1

Implementation of Lean Six Sigma Framework in an MRO Facility

Individual Assignment

Prepared By

Aisha AlThabahi 1078218

Submitted to

Dr. Kamran Chatha

Date of Submission

25 September 2021
 2

Implementation of Lean Six Sigma Framework in an MRO Facility

Briefly describe the problem faced by the company and why did they use LSS to solve the
problem?

MRO stands for Maintenance Repair and Overhaul of an aerospace engine facility, The
Company has a global chain supply network which is comprised of over 60 separate retailers. Inside
one precise engine specifications, 17 repair facilities and 12 diverse supplier accounts are developed
to safeguard engine reconstruction needs. Well, The MRO facility has experienced tremendous
disruptions in its operational build cycles because of poor internal operations causing late requests for
elements from its supply chains to meet the up-to-date engine construction needs. Additionally, there
is a bigger proportion of non-value-added activities conducted at the facility to make changes to late
component requests that exist within the MRO cycles. It is because any approach error that interrupts
the operational stabilities of both the facility's shop floors and its supply chains structures has an
adverse outcome on its Order to Receipt (OTR) times. Precisely, the specific cause of the late element
requests has contemporarily been put down to the issues linked with the corporation's commodity mix
where one engine type is slowly being phased out of operations (JET A). Therefore, this reveals a
reduction in service volumes while other engine types rapidly elevate their ways of service volume
demands (JET B). For this reason, the MRO workforce is experiencing a quick reconfiguration of
their supply chains and operational structures because of the increasing reduction of the engine
service volume of JET A and the swift surge of engine service volumes of JET B.

The corporation decided to use the LSS to solve their JET A and JET B engine problems
because Lean Six Sigma frameworks are aimed at achieving sustainable customer satisfaction via
their continual aims on customer needs. The Lean Six Sigma Framework was implemented in the
corporation as; Maintenance Repair and Overhaul (MRO) facility. Its identity has been safeguarded
and offered a pseudonym AMRO limited due to the request of the company. By emphasizing
customer needs and the challenges that alter customer satisfaction, Six Sigma eradicates possible
performance issues before they happen by concentrating on process variables that are Crucial to
Quality (CTQ). Moreover, the Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control (DMAIC) cycles
inherit within Six Sigma by describing the crucial logic of the data-centered approach improvement
process. Theoretically, the completion of each DMAIC cycle will allow the project goals to be
realized, enhance the performances, and sustain quality for corporations such as MRO facilities.

Thereby, the MRO facility implemented the LSS framework to expand the JET B serving
volumes by streamlining it while making sure that the qualities of their operations were maintained at
higher standards In addition, other than rearranging their supply chains, suppliers, and internal
operations, the corporation has needed to board on an activity to cross-train their engineering
workforces to ensure that workers can service JETB engines while also making sure that JET A
legacies engines are considered too.

Critically review the application of LSS methodology and reflect on why did they use specific
LSS tools and techniques while applying different stages of LSS methodology?

In the establishment of an integrated Lean Six Sigma framework in the MRO facility, the
primary aim is guaranteeing the synchronized implementation of both the Lean and Six Sigma cycles
with the focus that the corporation instantaneously handles both the 'wastes reduction' aspect and the
Critical to Quality aspect . The connectivity between Lean and Six Sigma is linear in its approach.
Six Sigma is the first one to be applied after the process variation has been lessened via the
Six Sigma phase, followed by implementing Lean Principles and tools. Table one below shows the
final matrix comprised of numerous elements for every phase in the LSS implementation. Changes to
the framework made encompassed reconstructing the LSS framework to modify the points at which
numerous tools are used while adding Stage (0) to prepare the corporation for undertaking the LSS
implementations. Also, figure 1 shows a generic form of the LSS structure, LSSF, which was
 3

implemented in this research. It points out how each of the Six Sigma DMAIC phases are adopted
simultaneously to each Lean cycle. For instance, the matrix in table 2 shows that the output of the
Define phase of Lean Stage one feeds into the input at the Measure stage in the Lean Stage one.
Therefore, this continues with the output in the measure phase by feeding to the Analyze phase until it
forms a series of interconnected activities in the Lean Stage one. Further, at the end of the Stage, the
outputs of the Control phase feeds to the Define phase of the next Lean Stage. In this case, the Control
Stage Output offered the team a plan to point out and handle the 'missed inspections' in the
corporation.

Consequently, Stage (0) of the LSS framework was the first point in the implementation
stage, and it was comprised of numerous series of awareness-raising sessions whereby the
implementation approach was summarized. All staff offered a chance to contribute to the process
while preparing themselves for the LSS implementations. The core values of the staff, their
educational levels, and defining visions for changes were pointed out as major tools in establishing
high-performing LSS projects (Hill et al., 2019). Also, the early-stage work in pointing the typical
tools and techniques to be deployed was also done at Stage (0).
In the LSS Phase one, that is specifying values by defining the CTQ issues followed. A
workshop was developed where executives, engineers, and key customers in the company were
focused on identifying the Critical to Quality (CTQ) issues that the company was currently going
through. Systemic evaluations of each CTQ allowed the corporation to point out that the 62-day OTR
of the company was not being met, and it was due to variations in Stage one, that is, material ordering.
To minimize late component requests in Stage one, the project team had to ensure that no late calls
were to be received after 10 days. Additionally, this was dependent upon ensuring that work
conducted at Stage 0 was cautiously done and all documentation cautiously processed and inputted
during that Stage. In LSS phase two, the LSS team aimed to align the Internal Value Streams to point
out the full impacts of Stage one late calls (Hill et al., 2018). In this situation, the LSS staff deployed
multiple observational activities, and VSM exercised to offer a comprehensive understanding of
different aspects in the MRO production cycles. As a result, the VSM exercises carried out in this
stage cycle allowed the LSS team to quickly identify the significant aspects causing the challenge of
late calls and thus develop an evidence trail of resolving the CTQ issue.
What's more, the LSS phase 3 allowed the team to focus upon the issue of creating flow parts
through the engine MRO cycles. The LSS team focused on systemic eliminating the inefficiencies that
averted the swift flow of parts through the MRO facility. The data obtained from phases 1 and 2
allowed a more detailed analysis as to why there were many ‘late calls’ in the 3 rd phase. A series of
meetings were held with stage team members operating the five crucial modules. The outcomes
showed a total of 867 late calls due to missed inspections driven by operational staff members with
less than 12 months of engine-type experience. The LSS phase 4 pointed out that introducing new
members to the JET B facility resulted in instabilities in the build operations at all operational stages
 4

(Hill et al., 2018). However, the tools employed showed that Stage one portrayed significant issues
due to newer and inexperienced staff. In the last phase, that is, continuous improvement and control of
future processes for the MRO facility, the operations staff team decided to conduct weekly feedback
sessions to maintain focus on operational procedures and best practices to ensure that late calls are
eliminated from the processes.
What challenges or issues did they face in implementing LSS in the organization, and how did
they address those challenges?
The LSS team faced the issue of late calls in the organization, which posed a challenge in
implementing the LSS. In the third phase, the team was aimed at creating a flow of parts via the
engine MRO cycles as part of implementing the LSS (Thomas et al., 2016). Also, the team was
focused upon the systematic eliminations of any inefficient that would otherwise alter the swift flow
of parts through the facility. Referring back to phases one and two, a more comprehensive analysis
was developed in Stage three to know why so many 'late calls' triggered from fewer modules
components existed. Numerous meetings were held with the staff working within the five crucial
modules, and the outcomes showed that a total of 867 late calls existed. The late calls were directly
caused because of missed inspections in Stage one, and 77% of the missed inspections were driven by
staff members of operational staff with less than 12-month of engine type experience. Late calls are a
big challenge for the LSS staff as they largely affect the company's external supply chains as well as
their internal engineering operations, which ultimately causes engine build delays. To overcome these
issues, it is fundamental to ensure all elements within the engine are correctly inspected and tested and
that all requests for newer components from the supply chains are requested by Stage one end.
Similarly, the introduction of newer staff to the JET B facility resulted in instabilities in the
build operations at all operational stages, thus causing the effects due to newer and inexperienced
staff. Coincidentally, to resolve the issue of missed inspections which causes problems of late calls, a
comprehensive 'three-split' improvement program was implemented (Hill et al., 2018). They
comprised of series of training and technical updating of the technician workforces, changes in the
composition of maintenance teams to develop more cohesive and supportive learning ecologies, and
variations in the supervisory arrangements, especially where newer and inexperienced staff are
present within the maintenance staff.
What improvements would you suggest in the application of LSS tools, techniques, and
methodology for addressing the problem?
The major challenge facing the MRO corporation is missed inspections which causes late
calls that are likely to negatively impact the external supply chains and its internal engineering
operations, eventually causing engine build delays (Hill et al., 2018). A new training regime can be
designed and developed for the facility to ensure that all staff is fully trained and supported through
the transitions between the engine types. Additionally, improvements can be developed to supervisory
activities: refresher training for supervisors to be coaches and mentors for their team while offering
the standard leadership training.
Another improvement that will help avert the late calls component in the first phase of the
LSS implementation is ensuring that the operations management team is able to conduct weekly
feedback sessions so that there is a focus on all operational approaches and quality best practices (Hill
et al., 2018). The procurement materials team can make a commitment to analyzing the stock room
materials usage patterns monthly to address newer spikes in demands related to ate call activities. For
this to be a success, the planning and maintenance management staff needed more robust and efficient
leaderships to be initiated and adopted. Closer collaborations within the departments are a
requirement, and all the regulations of the system processes needed to be enacted and maintained by
close control and actions by the management staff. Therefore, the control board is a crucial
management tool for driving and managing later changes. Besides, these teams help to resolve any
control conditions within the working day such that the system flows can be maintained with reduced
disruptions.
 5

References

Hill, J., Thomas, A. J., Mason-Jones, R. K., & El-Kateb, S. (2018). The implementation of a Lean Six
Sigma framework to enhance operational performance in an MRO facility. Production &
Manufacturing Research, 6(1), 26-48.