. 350 units 4

Increased flexibility/set-up/lot size reduction 2.5 hrs. Increased productivity Improved quality Reduced cumulative lead-time Reduced inventory Reduced head count 8.9 14% 22 hrs. 3000 units 6

Intangible Benefits Improved utilization of resources Easier to manage-visual control WIP Easier to identify bottlenecks and make adjustments Promotes team work-empowers employees Promotes continuous flow manufacturing-keep product moving Minimize non-value added elements in the process Easier to schedule-level load Improved customer service Easier to quantify desired results-measure for success

Road Runner Current vs. Cellular Manufacturing Cost Comparison

Savings Summary (PN 15301240)

Current Platen Manufacturing $8.30 Materials Floor Space/OH Rework Totals $20.33 $0.55 $29.18

Proposed $5.80 $18.18 $0.38 $25.06

Delta % $2.50 30% $1.46 7% $0.17 30% $4.13 14%

8,501 sq. ft. 5,803 sq. ft. 2,698 32%

Road Runner Platen Current vs. Proposed Benefits Summary

Road Runner (PN 15301240)
Tangible Benefits Reduced floor space Reduced WIP Reduced D.L. Cost Improved manufacturing process time Increased productivity Improved quality Reduced cumulative lead-time Reduced F.G. inventory Reduced head count Current 8,501 sq. ft. 200 pieces. $8.03 Proposed 5,803 sq.ft. 5 pieces. $5.80 2 hrs. 8.3 8% 7.5 hrs. 350 units 5 % 33% 98% 30% 43% 45% 30% 75% 88% 29%

.173 hrs./pc. .120 hrs./pc. 5.8 14% 33 hrs. 3000 units 7

Increased flexibility/set-up/lot size reduction 3.5 hrs.

Intangible Benefits Improved utilization of resources Easier to manage-visual control WIP Easier to identify bottlenecks and make adjustments Promotes team work-empowers employees Promotes continuous flow manufacturing-keeps product moving Minimizes non-value added elements in the process Easier to schedule-level load Improved customer service Easier to quantify desired results-measure for success

Current Platens Layout

8,051s.f.

Proposed Conceptual Platens Layout

5,803s.f.

Platens Capital Summary

Hard Costs:
Automated Platen Wash System T.I.R. / C.O.F. Fixture T.I.R. for 4 Platen Closed Loop Conveyor System Total $ 35K $ 15K $ 02K $ 50K $102K $ 20K $ 20K $ 40K $142K

Soft Costs:
Relocate Equipment/Machinery Build and Relocate Test Room Total Total Costs

Platens - R.O.I.
Current Yearly Requirements: 5,000 units/month
Savings: 4 platens: $3.07 / unit x 20,000 units / year = $61,400 RR Platens: $4.13 / unit x 40,000 units / year = $165,200 Total Savings = $226.6K / year R.O.I. $142K / $226.6K = .63 years

Case Study #2

The Rival Company Division of The Holmes Group, Inc.

The Rival Company

Company Profile:
Location: Sales: Space: Products: Clinton & Sedalia, Missouri $600M 800,000sf Crock Pots, Heaters, Fans, Ice Cream Makers Processes: Stamping, Injection Molding, Machining, Assembly and Distribution. Time Frame: 15 18 months

The Rival Company

Study Objective:
To introduce Lean Manufacturing techniques that would reduce production costs, improve quality and reduce manufacturing lead times leading Rival towards World Class Manufacturing Excellence Reduce inventory levels to allow the opportunity for manufacturing in one location with minimal outside warehouse support areas.

The Rival Company

Current Conditions:
Excessive raw material and W.I.P. inventories Remote manufacturing facilities costs Remote warehousing costs: Critical labor supply Seasonal product lines Congested manufacturing areas Excessive handling and material movement High manufacturing costs High scrap and reject levels Lack of automation and material handling systems Lack of data collection systems

The Rival Company

Approach:
Identify key areas and or products for study
Crock pot assembly process Scrap reduction Inventory reduction Plant consolidation Material cost reduction

Establish teams Perform Kaizen analysis for quick hits

The Rival Company

Approach - Define Team Activity:
Team works to documented implementation plan Teams meet on a weekly basis Team does task, problem and issue analysis Work is done outside team meetings (collaboratively) Team uses good team-working skills
Facilitative Leadership Consensus

Team reports to Management Implementation Team

The Rival Company

Program Overview Goal Crock Pot Assembly Reduce costs 30% Increase productivity 20% 5s Line Balancing Automation Kaizen Blitz Scrap Reduction Reduce by 50% Inventory Reduction Reduce $ by 25% Material $ Reduction Reduce materials costs by 15% Plant Consolidate Reduce operating costs

Techniques Used

Handling Vendor quality specs. Source inspection Y.T.D $750k savings

Inv. Profile Improved Planning Vendor Deliveries 25% reduction $1.4 mm savings

Value Eng. Vendor Partnerships Make vs. Buy

Detailed operations analysis

Results

8 ppl /line $1.6 mm savings

$2 mm savings

$7 mm savings $9 mm costs R.O.I. 1.23

The Rival Company

Program Crock Pot Assembly (10 lines)
Goals & Objectives: Reduce Direct Labor Costs Increase Productivity Reduce Scrap Rate

The Rival Company

Approach Crock Pot Assembly
Observe the Process: Establish Accurate Labor Standards Perform Methods Analysis Integrate Recommended Changes Into the Process Establish the Tact Time Determine Line Staffing Rebalance the Line Identify Benefits and Projected Savings

The Rival Company

Current Conditions
Lines not balanced Assembly standards are tight Line speed too high / frequently stops Assemblers working at 130% Excessive rework Poor work place layouts Lack of good ergonomic techniques and tools Poor location of materials Lack of back up equipment

Recommendations
Use ribbon band heaters-1 Use push in wire connectors-1 Combine wrap & crimp op.-1 Use snap in switch1 Use single piece instructions 1 Automate labeling-1 Establish Engineering Standards-1 Re-balance the line to gating station (combine tasks)-1 Provide ergonomic tools and equipment

The Rival Company

Program Results:
Current Process:
26 assemblers @130% performance level 2,771 crocks/shift 10% scrap rate Net 2,494 crocks/shift

Proposed Process:
18 assemblers @100% performance level 2,502 crocks/shift 3% scrap rate Net 2,472 crock /shift

The Rival Company

Savings Per Assembly Line:
Method People Min / Crock L.B.E. Crocks /person/shift 82

Current

26

5.46

62%

Proposed

18

3.24

77%

139

Delta

2.22

15%

57

Delta $$$

$160,000

The Rival Company

Capital Costs Per Assembly Line:
Conveyor Automatic Label Applicator Ergonomic Handling Equipment Superstructure Computerized Test Equipment Totals $ $ $ $ $ 25K 35K 20K 05K 25K

$115K

The Rival Company

TOTAL PROGRAM R.O.I.

Cost Of Change -------------------------- = Total Savings

$115K x 10 Lines = $1.15MM ---------------------------------------$169K x 10 Lines = $1.69M

R.O.I. = .68 YEARS

Crock Pot Prototype Line

Prototype Crock Pot Assembly Line

Pre-form & Crimp

Position Bottom Cover & Position Eyelet and Nut

Case Study #3

Polaroid Corporation

Polaroid Corporation
Company Profile:
Norton, MA $750M 240,000sf Distribution 60,000sf Packaging Products: Cameras, Film Packs Processes: Shrink, Skin, Cartons, Blister, Special Manual Assembly (Promotions), and Distribution Time Frame: 12-16 weeks Location: Sales: Space:

Polaroid Corporation
Goals And Objectives:
Analyze the existing packaging operation to reduce D.L. costs and improve lead times. Identify methods for process improvements Develop plan for execution and implementation

Polaroid Corporation
Current Conditions
Schedule: Frequent Changes Assumes Infinite Capacity Poor Planning ( Capacity, Man-loading, Due Dates) Responsibility for Execution of Schedule (Who????)

Polaroid Corporation
Current Conditions
Organization: Markson Rosenthal on Site 8 Weeks, Learning Curve Products, Equipment, People, Systems Lack of Formally Trained Supervisors Lack of APICS Certified Planners Supervisors Expediting Not Supervising Contract Work Force, Continuously Training

Polaroid Corporation
Current Conditions
Operating Procedures: Lack of Documentation: Prints, Standards, Assembly Process Sheets Lack of Formal Operating Procedures For:
Materials Delivery, Pickup
Staffing Requirements (Direct, Indirect) Staging Requirements (Where)

Polaroid Corporation
Current Conditions
Process Flow: Processes Are Overstaffed, Poor Utilization of People People Idle for Long Periods of Time Long Set up Times - Excessive Time Spent to Locate Parts and Move Them to Line Excessive WIP on Floor Product Sits in Staging for Long Periods of Time No Go-to Lines to Minimize Downtime

Polaroid Corporation Actual Vs. Proposed Staffing Comparison

PID
100491

DESCRIPTION
4PK BRICK

CURRRENT PROPOSED QTY / MO PROCESS STAFFING STAFFING

678 SHRINK 9 6

COMMENTS
LD BRICK TO MACH - .10 SLEEVE TO 4 PK - .2 LD CLIP STRIP TO SEALER - .15 ASY STRIPS -1.5 DEVELOP TACT TIME - METHODS DEVELOP TACT TIME - METHODS TIME STUDY 6MIN /UNIT DEVELOP TACT TIME -METHODS

627495

15 CT CLIP STRIP

300

SHRINK

20

10

118180 616233 109855 103008

CAM PKT KIT W/JOY KIT WINGS BUSINESS ADDITION CAM KIT POKT CAM / FILM DISPLAY CAM OS BOX W/$12.01 REBATE TOTAL PEOPLE CSTM PK

1,454 5,653 900 39,300

CSTM-PK CSTM-PK CSTM-PK CSTM-PK

19 17 22 18 105

8 8 8 10 50

624250

T600 SGL GBL

128,000

MIDGET 3 MIDGETS ZED THEILE JR

14

10

STAFF TO MACHINE CYCLE TIME - .04MIN LD WHT TO BLUE CTN - .14 STAFF TO MACHINE CYCLE TIME - .34MIN STAFF TO MACHINE CYCLE TIME - .01MIN

118690 624247

T600 3PK -10CT T600 GL GABLE 20 CT TOTAL PEOPLE AUTO PK TOTAL PEOPLE ALL

98,667 475,000

14 13 41 146

9 13 32 82

Lack of Formal Process Documentation

Lack of Go To Lines

Poor Planning & Utilization of Resources

F.G. Sits in Staging for Long Periods of Time

Batch Assembly

Poor Housekeeping Practices 5S

Poor Staffing - Imbalance in Process

Poor Planning Waiting for Parts

Poor Utilization of Resources Batch Assembly

Polaroid Corporation
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Hire an Experienced APICS Certified Planner to Schedule the Operation. Staff and Dedicate Material Handling Personnel to Handle Workload and Move Material. Establish Formal Daily Operating Procedures to Move and Stage Materials - (Who, When, Where, Why, What)

Polaroid Corporation
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staging Options (Inbound) Stage to Designated Central Area, Manifest, and Move to Secondary Staging Area Near Required Process Stage to Designated Area by Material Type, Manifest and Move to Point of Use. Have Dedicated Material Handling Personnel Pull by Order and Deliver Directly to the Point of Use. Take Direction from Steve O.

Polaroid Corporation
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staging Options (Outbound) Stage Materials 3-Deep Along Back Wall As Originally Designed and Staff Appropriately So That Orders Are Processed Immediately Upon Completion Install Pallet Rack in Designated Area for Returns; Keep in Returns Rack According to Plan/Schedule. If Part Remains in Rack for More Than 1-Week, Return to Warehouse.

Polaroid Corporation
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Markson Rosenthal Should be Responsible for Running the Operation; Staffing, Equipment to be Used, Execution of Schedule. Develop Methods (One Piece Flow) and Standards for All Manual Packaging Operations and Develop the Tact Time for Each Job to be Run). Polaroid Should Supply Forecast and any Changes in Schedule with Adequate Notice.

Polaroid Corporation
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Develop a Stable and Well-Trained Workforce Revisit Organizational Structure and Personnel In Both Markson Rosenthal and Polaroid Organizations.
- Ops Manager - Experienced Supervisors - Group Leaders - Certified Planner - Master Scheduler - Facilities Support (Mechanics) - QC for Corrective Action - Human Resources - Data Entry Personnel - Industrial Engineer - Materials Personnel

Polaroid Corporation
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Change Format and Agenda of Morning Meetings Eliminate Reports that are Not Used to Initiate Corrective Action Provide Work Force with Tools and Equipment to Efficiently Perform Their Daily Task Establish Vendor Relationships: more frequent delivery of corrugation Immediately implement Kaizen Blitz to make easy and quick changes that will reduce costs and improve lead times

Polaroid Corporation
What Does Kaizen Mean?
Continuous Improvement Rapid Change With Immediate Results Teamwork - Solving Problems Together Training - What Needs to Be Done? Action - Just Do It! Follow Up - Are the Results What We Expected? Repeating the Cycle Continuously

Polaroid Corporation
Specific Examples of a Kaizen Blitz
Process Flow Analysis - Line Balancing TAKT Time vs. Cycle Time Implementing Visual Control / Visual Factory Techniques Working towards a Production on Demand for Materials Implementing Quick change Tooling & Fixturing Developing Mistake Proofing Devices - Poke Yoke Any Area Where Improvement can be Made!

Polaroid Corporation
How Does the Process Work?
Select the Type of Kaizen Blitz Pull Team Together Training on What the Quick Step will Consist of and How to Do It Establish Kaizen Blitz Goals Perform the Kaizen Blitz - Go Out and Do It Document Before / After Improvements Establish Follow Up Items Presentation to Management of Kaizen Blitz Monitor and Repeat Process as Needed

Polaroid Corporation
Program Results:
Staff automated packaging equipment to machine cycle time One piece flow implemented resulting in:
Reduced labor Increased productivity Improved quality Improved utilization of floor space Improved lead time to the customer

Established Go to Lines reduced setup/downtime Implemented Point of use staging for materials - 50% less downtime Results:
Reduction of 42 people from the current level of 146

One Piece Flow Prototype Line

One Piece Flow Assembly Area

Packaging Area Layout