SAIMAS CONFERENCE 2014 GLENBURN LODGE, MULDERSDRIFT...

SAIMAS CONFERENCE 2014

GLENBURN LODGE, MULDERSDRIFT

23 OCTOBER 2014

CREATING A LEAN MANUFACTURING

STRUCTURE IN A SOUTH AFRICAN

ORGANISATION/A SERVICE ENVIRONMENT

DAVID KRUGER

WHAT IS LEAN MANUFACTURING?

OVERVIEW

• INTRODUCTION

• BACKGROUND

• METHODOLOGY

• LITERATURE REVIEW

Workforce support

Communication

Lean Manufacturing Methodology

Lean Manufacturing Passion

Gainful LM Execution

• RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

KNOW WHAT TO DO

INTRODUCTION

• Regardless business sphere, concentrate on

speed, efficiency and the customer

• Organisations want to be prosperous and

therefore seen LM as a magic bullet

• In some instances it was successful

• Proven benefits through research identified as

increased yield per employee, increased

productivity and decline in WIP

• Originally propagated in the motor industry

INTRODUCTION (CONT)

• Other sectors of manufacturing and service industry seen

advantages

• Increase value added actions and elimination of non value adding

actions

• Achieved through the elimination of seven wastes

• Similar to other improvement methodologies, LM did not succeed

universally

• Many reasons can be put forward for failures

• Various and varied variables influence success of LM

• Most common identified as executive backing, unambiguous

communication links and deficiencies in LM execution

INTRODUCTION (CONT)

• Before LM execution following questions need to be

answered:

What are the fundamental actions obligatory to be

concluded prior to execution of specific LM basics?

What is the gradual modus operandi of LM execution?

What is the order of executing numerous doctrines,

procedures, tools and practices also called basics of

LM?

Various reasons for failure such as exploiting incorrect LM

tools, exploiting a single tool only, exploiting every known

LM tool for every single problem area

INTRODUCTION (CONT)

• The above actions leads to mistrust of LM methodology

by staff members

• Leads to squandering of vital scares resources

• It become imperative to have a well thought through LM

schema in execution of LM

• Above found through interviews at the researched

organisation

• Paper investigates how the LM execution in researched

organisation were influenced by communication or lack

thereof

• Study empirically confirmed necessity of proper

procedures

BACKGROUND

• Researched organisation a large manufacturing concern

• Situated in Johannesburg in Gauteng Province of South

Africa

• The organisation came into being through an

amalgamation of three competitive organisations

• Each had their own unique operating methods

• Shortly after amalgamation bought by overseas

organisation

• Parent organisation compelled the new organisation to

perform to the rigorous standards set by the parent

• Top executives obsessed about number of lean actions

BACKGROUND (CONT)

• Seen execution as a short term process instead of long

term as it should be

• Senior management unwavering in believe LM is a

single response to cure all their current problems

experienced

• Workforce were negative towards LM in the extreme

• Seen it before and it did not work then and why should it

work this time around.

• Labour sees it a highly intrusive methodology

• Seen as a tool to be utilised in downsizing the workforce

METHODOLOGY

• Case studies or Action research ideally suited to investigate real life

impasses

• Five themes documented endorsing this type of research:

Acquaintance contradictions is exhibited in recent LM research

Lucid rationale as to the significance of the research must be

existent

The classification of ontological and epistemological topics

Reflect on punctilious systems and approaches for evidence

compilation and scrutinising is essential. Through contemplation vis-

a-vis the subject matter soundness, trustworthiness and

triangulation in addition to the veracity of the research and

theoretical conviction in theory must exist

Clarify whether methodology utilised is appropriate

LITERATURE REVIEW

A - WORKFORCE SUPPORT:

• Include both senior management and labour

• Research concur that a dedicated workforce

prerequisite for successful LM execution

• Diversity of LM execution allow workforce to exploit their

competences.

• If not dedicated will sabotage the LM execution effort

• Therefore lip service to LM execution effort not enough

• If of opinion their effort not appreciated, will become

negative toward the LM execution

LITERATURE REVIEW (CONT)

B – COMMUNICATION:

• Labour’s concerns must be taken cognisance of

• Senior management must understand how it would affect

the LM execution

• Clear communication that LM results is more than

monetary gains – can be less quantifiable

• Without proper communication results might decrease

• Aversion to LM execution will result if neglected

• Successful LM execution demands well-defined

communications up and down the value chain

• Effective and efficient channels must be established


C – LEAN MANUFACTURING METHODOLOGY:

• Array of mechanisms and practices facilitating reduction

and eradication of waste wherever it is found

• TPS advanced as one such system utilised for LM

execution – identify three types of waste:

a. Muda- signifying non value adding work

b. Muri – signifying an overburdened production system

c. Mura – Signifying unevenness in production system

• A scientific method of LM execution

• This method is exploited to expose those operations that

cannot meet the production standards


• Judged to be a synergetic collection of techniques to

facilitate LM execution grouped under JIT, TQM and

TPM

• Exploited in a combination with an assortment of

effective HR management procedures such as teamwork

and employee empowerment

• Research of opinion that both internal and external

progress must be realised to be successful

• Exploit the tools to identify processes to be improved

• Improvement team may propagate use of a certain tool

that might be wholly inappropriate under circumstances


• Regardless of execution technique, the business should

be proficient in:

a. Appreciate what the execution demand from labour

b. Conveying the transformation expected from labour

c. Overseeing its consequences on labour

d. Endure essential transformation in the managerial

configuration and beliefs

• The above can be top up and top down processes – not

suitable for all LM executions

• Most efficient execution system is the top down/bottom

up approach


• LM execution may not be achieved if there is:

a. Unsuitable instruction techniques and skill transfers

b. Erroneous focus

c. Deficiency in participation of labour

d. Inappropriate planning

• Short range commitment to the project

• Often labours commitment to the LM execution project is

fragmented

• Lacking appropriate strategic preparation for LM

execution, an emergency may result due to poor

planning of the LM execution


D – LEAN MANUFACTURING PASSION:

• Winning LM execution must have effective dimension for

processing of requirements during implementation

• This can be portrayed as a passion for the LM project

• Implementation must be undertaken by a specialist

demonstrating the require passion for the project

• Specialist will constantly speak the vocabulary of LM

particularly wastes transpiring in the system

• Specialists labour on the shop floor to propel the

execution in the right direction

• As a result a seamless equilibrium should be achieved


E – GAINFUL LM EXECUTION:

i. Questioning and Problem-Solving:

• Most important step is genchi genbutsu or visit the shop

floor

• Observe what is happening – unlike most managerial

practices, LM happens at shop floor level

• Most work takes place on the shop floor – biased

towards practical solutions

• Requires ongoing drive and leadership – take executives

from office to shop floor to experience situation

• Critical to constantly question current practices


• Implementation team should ask following questions:

a. Why did we not go further down this line of thinking?

b. Where are we going to duplicate these findings?

c. When are we coming back to this area to further

improve it?

• Understanding reasons for not accepting anything other

than 100% implementation is important

• LM leaders far more focussed on problem solving than

average employees

• LM execution requires rapid action to improve ailing

processes


ii Rigorous Problem-Solving and Hypothesis Testing:

• Forms nucleus of the LM methodology

• Implementer challenges with realistic application, he/she

should not accept first available solution

Iii Mind-set change:

• Many failed implementations occur due to

misinterpretation of expectations

• Many times no prolonged shop floor gains achieved

• Achievable gains only from insight into problems

• Therefore implementer should not be from executives

• Should be seen as guiding principles not a course

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

• Paper advocating an execution strategy or roadmap for

an effective LM execution at a South African concern.

• Primary concern of the LM execution archetype is

elimination of improvident activities and establishing

customer value.

• An exemplar or roadmap is indispensable to afford

sequencing for altering a concern from not being lean to

realizing a position of lean

• The advocated roadmap governs the methods and

procedures to be exploited in attaining lean status. It is

established from the existing status incorporating the

category of industry of the researched concern

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS (CONT)

• The significance of communications vis-à-vis the objectives and

accomplishments realized was investigated too

• The paper ascertained social and procedural fundamentals affecting

a LM execution plan. It comprised fundamentals such as workforce

devotion, communications, executive devotion and mind-set change

• The bulk of the evidence associated with the adverse effect of

executive devotion, encompasses the implementation process

• Complications ensued since the executives did not expect labour

involvement

• The perception persevered that the LM execution endeavour was a

subterfuge in finalizing workforce lay-off

• The executives were ineffective in affording reliable training

programmes accessible to all staff members


• Executive contribution regarding LM execution assisted in freeing up

communication channels with the workforce

• The research suggested the inadequate communications were not

eliminated entirely

• Corroboration of inadequate communication was accredited to

inadequacies of executive patronage

• The methodology would reinforce the fundamental relationships

amongst the variables and LM execution

• Regrettably, executives do not appreciate that numerous variables

impact on a successful or failed LM execution

• Senior executives judges LM to be a knowledge base executable

everywhere and on every occasion

• Regrettably, that is not true


• The LM execution journey is frequently demanding and

fraught with difficulties

• It nonetheless affords numerous demonstrated gains,

substantial and unquantifiable

• The results and conclusions in the paper are centres on

an empirical examination of a South African

manufacturing organisation’s fabrication plant

• The projected aspiration of the schema is guaranteeing

the organisation develop into a principal exponent in

provisos of efficiency, problem solving, continuous

improvement and flexible production


• The schema compels the endeavour in the direction

which the concern refers to as performance ascendancy

in the course of lean execution

• The schema directed by the beliefs of continuous

improvement and standardized work methods

• The beliefs have its foundation in the principal processes

to be enhanced

• It illustrates the commitment of the senior executive team

to lean and a successful execution of lean projects

• The schema is exploited as an suggestion of the

departure point for each individual execution project

THANK YOU

[email protected]

??????????????

mailto:[email protected]

SAIMAS CONFERENCE 2014 GLENBURN LODGE, MULDERSDRIFT...

Documents

Transcript of SAIMAS CONFERENCE 2014 GLENBURN LODGE, MULDERSDRIFT...