Lean Manufacturing Concepts - Is 'Lean' hype?

[Helmut Jilling]

In Reply to Parent Post by ralphsulser

I was involved in TWI training in the late 60's. The company had on site training for most management and staff. It was once a week for about 10 weeks. The company ended up hiring the instructor as the plant manager to replace one who retired. His demeaner changed after becoming plant manager, especially with the QC department. ;-)

That is very interesting...

[Narendran]

Hi Mike,

Please find out where the constraint of the organisation rests? Start at the constraint. You would see immediate benefits.

Regards,

[Stijloor]

In Reply to Parent Post by Narendran

Hi Mike,

Please find out where the constraint of the organisation rests? Start at the constraint. You would see immediate benefits.

Regards,

Removing constraints.....

- Theory of constraints.

- AGI Goldratt Institute.

Stijloor.

[ricevans]

So I've spent the morning reading 4 years of posts on this subject. I've been involved in just about every quality program since the early 70's and find them all to be relatively the same. In 1974 the USAF decided to eliminate the clutter in personal lockers by ordering the removal of all government issued equipment (that's bench stock for those not familiar with military jargon).

Lockers were opened, material was removed and thrown away and life went on. The estimated long term costs at the base I was stationed at totaled near a million dollars in lost productivity waiting for material to be delivered, lost aircraft launch due to material waiting to be delivered and the estimation of thousands of dollars of material (not waiting to be delivered) discarded.

I recently watched with horror as management here implemented 6S and thousands of dollars worth of (hidden) stock was arbitrarily tossed in the trash. If you are implementing 6S or 5S please consult with the "owners" of that material and evaluate why they have it in the first place before you decimate the one thing that keeps it all working.

That guy on the line that could always come up with a spare missing widget or piece of hardware could be the reason why you were as successful as you had been. Much better to leave it in place and catagorize it properly than to discard it carelessly. Even if it takes more time.

Either way thanks for a very interesting morning to all that have contributed here.

[Helmut Jilling]

In Reply to Parent Post by ricevans

... I recently watched with horror as management here implemented 6S and thousands of dollars worth of (hidden) stock was arbitrarily tossed in the trash. If you are implementing 6S or 5S please consult with the "owners" of that material and evaluate why they have it in the first place before you decimate the one thing that keeps it all working.

That guy on the line that could always come up with a spare missing widget or piece of hardware could be the reason why you were as successful as you had been. Much better to leave it in place and catagorize it properly than to discard it carelessly. Even if it takes more time.

Excellent point. Remember the ISO/TS requiremrnt that the impact of changes in systems must be considered (evaluated) before implementing [significant] changes in systems...duh!

These programs may use the same principles, but that's because the principles work. Just would be nice if people followed those principles.

Thanks for your post!

[Wes Bucey]

In Reply to Parent Post by ricevans

So I've spent the morning reading 4 years of posts on this subject. I've been involved in just about every quality program since the early 70's and find them all to be relatively the same. In 1974 the USAF decided to eliminate the clutter in personal lockers by ordering the removal of all government issued equipment (that's bench stock for those not familiar with military jargon).

Lockers were opened, material was removed and thrown away and life went on. The estimated long term costs at the base I was stationed at totaled near a million dollars in lost productivity waiting for material to be delivered, lost aircraft launch due to material waiting to be delivered and the estimation of thousands of dollars of material (not waiting to be delivered) discarded.

I recently watched with horror as management here implemented 6S and thousands of dollars worth of (hidden) stock was arbitrarily tossed in the trash. If you are implementing 6S or 5S please consult with the "owners" of that material and evaluate why they have it in the first place before you decimate the one thing that keeps it all working.

That guy on the line that could always come up with a spare missing widget or piece of hardware could be the reason why you were as successful as you had been. Much better to leave it in place and catagorize it properly than to discard it carelessly. Even if it takes more time.

Either way thanks for a very interesting morning to all that have contributed here.

I agree with Helmut this is an excellent point to consider.

From a theoretical viewpoint (versus your extremely practical one) the concept is that many 5S and kaizen programs are undertaken in an arbitrary and capricious manner without consulting all the stakeholders about the plan of action and actually giving weight to the responses and including them in the evaluation.

A laughable example might be a willing worker in a Red Bead experiment keeping a stash of white beads in his pocket to replace any red beads that may pop up. Without knowing about the stash, management blithely continues to believe the "system" is working.

[wmarhel]

In Reply to Parent Post by ricevans

I recently watched with horror as management here implemented 6S and thousands of dollars worth of (hidden) stock was arbitrarily tossed in the trash. If you are implementing 6S or 5S please consult with the "owners" of that material and evaluate why they have it in the first place before you decimate the one thing that keeps it all working.

That person on the line that could always come up with a spare missing widget or piece of hardware could be the reason why you were as successful as you had been. Much better to leave it in place and catagorize it properly than to discard it carelessly. Even if it takes more time.

Either way thanks for a very interesting morning to all that have contributed here.

I think the problem here is in the application of 5S. There should always be a designated area where items can be logged into the area, and that can then be signed out within a specific timeframe by people who need them. It also allows for the ability to contact other divisions, potential buyers, etc.; and see if the items can't be used in some fashion, thereby precluding a purchase in the future. A common time for items to stay in the red tag area are 2-4 weeks, after that it may be time to throw them away. Of course, items that are clearly garbage are thrown away immediately.

One caveat, and I'm not disagreeing with you about the need to inquire with the people in the area, is that there is a tendency for people to claim they need it and that is why they have it in the first place. This is a perfect time to ask questions such as, "how often", "where is it used", "is it the proper tool", etc. I've seen people claim they needed to keep a broken screwdrive (the tip was broken) because they needed a pry bar. What they really needed was a small pry bar and using the screwdriver as such is what probably caused it to break in the first place.

If a tool is all covered with gobs of grease and dusty....chances are they don't use it except in extremely rare circumstances. The general attitude is often very possessive in that it is there junk and no one should touch it. Again, put it in the red tag area and see if there isn't a need for it somewhere.

Wayne

[Benjamin28]

I have to agree with Wayne here, this is a problem in the "sort" phase of the 5S program.

In regard to the fella that has a widget always at the ready, I would prefer these kinds of issues came up into the open, if it makes for a stall in production then we're going to fix the process so that it can't happen again or make certain we can make a quick repair(parts in stock)...down the road it only means a better more consistent process, if we allow that devious widget replacer to continue we'll still have the same problems once he leaves or runs out of widgets, further the cost of said widgets can be built into the process if we know it's a necessary replacement part and should be kept in stock....so on and so forth.