CASE 3 REPORT

(PRODUCTION & OPERATIONS

MANAGMENT)

Process Control at Polaroid (A)

SUBMITTED TO

DR. RAJESH MATAI

SUBMITTED BY: GROUP 6

ARAVIND. R 2019H1490822P

MEGHA GANDHI 2019H1490834P

NANDIGAM SANDEEP KUMAR 2019H1490854P

RADHIKA GUPTA 2019H1490844P

TATHAGATA. B 2019H1490833P

Department of Management

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Polaroid had led the instant photography market, it offered two basic types of instant films:
Peel-Apart and Integral. Both film types used similar technologies: opening the camera's
shutter produced an image on a film negative; then, as the film was removed from the
camera, a chemical reagent was activated which developed the image onto the photographic
paper.
The Waltham, Massachusetts, site, which produced most of integral film consisted of four
main building i.e.:
 R1 manufactured peel-apart films.
 R2 manufactured integral films.
 R3 contained administrative offices.
 R4 produced batteries that were assembled into integral film packs.
The quality control processes at R2 assembly plant of Polaroid traditionally based on
destructive sampling. This main drawback of this sampling process is that it destroys a
perfectly good product and created scrap and also it was considered to be inefficient. With
Project Greenlight, Statistical Process Control (SPC) was brought in. However, the defects
detected by the quality auditors rose to a high level (as much as ten times), while defects
reported in production processes fell to half.
For Bud Rolfs, the manager heading the SPC, the perception of SPC is an area of concern.
The external customer would need convincing that there was not a quality problem. At the
same time, he has to install confidence in the management that his project didn’t sacrifice
quality. Also, he has to convince the staff that quality comes from controlled and capable
processes and not from ‘tweaking’ the machines and if possible, to develop more systematic
and automated methods for collecting operator data in the near future.

INTRODUCTION

Quality control of film cartridges on R2 was a routine process, but the QC department found
that there are some discrepancies between the defect rate of QC auditors and the Operators.
Defects were being passed through the entire manufacturing process unnoticed. While pre-
existing measurements at quality control showed low overall defect rates, there were
complications in the process and interference from operators that affected QC numbers.
Project Greenlight was initially necessary to allow for accurate measurement of processes and
quality control during the process as opposed to the end of the process.

Once implemented, Greenlight would serve to measure and identify manufacturing process
steps that were not in control and might produce defects. While necessary to provide a clear
understanding of quality control through each step of the manufacturing process, upper
management seemed less interested in Greenlight’s success as a source of continual
improvement and more in its ability to cut personnel from the quality control side.
Factors contributing to decrease in quality of product are numerous. R2 does not inspect for
the types of defects that consumers notice. Rather, it inspects for more technical, hidden
defects. Operators do not follow the guidelines for interpreting control charts as most of the
defects are sighted by Quality Control at the end of the process. Some problems that
operators did not regard as important are not reported and result in rejection by quality
control at the end of the process. Operators tweak the machines when products do not meet
the process control limit resulting in greater inconsistency within the process.