3x more productivity
In 2007, Samas’ new MD Martin Schenkel took up the challenge to beat low morale, overproduction and irregular pressure. Read the amazing results here.
In November 2007, when Samas’ new managing director Martin Schenkel took his first tour round the plant, the level of inefficiency was immediately clear: Many members of staff were waiting around, there was a surplus of stock due to overproduction, surplus stock had to be relocated. It soon became apparent that production was erratic. At times it got so busy that staff were working under pressure, whereas at other times there was hardly any work for anyone. Staff were complaining and morale seemed low.
The good news though, was that orders were being placed, each work station was operating in accordance with the requirements of the planning department and customers were receiving their filing cabinets, their cabinets with sliding doors, and their work stations. However, this stability came at a cost: inefficient and erratic production.
So the next challenge was to improve on these points -whilst at the same time maintaining stability-. It was clear to Martin that by implementing Lean, productivity could be drastically improved; by the first estimate by 25%.
Training and the development of a lean vision
The process was set in motion with an intensive one week course in Lean and the development of a vision, provided by Ton Hodes from TAKT - lean management. On completion of the one week course, managers had a clear vision of the current and future state of the 3 value streams for SAMAS: 1. Filing cabinets; 2. Cabinets with sliding doors; and 3. Work stations. It was decided that the first step was to tackle the work stations in the assembly hall. The aim was to create a flow cell without intermediate stock and at production at the right pace to meet takt time for the T-System (SAMAS’s best selling design).
The situation before Lean
Production levels varied enormously. Whereas one day only 50 work stations were required, it was quite possible that 350 had to be produced the next. Although the capacity could be stretched somewhat, it was impossible to keep pace with fluctuations. As a consequence, staff had to wait around when production levels were low and found themselves under stress when production levels were high. The manufacture of the legs, the sub assembly and the assembly of the work station itself all took place in different parts of the factory, and each of these steps was separated by an intermediate stock consisting of the produce of one day. At the final assembly point, 3 men produced an average of 7.5 tables per hour.
This typical job shop environment had to be transformed into a modern flow cell with Lean principles. Intermediate stock had to be eliminated, and productivity had to increase by 25%. It took the team one week to achieve this, with dramatically improved productivity as a result!
Kaizen Events
How was this achieved? Led by the assembly manager and the two team managers, the team followed the Kaizen Event method. This method consists of 3 weeks of preparation, 1 week of event and 3 weeks of follow up. The team used standardized checklists to be followed almost on a day to day basis. This method did not only lead to one-off results, but it also taught the team leaders and the assembly manager a method whereby they could continue to achieve successes. The method also ensures that employees are being involved in the decision-making process by gathering their ideas and discussing them.
The Event week
The flow cell idea had been worked out for the most part in the 3 weeks of preparation. The rate of production was determined by means of a takt-time clock. It was determined that the average demand was 1 work station every 2.20 minutes. Tables were manufactured at this rate; no faster and no slower. As a result, over production and accumulation of stock was eliminated. Moreover, the set rate led to the development of standard working procedures, and consequently to advantages in terms of quality and productivity.
A superfluous conveyer belt in the hall was used for the assembly of tables. It was decided to move the assembly point for the legs to the area next to the conveyer belt. As a result, the legs sub assembly now fitted into the rhythm of 2.20 minutes, which meant that over production and accumulation of stock was eliminated in this area as well.
When the basic set-up and the rate were in place, the learning process started. Staff despaired when the design of the Flow Cell did not work straight away. Some operators had far too much work to do whereas others had far too little to do. Some onlookers and ‘passers-by’ (the event drew a lot of attention) started laughing, because people in a traditional environment are not used to systematic planning, doing, checking and acting upon it. The plan was made, the plan was executed, we checked whether it worked or not, the answer is no, so we are going back to the way it was... Not this time: The problem was described and visualised by means of a bar chart. Thus it soon became apparent what was wrong and what needed to be done. The work was divided equally (balancing the line), and after 3 trials all operators completed their tasks within takt-time.
Then came the surprise: The number of work stations produced per hour by 3 operators was no longer 7.5, but 25! Strengthened by their initial success, the group began to solve a number of problems systematically and increase productivity even more.
Simple and complex work stations within takt-time
First and foremost, there was a problem in terms of labour-intensive models and simple models. The difference could be quite substantial. The solution to this was both simple and effective:
The number of team-members working on simple tables was reduced with one to a total of four team-members. Semi-complex tables were manufactured by a standard team of 5 team-members. For complex tables, a sixth person (with varying duties) would join the team.
In each team one or two team-members are responsible for maintenance procedures, improvement of processes, production of sub assemblies, supplying certain kanban inventory items, administration, capacity planning etc.
Organisation of the work place when takt-time is not met
The situation around the cell was rather messy. When takt-time wasn’t being achieved, operators often didn’t use their tools correctly or lost things. Operators resumed their 5S efforts and worked on Sorting (removing items that were not needed), Straightening (putting the necessary items in a logical position), Sweeping (cleaning) and Standardising.
Standard work procedures and continuous improvement
At the end of the week, the first standards appeared in order to maintain what had been achieved so far. Thus, it soon became apparent that there were 3 main groups: 1) Complex tables; 2) Semi-complex tables and 3) Simple tables. A bar chart was produced for each main group, and a standard work procedure was devised for each operator.
The development and improvement of these standards is ensured by the use of continuous improvement methods. To this end, the team meets every morning for ten minutes to discuss the tasks for the day. What have we got to manufacture? What must we pay attention to? And: Which improvement process is being addressed that day! The intention is to solve one problem per day. The meetings are conducted with a visual Problem Solution Chart. This is also done at the end of the day, when the team leader explains the problems that the group experienced that day. Problems are then categorised by means of a decision matrix into ‘Actions to undertake immediately’ and ‘Actions for Planning, Doing, Checking and Acting upon’. Team leaders received extensive training in this method.
The Results
| Measurements | Before Flow Cell | After Flow Cell | Target |
|---|---|---|---|
| Actions | 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Stock (of legs) | 1 day | 0 | 0 |
| Production time of finished product | 2 days | 1 day | 1 day |
| Floor surface | 345 | 207 | |
| Transportation distance | 160 m | 140 m | 100 m |
| Steadying production levels | 50 to 350 work stations per day | 200 work stations per day | average 200 work stations per day |
| Faults | 1 order (approx. 15 units per week) | ? | |
| Aim | 4 stations | 1 station | |
| Productivity | 7,5 work stations | 25 work stations | 14 work stations |
Samas is being supported, trained and coached on its’ lean journey by Ton Hodes and other colleagues from TAKT – lean management