Claes Gefvenberg
Admin
You may want to have a look at this old thread about Lean office.It may also be a good idea not to turn everything on its head at once. A gradual change stands a better chance to stick.
/Claes
/Claes
M
MattBat
Hi everyone,
First off, I apologize for the very long delay in replying. Sorry.
Between when I started the post and now we have taken a major turn for the better. Although it has not yet been officially communicated, our management has decided to initiate a complete overhaul of our
management system. This is in part due to the realization that our customers have new expectations/requirements that the current system is fundamentally unable to satisfy. This means continuing with TPM in the production, but implementing a hybrid system in the administrative departments.
Samsung (and others):
Your statement fits well with our company. In the long past we had a simple yet effective system and could control our success. Then ISO 9001:1994 came along and was mainly set up as a SPC (Show Program for Customers). Naturally, the ever more complex external and internal system requirements were ever more difficult to implement. At the same time our success became more difficult to control. Then all of a sudden, thanks to the global recession, we had no more control over our success. This year the management realized that the whole QMS was only smoke and mirrors and was not able to manage critical aspect of our activities, and in extension our success. Ok, certain basic aspects were functioning, but the overall system was uncontrollable.
TWIBlogger:
I have decided to narrow the scope of my "school project" to developing the forward looking internal audit program (scope, structure, content, auditor requirements, reporting system etc.) that will escort the new management system.
Sixsigmais:
Yes, I have set a very long initiation and integration period for the administrative departments. In the production where we have TPM running for two years, we are just now starting the second phase to integrate the quality aspects. Until now it was the basic 5s and have achieved employee buy-in and constantly good evaluations. The second phase will probably take another two years until the system has stabilzed.
Okay, I will finish reading the other posts and reply again.
Cheers,
Matthias
First off, I apologize for the very long delay in replying. Sorry.
Between when I started the post and now we have taken a major turn for the better. Although it has not yet been officially communicated, our management has decided to initiate a complete overhaul of our
management system. This is in part due to the realization that our customers have new expectations/requirements that the current system is fundamentally unable to satisfy. This means continuing with TPM in the production, but implementing a hybrid system in the administrative departments.
Samsung (and others):
Your statement fits well with our company. In the long past we had a simple yet effective system and could control our success. Then ISO 9001:1994 came along and was mainly set up as a SPC (Show Program for Customers). Naturally, the ever more complex external and internal system requirements were ever more difficult to implement. At the same time our success became more difficult to control. Then all of a sudden, thanks to the global recession, we had no more control over our success. This year the management realized that the whole QMS was only smoke and mirrors and was not able to manage critical aspect of our activities, and in extension our success. Ok, certain basic aspects were functioning, but the overall system was uncontrollable.
TWIBlogger:
I have decided to narrow the scope of my "school project" to developing the forward looking internal audit program (scope, structure, content, auditor requirements, reporting system etc.) that will escort the new management system.
Sixsigmais:
Yes, I have set a very long initiation and integration period for the administrative departments. In the production where we have TPM running for two years, we are just now starting the second phase to integrate the quality aspects. Until now it was the basic 5s and have achieved employee buy-in and constantly good evaluations. The second phase will probably take another two years until the system has stabilzed.
Okay, I will finish reading the other posts and reply again.
Cheers,
Matthias
B
bpugazhendhi
I always feel that TPM, six-sigma, 5S, Quality Circle (QC) etc all are components of the larger system of TQM. Unless the Total Quality Management (TQM) is implemented all the other sub-systems mentioned above will yield little as a stand-alone technique of improving productivity.
L
leansim
There was an interesting graphic I came across a while ago that showed a "culture change" triangle. At the bottom of the triangle was the culture of the company and at the top, the skinny top part, was the "what we do".
The explanation was that Western companies tend to start with the overall culture and have that influence "what we do". The arrow goes from the bottom of the triangle to the top. So they focus on brilliant slogans, training etc, hoping that once the mindset changes, the work will improve.
On the opposite site of the triangle was an arrow going from top to bottom, the Japanese approach. Start with the "what we do" and eventually, the culture will change. So they focus on incremental changes, kaizen etc. The proof in manufacturing was NUMMI and how Toyota was able to change the adversarial union culture based on what they did.
My point is, although it is very important to have upper management support, by using the smaller, incremental approach you may get better mileage out of your improvement activities, rather than taking on the whole system at once.
The explanation was that Western companies tend to start with the overall culture and have that influence "what we do". The arrow goes from the bottom of the triangle to the top. So they focus on brilliant slogans, training etc, hoping that once the mindset changes, the work will improve.
On the opposite site of the triangle was an arrow going from top to bottom, the Japanese approach. Start with the "what we do" and eventually, the culture will change. So they focus on incremental changes, kaizen etc. The proof in manufacturing was NUMMI and how Toyota was able to change the adversarial union culture based on what they did.
My point is, although it is very important to have upper management support, by using the smaller, incremental approach you may get better mileage out of your improvement activities, rather than taking on the whole system at once.
M
MattBat
M
MattBat
Situation Update...
In my company the management has changed, and now a different wind is blowing. In addition, we have developed a ambitious 5-year strategic plan which includes new sales structures, new manufacturing methods, new partnerships with suppliers and reduction of overhead costs. Additionally, one of the strategic goals to start along the road of process excellence in the administrative processes.
Our cheif exec. is convinced that since TPM is working out well for the production, it is also the go-to approach for our administrative processes.
In the last weeks we (the QM dept.) have come to the conclusion that the layout (strategic direction) of the current processes is not in-line with our new company strategy. In addition, some strategic goals have no applicable current processes, therefore requireing a entirely new set of processes.
And now our (QM dept.) position:
We fell it would be extremely difficult to achieve such fundamental re-orientation of the company using the TPM approach. Therefore the short-term focus must be on aligning the processes along the strategic goals (and where necessary creating new ones and removing unnecessary ones) and integrating the various process management initiatives currently in place (QM-system, KPI reporting system, production TPM etc.). Once a certain "maturity" has been reached we can continue along the road of company-wide process excellence.
In summary: re-orientation and integration before optimization NOT optimization before re-orientation.
My question to the Cove:
1) Do you think I am pursuing a worthy cause (re-orientation and integration before optimizing)? If so, what would be an effective line of argumentation?
2) What are your experiences using TPM to achieve such a ambitious re-orientation of your company?
I look forward to your feedback!
Cheers,
Matthias
In my company the management has changed, and now a different wind is blowing. In addition, we have developed a ambitious 5-year strategic plan which includes new sales structures, new manufacturing methods, new partnerships with suppliers and reduction of overhead costs. Additionally, one of the strategic goals to start along the road of process excellence in the administrative processes.
Our cheif exec. is convinced that since TPM is working out well for the production, it is also the go-to approach for our administrative processes.
In the last weeks we (the QM dept.) have come to the conclusion that the layout (strategic direction) of the current processes is not in-line with our new company strategy. In addition, some strategic goals have no applicable current processes, therefore requireing a entirely new set of processes.
And now our (QM dept.) position:
We fell it would be extremely difficult to achieve such fundamental re-orientation of the company using the TPM approach. Therefore the short-term focus must be on aligning the processes along the strategic goals (and where necessary creating new ones and removing unnecessary ones) and integrating the various process management initiatives currently in place (QM-system, KPI reporting system, production TPM etc.). Once a certain "maturity" has been reached we can continue along the road of company-wide process excellence.
In summary: re-orientation and integration before optimization NOT optimization before re-orientation.
My question to the Cove:
1) Do you think I am pursuing a worthy cause (re-orientation and integration before optimizing)? If so, what would be an effective line of argumentation?
2) What are your experiences using TPM to achieve such a ambitious re-orientation of your company?
I look forward to your feedback!
Cheers,
Matthias
P
pthareja
Yes, the sequence as I read is 5-S, QCC's, and TPM to ....TQM . we do intersperse several other tools in the sequence to graduate to TQM.
I show six sigma as a parallel ( though a subset / inferior) path from TPM to TQM. That's really my opinion based on readings and else.
Posted by Matthias said:
Quite true. Quality is more of culture. And to be cultured we all have to embrace goodness (Quality). Even for TPM the first step is alignment./ reorientation to assure total productive environment. That implies achieving a harmonious state. Once we have sustainably achieved harmony - goodness ( call it process + product approach), we have graduated to think Quality. Implementation is not far off...
I don't think vice versa can be anything but futile.
Priyavrat Thareja
Z
zaid_iec
Hello All,
I am also thinking of starting 5S drive in my office as a first step of implementing Lean Culture. I think 5S is the foundation of starting with continuous improvement approach in any organization.
I would like to know from you all, How i can proceed with 5S implementation plan. What should be my approach ?
Regards
Mohammad
I am also thinking of starting 5S drive in my office as a first step of implementing Lean Culture. I think 5S is the foundation of starting with continuous improvement approach in any organization.
I would like to know from you all, How i can proceed with 5S implementation plan. What should be my approach ?
Regards
Mohammad
Similar threads
