October 22, 2019 Industry Forum Blog The International Aerospace Action Group created an Aerospace sector-wide standard for Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP) and Production Part Approval Process (PPAP). Rolls-Royce was an early adopter of the requirements defined in AS/EN/SJAC 9145:2016, with a requirement for all tier 1 suppliers to comply with the standard. This was communicated by a Notice to Suppliers (NTS) and inclusion in the Rolls-Royce supplier requirements manual “SABRe”. The need to meet the requirements of AS/EN/SJAC 9145:2016 APQP/PPAP is now rapidly expanding with both Airbus and Boeing mandating compliance as part of meeting their supplier obligations. Compliance to APQP/PPAP is rapidly being seen as a supplier entry level requirement. AS/EN/SJAC 9145:2016 provides a best practice framework for APQP and PPAP. In simple terms, it is a project management tool following 5 standard phases. These 5 phases are supported by a part approval method which utilises an agreed set of supporting documents. The standard also gives organisations adopting the requirements an opportunity to further tailor the required supporting PPAP documentation to include requirements specific to their organisation – these additional requirements are termed Customer Specific Requirements (CSR). The overall objective of the standard is twofold: to provide a simplified and common approach to Project Planning/Part Approval and to define an approach that underpins the journey towards zero defects. There is a new mood within the industry which, whilst recognising the need for product safety, also focuses on competiveness and quality, with many OEMs now driving towards a zero defects culture. AS/EN/SJAC 9145:2016 includes within its 5 phases, tools and techniques which are proactive in nature and hence, support the drive towards greater competiveness. This can be achieved through reduction in variation and waste from the supply chain, adopting defect prevention as a way of life and supporting continuous improvement. AS/EN/SJAC 9145:2016 sequences proactive techniques such as Design and Process Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), Process Flow Diagram, Control Plan, Measurement System Analysis (MSA), Initial Process studies and First Article Inspection, all of which supports the expectation that from an OEM level and downwards, through the multiple layers of supply, that both products and processes will be designed with zero defects in mind. Organisations now have to make a key decision: do they seek to introduce AS/EN/SJAC 9145:2016 as a vehicle to change their culture into a truly proactive and competitive one or do they adopt AS/EN/SJAC 9145:2016 simply because the customer mandates it? Either way, an industry-wide driver for change is developing and widening. Industry Forum has the tools to assist with the adoption of the standard. – October 2019 authored by Richard Hammond To find out more about how Industry Forum can support your journey of improvement and achieving zero defects, visit our website, email us or phone +44 121 717 6600 to talk to our expert practitioners. A Bit More About Richard Richard Hammond has over 30 years of auditing and consulting experience within automotive and aerospace sectors. He began his career at Rolls Royce Motors Plc, where he graduated to the role of Maintenance and Installation Engineer, before progressing to his current position as Principal Consultant at Industry Forum via Industrial Robotics and Certification Body Auditing. As a qualified SMMT trainer, Richard delivers the recognised International Automotive Task Force (IATF) ISO/TS16949 Certification Body Auditor training and evaluation. Richard is an approved IATF Witness Auditor and delivers Core Tools training (APQP, PPAP, SPC, MSA, FMEA and Control Plan) into major aerospace and automotive OEMs and tier 1 suppliers. Click here to contact Richard.
October 15, 2019 Industry Forum Blog Product safety is an increasingly high priority for the automotive supply chain, and rightly so: recent years have seen a string of global product safety crises in the industry. Carmakers and their suppliers are the subject of media and regulatory scrutiny like never before, and the trail of recalls, regulatory investigations and litigation speaks for itself: despite significant advancements in quality management standards and techniques, automotive businesses continue to stumble into crises as a result of design and manufacturing errors, poor communication/document management or inadequate crisis planning. And if you thought these issues were a concern only for OEMs, think again: with the increasing complexity of automotive supply chains, the growing opportunities and pressures of new technology and increasingly sophisticated regulatory frameworks, the reputational and financial risk for Tier 1 and 2 suppliers and beyond is real and growing. There has never been a more important time to understand and address your exposures. As part of its ongoing work to position the UK automotive sector as a leader in product safety and quality management, SMMT Industry Forum has teamed up with product liability experts at leading global law firm Eversheds Sutherland to provide sessions helping UK automotive businesses to understand their legal responsibilities and liabilities and to improve their systems so as to minimise the risk of product safety crises and respond better when they occur. Eversheds Sutherland’s product compliance team have been working on these issues with OEMs and major Tier 1 suppliers for many years and in partnership with SMMT Industry Forum, the whole UK automotive supply chain can now access their expertise. Find out more about these courses here: NEW! Product Liability: why does it matter? what you can do about it? NEW! Product Safety Crisis Management
October 15, 2019 Industry Forum Blog Team Leader Essentials Programme (TLE) Team Leaders play a vital and pivotal role in ensuring the organisation achieves and exceeds their key strategic objectives in today’s competitive manufacturing market but the question that arises is “how well are they trained?”, in modern lean manufacturing methodologies, ensuring their capabilities are adequately supporting the business’s needs. It’s well recognised and understood that training is a key component of developing a Team Leader’s skillset and capability but that alone doesn’t verify the individual’s competency or alignment to the business requirements. Typical off the shelf training offers no stimulation for debate or shop floor based activities for the team leaders to apply their new skills. This is usually followed by handing over a large booklet of materials covered during the training, and then wishing them all the very best with managing their teams and driving a culture of high performing team. Frequently that type of training will not be at all effective or beneficial to either the individual or organisation. What is required is a programme that allows the individuals to combine blended learning underpinned by implementing an improvement project, which can be measured against one of these 4 metrics; Quality, Cost, Delivery or Safety. This will enable them to demonstrate their competency level by applying the tools & techniques learnt. Ultimately the metric used for the improvement project will be aligned to the organisation’s strategic direction. Topics Covered Some of the core topics taught during the TLE programme. Daily Management Start of Shift 8 Wastes 5S & Visual Management PDCA Standard Work Data Analysis Problem Solving / A3 thinking Effective Communication / Feedback Line Balance / SMED Coaching The TLE programme can be be entirely bespoke to the organisation’s requirements. The TLE programme will firstly, help team leaders to understand the fundamental lean principles in order to ensure an efficient, effective and competitive organisation followed by creating & managing a high performing team that drives & thrives for continuous improvement. Part of the blended learning the team leaders will be given log-in details to Industry Forum’s E-Learning platform, where they can review the teach-points prior to the training, giving them a taster for each of the topics, which can be accessed multiple times (even after the completing the training up to 12 months). The 3 days of the training consists of shop-floor, team based activities and a simulation. Following this each team leader selects an improvement project in their work area that will be aligned to the business strategy or improvement programme. The team leaders will be supported to create an individual project plan in the form of A3 document that the organisation will use to own and monitor the individual’s project progress. Industry Forum will provide on-site support to the team leaders to complete their A3 document, being a mediator for any road blocks that may arise during project implementation, whilst enhancing and developing the team leader’s coaching skills. This forms part of the 3 days of on-site support to the team leaders over 3 months after the initial training. A final day is then arranged for the team leaders to present back to their senior management team about their improvement project using a PowerPoint presentation or a ‘Show & Tell’ activity. During the feedback session the senior management team will be able to see the impact of the improvement project to the organisation’s bottom line, individual’s capability enhancement, ask any project related questions and to recognise the team leader’s achievements by giving them a TLE completion certificate. After the TLE programme, if the organisation wants to get further nationally recognised qualification then Industry Forum can support the organisation on NVQ Business Improvement Techniques. To start developing and training your team leaders to support the organisation’s key objective please click here to book or speak to one of our experts in creating your bespoke Team Leader Essential Programme.
September 24, 2019 Industry Forum Blog To understand the differences between Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Failure Modes and Criticality Analysis (FMECA), you need to go backwards in time. Let’s start with a little bit of history. The concept of planning for risk management started back in 1949 when the American military issued a directive to suppliers – MIL STD 1629. This directive was refined and reissued for the benefit of the Aerospace sector as ARP 926. Today when we talk about FMEA and FMECA, in general terms, we consider them to be both the same and interchangeable but actually, there is a difference between the two and the difference can be significant. If we go back to the birth of FMEA, the template that was used was not very sophisticated and ranking severity, occurrence and detection was yet to be instigated. Back in these early days, the criticality element of FMECA was required to allow risk in FMEA to be prioritised. As FMEA templates developed and became more refined, the prioritisation of risk became easier to determine and the use of FMECA became less significant. So what is the difference? Well, this can best be summarised by asking the question, “You have the FMEA, so now what?” Well, FMEA only determines risk in broad terms and at times is not very incisive. So, how do I create FMECA? The process steps are outlined as follows: We can see that Criticality Analysis is conducted post FMEA. FMECA can be conducted based on the following approaches: Top-Down Approach – System Level / Sub System Level The top-down approach is mainly used in an early design phase before the whole system structure is decided and the analysis is usually function-oriented. The analysis starts with the main system functions, and how these may fail. Functional failures with significant effects are usually prioritised in the analysis, however, the analysis will not necessarily be complete. The top-down approach may also be used on an existing system to focus on problem areas. Bottom-Up Approach – Component Level The bottom-up approach is used when a system concept has been decided. Each component on the lowest level of indenture is studied one-by-one. The analysis is complete once all components are considered. The Criticality Analysis (CA) can be performed using either a quantitative or a qualitative approach. Availability of part configuration and failure rate data will determine the analysis approach. As a general rule: • use a Quantitative approach when actual component data is available; and • use a Qualitative approach when no actual component data or only generic component data is available. The results of the Criticality Analysis will result in either a defined value (Quantitative), where Failure Mode Criticality (CM) is calculated as: Or, as a matrix (Qualitative): To find out more about FMEA and FMECA and how Industry Forum can support your journey of improvement and achieving zero defects, email us or phone +44 121 717 6600 to talk to our expert practitioners. A Bit More About Richard Richard Hammond has over 30 years of auditing and consulting experience within automotive and aerospace sectors. He began his career at Rolls Royce Motors Plc, where he graduated to the role of Maintenance and Installation Engineer, before progressing to his current position as Principal Consultant at Industry Forum via Industrial Robotics and Certification Body Auditing. As a qualified SMMT trainer, Richard delivers the recognised International Automotive Task Force (IATF) ISO/TS16949 Certification Body Auditor training and evaluation. Richard is an approved IATF Witness Auditor and delivers Core Tools training (APQP, PPAP, SPC, MSA, FMEA and Control Plan) into major aerospace and automotive OEMs and tier 1 suppliers. Click here to contact Richard.
September 19, 2019 Industry Forum Blog “Without standards there can be no improvement”. So reads the frequently quoted words of Taiichi Ohno, the father of the Toyota Production System. But what is Standardised Work? And how does it support improvement? One of the misconceptions around Standardised Work is that capturing a process on a prescribed document and posting it at the work place is all that needs to be done. This is certainly the ‘visible’ part of standard work, but like so many Lean tools lifted from the Toyota Production System, it is the change in behaviour that is the reality of standardised work. What is Standardised Work? Standardised Work defines the best current method of safely combining process inputs in order to achieve the output Quality, Cost and Delivery (QCD) performance every time, irrespective of the difference between people. The aim of Standardised Work is to achieve customer satisfaction every time, through effective management of workplace methods. When the organisation can repeatedly achieve the required QCD results, then time can be released to make real improvements. There are two distinct phases to the deployment of the Standardised Work tool: The standardisation step that leads to the creation of standard operations. 2. The ongoing management of the process using the standard operations. Standardisation and Standard Operations Standardisation is the elimination of variability which leads to standardised work. Ideally, all variation should be eliminated, however in reality, it is not reasonably practicable to do this and a compromise is reached. If you ask the question, “What can vary when carrying out a process?”, there will be a whole range of answers that cover the different inputs to a process, man, material and machine, and the method used to run the process. Process Model Fig. 1 More specific examples are generated when considering a specific process. Variation manifests itself as waste. Process Variations Fig. 2 The three main documents are: Standardised Work Chart (SWC) Job Detail Sheet (JDS) Standardised Work Combination Table (SWCT) The SWC captures where the process happens on a diagram of the work area or the sequence of the process, if a flow diagram is more appropriate. Standardised Work Chart Fig. 3 The JDS captures detail of how the process is run – sequence, key points for safety, quality and ease with photos or sketches to simplify and clarify the key point descriptions. Job Detail Sheet Fig. 4 The SWCT captures the time it takes to carry out the work elements of the process. Standardised Work Combination Table Fig. 5 Why Use Standardised Work? Organisations that want to be successful in the long term must operate safely, make a profit and achieve customer satisfaction. Application of Standardised Work will impact on each of these three aspects of successful operation. When the standard operations are being designed and written, the creators have to take into account how to perform the process safely and what performance outputs are required. In this way, safety, customer satisfaction and processing to cost targets are built into the process. Employees that perform the process as per the standard operations are then guaranteed to perform safely and produce output of the desired quality in the same time, every time. In turn, the organisation should achieve customer satisfaction and desired profit levels. Standardised Work is the best current method that safely combines the process inputs of man, machine and material to provide a predictable and repeatable output in terms of quality, cost and delivery. By definition, the documents form the current operating standard but also provide a starting point for ongoing improvement. Initially, the tool is used to capture the best current method. The standard operations also capture “know-how” or special employee tips that enable the process to be completed more easily. If this “know-how” is not recorded, it can be lost when an employee changes jobs or leaves the organisation, and so it has to be relearnt. The standard operations enable the transfer of knowledge from experienced employees to new employees in a quicker and more consistent way than “buddy” training (working alongside somebody else). Differences between individual employees are ironed out, as are differences between shift teams. The standard operations should always be updated after improvement activities have taken place, in order to capture the changes and for them to then be used to communicate the changes in a formal way to retrain. In this way, waste that has been eliminated and standards set by 5C / 5S are captured and not allowed to creep back in. The standard operation should therefore be treated as a living document. In terms of managing the process on an ongoing basis, the standard operations enable employees to be trained to the correct standard. Ideally, the process will now always perform to give the desired output performance; however, abnormal conditions may still occur, leading to a performance loss. In these instances, the standard operation sheets can be used to help identify the cause of the abnormal condition. This is done by physically taking the standard operations to the process, and comparing what is actually happening to what the standard sheets say should be happening. Why we need Standardised Work Fig. 6 To find out more about how Industry Forum can support your journey of improvement, visit our website, email us or phone +44 121 717 6600 to talk to our expert practitioners. A Bit More About Mike Mike Scull has over 30 years of manufacturing experience within the automotive, aerospace, electronics, off highway, white goods and apparel sectors. Joining Industry Forum in January 1998, Mike underwent training and mentoring in the implementation of Lean Manufacturing with Japanese Master Engineers from Toyota, Nissan and Honda. Mike’s current role at Industry Forum is Principal Consultant – Lean Manufacturing. Mike is a Chartered Engineer (CEng MIMechE), and has a BSc (Hons) in Civil Engineering. He has professional qualifications including APICS Certified Supply Chain Professional (CSCP) and Certified Production and Inventory Management (CPIM), Certified Demand Driven Planner, PRINCE2 Practitioner and is a Certified Six Sigma Black Belt. He is also an Assessor for the National Manufacturing Competitiveness Levels (NMCL) programme. Click here to contact Mike.
September 19, 2019 Industry Forum Blog Why is NPI Important? Aspirational growth targets are fundamental to future business strategy and a large part of achieving this growth will involve the introduction of new opportunities and new products into the business. Developing profitable, timely, high-quality products is more important today than ever before. Visibility to product performance has never been higher, while competitive pressures continue to squeeze margins and time to market. To compete, manufacturers must deliver better, faster and cheaper. Suppliers today are monitored by automated supplier management systems – these systems categorise suppliers based on risk formulas, which include factors like quality and on time delivery. Preferred suppliers are more likely to be awarded new contracts, while higher risk suppliers require more oversight and therefore receive fewer competitive contracts. This level of scrutiny and instantaneous global visibility means that manufacturers can no longer afford to launch products and improve them post release; product performance and quality must be excellent at initial release. What is Successful NPI? The four top criteria required for successful NPI are product quality, product performance, cost/margin, and time to market. It is also well known that these criteria tend to conflict with each other and often, organisations are required to decide whether to increase cost, delay release, or launch with known quality defects. It is “easy” to achieve one of these criteria, hard to accomplish two, and a strategic and collaborative effort is required to achieve all NPI success criteria consistently. Common Reasons for NPI Failures NPI areas that require handoffs among multiple stakeholders are requirements management, risk, product verification and validation, suppliers, and production planning. Challenges vary by discipline, but three issues are common areas of concern: lack of consistent or formal processes, disparate systems and data sources, and late engagement in NPI. These challenges have a negative impact on key NPI success criteria – time to market, costs, performance, and quality. Weak cross-functional collaboration is a crippling obstacle to NPI success. While there are plenty of reasons why targets set for a NPI launch are not achieved, below is a list of 5 of the most common reasons. NPI failures can include any combination of the following: Lack of formal launch processes Lack of project management approach and resource commitment Design and development issues and delayed design freeze The manufacturing process design is not able to achieve desired ramp up volumes Product quality or supply problems What Can You Do as a Manufacturer Now? Whether it’s a start up or an experienced NPI team, EVERY launch is different and must be addressed as such. A few steps that may help to drive successful product launches are: Identify a “NPI lead” and cross-functional team, mapping out requirements from each participant in a product launch schedule. Determine time and scale of NPI by creating a “baseline” readiness report. Create a NPI plan with definitive and measurable goals. Build sales and operational readiness by ensuring sales and operational teams are trained in new product launch excellence and have sign off on product launch date. Conduct a post product launch evaluation to learn lessons for the future by performing a thorough assessment and debrief of actions. To start your NPI improvement journey, complete your free NPI self-assessment and one of our experts will provide you with feedback. For more information, visit our website, email us or phone +44 121 717 6600 to talk to our expert practitioners. A Bit More About Robin Robin Talwar has over 20 years of international experience within the manufacturing sector, working with leading OEMs and cross-sector tier 1 suppliers. He began his career as a Quality Engineer for Honda Car Manufacturing, developing skills in Problem Solving, Kaizen and Quality Circles. Moving in to the role of Supplier Development Engineer at BMW Germany, Robin was involved in NPI activities and application of Core Tools with suppliers. Joining the Greenfield Project Team with Daimler Trucks, Robin led the Supplier Selection and Development activities to achieve a challenging 85% localisation target. Before joining Industry Forum in May 2015 as Principal Consultant in NPI and Lifecycle Management, Robin was Head of Logistics Operations for a brand new car manufacturing plant of Honda Cars in India, where he successfully developed a Japanese 3PL for inbound logistics and milk run operations. Click here to contact Robin.
September 4, 2019 Industry Forum Blog The supply chain is constantly changing for all industries. With the introduction of new technologies, innovative systems and the ever-changing demand of products, companies have been forced to change how they manage their operations and logistics to suit. These have all collectively contributed to the increased importance of having a smooth flow of management to ensure that the supply chain is working effectively. Your supply chain can be one of your best strategic resources and, if utilised properly, it can help you to grow quickly and efficiently. However, often we see areas in companies where it can be optimised even further to help take the business to the next level. Here are some of our best practices for making your supply chain management the best it can be. By optimising your flow with some of the below recommendations, you could grow your business in more ways than revenue. Healthy Supplier Relationships Communication is the key to everything in business and it should be at the forefront of any strong supply chain management system. Having good, healthy relationships with your suppliers is an important indicator that you are aiming to get the best out of your chain. Communication should occur regularly and should aim to be two-way so that both partners feel they are receiving a benefit. Having strong communication and relationship dictates value in each other, allows you to measure performance better and gives you a better opportunity to resolve any conflict that may arise. Optimise Your Inventory In business, reducing costs can sometimes be both necessary and difficult, but it doesn’t have to be the latter. Utilise your supply chain by consistently looking into your inventory quantities and where you can optimise them to save costs. When it comes to storing hold stock, it can become costly quickly as they sit in the warehouse with nowhere to go at that present time. By working on your ability to forecast and plan demand where possible, or even use a JIT (Just-In-Time) system, you can streamline this process and reduce costs dramatically. Utilise Technology As we’ve discussed previously, technological advancements give us the opportunity to better our business, whether it’s quickening processes or bringing certain elements in-house rather than outsourcing. By reviewing the technology, software and programmes that are used in your business on the regular, you could potentially save hours of work and therefore money. However, it’s important that you don’t rely on these technologies alone. Only review processes that are lacking and then see if there are any software solutions to suit. Establish Green Initiatives The world that we live in is being forced to become more socially responsible by introducing friendlier procedures to counteract the damaging effects industry have had on the planet. If a company is wanting to survive in the long term, it’s important that they begin to plan and implement sustainable and ‘green’ procedures for their business. Buyers are becoming a lot more environmentally aware when it comes to their purchasing decisions and may often purchase when hearing something positive in regards to the environment and the social responsibility of a company. By creating greener processes alongside a desired and positive workplace, you are on the right path to success. These are only a small selection of tools that can help you optimise your supply chain management but this is only the beginning. You can discover more ways to optimise your processes via our collection of AIAG Books, Publications and Standards. The Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG) are a group of professionals within the industry who aim to help with the streamlining of various industry processes, such as your supply chain management.
August 19, 2019 Industry Forum Blog Companies within the Aerospace industry have long since recognised that although they compete to gain market share, they also share common challenges. In the past, they have created differing techniques and methods to try and achieve the same results. To address this, the aviation, space, and defence industry established the International Aerospace Quality Group (IAQG) for the purpose of achieving significant improvements in quality, delivery, safety, and reductions in cost, throughout the value stream. This organisation includes representation from companies in the Americas, Asia Pacific, and Europe. One of the more tangible results of the group’s activities is the release of a number of industry recognised standards. The initial Aerospace approach to problem solving was released in May 2014. This standard was designated AS13000 Problem Solving Requirements for Suppliers and was based on the Automotive industry 8 discipline approach, more commonly known as “8D”. The standard was released in an attempt to create a common approach for problem solving. With the drive towards zero defects and continuous improvement becoming an Aerospace industry wide focus, the subject of problem solving was revisited in November 2016. This resulted in the IAQG releasing ARP9136, which is a recommended practice document, again, in support of problem solving. This guidance follows what is now known within the Aerospace sector as the 9 Step or “9S” approach. To summarise, ARP9136 is an Aerospace recommended practice and AS13000 is an Aerospace standard, both of which are used in aviation, space and defence industries. They both detail the same practices and methodologies to perform root cause analysis, with the only minor difference that ARP9136 describes a 9S approach, and AS13000 describes an 8D methodology. The intent and outcomes of both of these methodologies are exactly the same. Problem solving is seen as a key element of the goal of zero defects, as can be seen in the diagram. It moves organisations from fire fighting to effective root cause analysis, and the application of systematic corrective action. Our AS13000 8D Problem Solving Course has been updated to include alignment with ARP9136 Root Cause and Problem Solving (9S Methodology). To find out more about AS13000 and ARP9136 and how Industry Forum can support your journey of improvement and achieving zero defects, visit our website, email us or phone +44 121 717 6600 to talk to our expert practitioners. – August 2019 authored by Richard Hammond A Bit More About Richard Richard Hammond has over 30 years of auditing and consulting experience within automotive and aerospace sectors. He began his career at Rolls Royce Motors Plc, where he graduated to the role of Maintenance and Installation Engineer, before progressing to his current position as Principal Consultant at Industry Forum via Industrial Robotics and Certification Body Auditing. As a qualified SMMT trainer, Richard delivers the recognised International Automotive Task Force (IATF) ISO/TS16949 Certification Body Auditor training and evaluation. Richard is an approved IATF Witness Auditor and delivers Core Tools training (APQP, PPAP, SPC, MSA, FMEA and Control Plan) into major aerospace and automotive OEMs and tier 1 suppliers. Click here to contact Richard.
August 14, 2019 Industry Forum Blog Deming was champion of using data and measurement to properly understand and quantify current performance against standard. Understanding a problem through robust data collection and analysis provides a solid foundation to begin problem solving. It’s conventional wisdom, and has been around for a long time – all the more surprising then that the second biggest Major Non Conformance criteria in IATF 16949 for 2019 year to date is Clause 10.2.3 – Problem Solving! Problems, or abnormal occurrences, may be picked up in a number of different ways: Measuring actual performance against target as in Figure 1 e.g. short interval monitoring, SPC charts, performance measures on a Visual Management Board. Figure 1: The gap between actual and target performance. Typical performance measures include delivery, cost, lead time, safety and quality. It is important to remember that Problem Solving is not just used to react to a customer quality complaint. Trend or data trail analysis as part of an improvement programme. Customer complaints. Accident log book. Observing for yourself at the place of work and by talking to those carrying out the process. The last point here reminds us of the importance of ”going to Gemba”. Data and information are important to help direct you to the point of cause – but then you have to go and look for yourself, if you really want to understand the mechanism by which a failure might occur. “Data is of course important in manufacturing, but I place the greatest emphasis on facts.” – Taiichi Ohno Not all problems need to be resolved using the structured Problem Solving tool. Before embarking on a structured Problem Solving activity, it is important to understand if the inputs to the process (man, material, machine and method) are in line with the required standard, and if the cause of the problem or the countermeasure to the problem is known. The first question to ask is “Is the “problem” a result of the deterioration of standard working conditions and practices (basic conditions), which would affect the inputs to the process (man, material, machine, method)?” Frequently, “problems” detected as a gap between actual and target performance, during the course of normal working can be rectified by restoring the process back to the required basic conditions (5C standard – also known as 5S, working to Standard Operations, equipment maintained at correct standard). This is illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 2: The Infinity Loop. In normal working situations, we are in the sustain cycle, the first step of which is to measure the current situation. The second step is to keep to standard and if required, restore basic conditions of the equipment. Basic conditions refer to the good 5S/5C condition, working to Standard Operations and equipment maintained at the correct level. We then ask “Has the problem identified in step 1 been resolved?” Typically, 8/10 problems are resolved by restoring basic conditions. In these cases, step 3 is to do what is required to maintain the basic conditions in order to sustain normal working conditions. In these instances, we do not need to deploy a structured problem solving technique. What happens if the problem isn’t resolved by restoring basic conditions? We now have a second route to take; the Improvement Cycle. This could be a Focussed Improvement activity using the tools of Problem Solving. In the improve cycle, step 3 becomes carry out a “root cause analysis”. Step 4 is “root cause countermeasure” and step 5 is “define standards”. We then ask the question, “Has this solved the problem?” If the answer is no, go round the improvement cycle again. If the answer is yes, then we return to the sustain cycle, and the old step 3 has become step 6. The final step is 7, improve the basic conditions in line with the countermeasure. Normal working is made up of a combination of these two cycles – called the infinity loop. The infinity loop has strong links with Total Productive Maintenance, especially the point of establishing and maintaining basic conditions. The second question asked when deciding if structured problem solving needs to be used is, “Is the cause and/or countermeasure to the problem known?” The table below demonstrates the different approaches to be taken, depending upon your knowledge of cause and countermeasure: Figure 3: Cause/Countermeasure Matrix The matrix illustrates the different approaches that can be taken to solving a Problem, dependent upon your understanding of it. The cause may be known or not known, and similarly, the countermeasure may be known or not known. This leads to 4 different scenarios: Type 1 where cause and countermeasure are both known. Existing knowledge can be applied to the solution of the problem and a simple process followed. Type 2 where cause is known and countermeasure is not known. This is where technology tends to get applied to resolve issues and process specialists are required. Type 3 where cause is not known and countermeasure is known. Beware that countermeasures, at this point, could be applied to symptoms of problems if that problem has not been fully understood – this is fire-fighting. Type 4 where neither cause nor countermeasure is known. This is the area where the structured approach is most useful. The root cause can be most effectively identified through a rigorous iterative process utilising all the information relevant to the problem. The application of a structured Problem Solving approach can be usefully deployed if: All the process inputs are being deployed as required (man, material, machine and method) i.e. basic conditions are being met. The cause for falling short of target is unknown. The countermeasure is unknown. Structured Problem Solving can also be used to improve performance, rather than just react to a problem that is happening. In both instances, typical performance measures that can benefit from the application of the Problem Solving tool include delivery, cost, lead time, safety and quality. Conversely, failure to resolve problems will affect: Customer satisfaction – customer expects certain quality, price and delivery targets to be met and failure to meet these will reduce satisfaction, especially if the reason given for failure is repetitive. Competitiveness – poor QCD results affect the ability to compete with other suppliers and the achievement of globally competitive costs. Ultimately, this affects profitability. Reputation – a dissatisfied customer will be unlikely to repeat their business with you, and will likely spread the word to other people. Employee effectiveness. Effective problem solving using a structured method: Prevents reoccurrence of problems (i.e. fire-fighting). In turn, this improves performance measures and customer satisfaction. Provides a structured methodology for improvement of products/processes by highlighting potential risks on similar processes. Reduces costs associated with the problem. However, effective problem solving is not easy as the true root cause of a problem can be elusive to find. Perhaps that’s why there are so many Major Non-Conformances across IATF 16949 audits this year. To find out more about how Industry Forum can support your journey of improvement, visit our website, email us or phone +44 121 717 6600 to talk to our expert practitioners. A Bit More About Mike Mike Scull has over 30 years of manufacturing experience within the automotive, aerospace, electronics, off highway, white goods and apparel sectors. Joining Industry Forum in January 1998, Mike underwent training and mentoring in the implementation of Lean Manufacturing with Japanese Master Engineers from Toyota, Nissan and Honda. Mike’s current role at Industry Forum is Principal Consultant – Lean Manufacturing. Mike is a Chartered Engineer (CEng MIMechE), and has a BSc (Hons) in Civil Engineering. He has professional qualifications including APICS Certified Supply Chain Professional (CSCP) and Certified Production and Inventory Management (CPIM), Certified Demand Driven Planner, PRINCE2 Practitioner and is a Certified Six Sigma Black Belt. He is also an Assessor for the National Manufacturing Competitiveness Levels (NMCL) programme. Click here to contact Mike.
August 14, 2019 Industry Forum Blog Earlier this year, Industry Forum launched a free NPI self-assessment tool to help organisations start their NPI improvement journey. Since its launch, we have received responses from cross-sector manufacturing organisations (i.e. automotive, aerospace and diverse). Respondents to the self-assessment have come from across most functions in organisations, including project management, quality, design engineering, manufacturing engineering, supply chain, senior management and manufacturing. Feedback provided by our experienced team at Industry Forum on each individual NPI self-assessment has been well received and we are confident that this process has been of great value to organisations truly looking to improve their NPI capabilities. In this article, we will share some of the results across the self-assessments completed and talk about common weak areas identified for improvement. Before we start analysing results, here is your chance to complete the free NPI self-assessment, if you have not already done so. Take our free NPI self-assessment Fig. 1: Summary of NPI Self-Assessment Responses Fig. 2: Industry Forum NPI Model for Launch Excellence The NPI Process pillar remains, by far, the biggest area of concern highlighted in NPI self-assessment responses completed to date. 63% of responses (see Fig. 1) within this pillar are an area of concern for respondents. It is also one of the key process pillars in the Industry Forum NPI Model for Launch Excellence (see Fig. 2). A successful NPI process needs to be aligned to business needs and agreed with all stakeholders. Lack of stakeholder commitment is often seen either due to a cumbersome NPI process or one that is not rigorous enough to produce the desired NPI results. This is also an area where best practices start becoming a best fit to organisations. It all comes down to having a right sized NPI process that meets the business needs. So, how do we get to this right sized NPI process? The right sized NPI process should: Be adaptable to both simple and complex situations. Have a clear definition and buy-in from a cross-functional team on expected activities, deliverables and decisions for NPI. Have buy-in from a cross-functional team on standard work output for each activity within the NPI process. Have measures for process adherence and NPI outputs agreed and implemented in teams. Project Management is the next biggest area of concern highlighted in NPI self-assessment responses completed to date. 39% of responses (see Fig. 1) within this pillar are an area of concern for respondents. When we think about some of the reasons for NPI project failures, the usual suspects come to mind: Failure to set and manage expectations: Lack of communication at any level. Inefficient documentation and tracking of progress. Competing priorities. Disregard of project warning signs / risks. Poor planning and/or inadequate structure of process. Poor project leadership or implementation – inadequately trained project managers or project teams. Inaccurate cost estimates. The good news is that while every project is unique, there are a number of core Project Management principles which underpin success. What Are the Next Steps? The big question for many organisations starting on their NPI improvement journey is what they should do first. A good starting point is to do some internal analysis to identify strengths and weaknesses. This approach will not only be more cost effective but will also highlight where to concentrate first level efforts for improvement. To facilitate this internal analysis, a self-assessment tool can provide people the opportunity to take a step back, reflect and make decisions on where improvements are required. Only after this exercise has been completed can a logical decision be made on next steps to advance the capabilities and close existing gaps. Below are some simple questions to ask within your teams to define your improvement areas relating to project management: Do we all have a common understanding and awareness of project management principles? Do we have a project management approach established with a structured project planning process? Do we have effective communication in project teams from start to end of projects? Consider planning, assigning, monitoring, controlling and close out of projects. Do we effectively manage project risk and changes in the team? Do we continuously improve our project management methodologies with a lessons learned feedback loop? Industry Forum can help with a 4 day NPI process workshop, as a closed course at your site. This workshop includes reviewing the existing NPI process, defining a suitable future state with cross-functional teams and defining measures for sustained implementation of the new NPI process. We also have a 3 day Project Management Practitioner for Product Launch Excellence course that can be delivered at your site. For more information, visit our website, email us or phone +44 121 717 6600 to talk to our expert practitioners. A Bit More About Robin Robin Talwar has over 20 years of international experience within the manufacturing sector, working with leading OEMs and cross-sector tier 1 suppliers. He began his career as a Quality Engineer for Honda Car Manufacturing, developing skills in Problem Solving, Kaizen and Quality Circles. Moving in to the role of Supplier Development Engineer at BMW Germany, Robin was involved in NPI activities and application of Core Tools with suppliers. Joining the Greenfield Project Team with Daimler Trucks, Robin led the Supplier Selection and Development activities to achieve a challenging 85% localisation target. Before joining Industry Forum in May 2015 as Principal Consultant in NPI and Lifecycle Management, Robin was Head of Logistics Operations for a brand new car manufacturing plant of Honda Cars in India, where he successfully developed a Japanese 3PL for inbound logistics and milk run operations. Click here to contact Robin.
