Management Fads, SPC, TQM, 5S, Lean.... - Page 3
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 146
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Flushing/Flint, Michigan
    Posts
    6,120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    241
    Likes (Received)
    4937

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Dude View Post
    .....

    I am actually developing a new "alternative" system to lean (mostly the same goals, different implementation and tool strategy) that is aimed at small-medium private shops of all types (OEM, job shop, pure service, etc.) My goal is to make it so simple and effective......

    The Dude
    That is long overdue in my opinion.
    Lean, perhaps a good idea but "it can be improved on". (lean nuts will get the reference)
    But of note is that this took a track on 5S not lean or others.
    Is this because of the large use of 5S as it is simple to implement?
    5S is sort of duh, type stuff. I see no one took on SPC and that is interesting in itself.
    Lean is different and makes no sense to many. Flow, single part pulls, cells that your reconfigure fast., no inventories on the floor or on the shelf. Fancy value added charts.
    The name itself is bad and scary.
    Lean does not mean cutting to the bone. It does not mean cutting staff. It does not mean paying less to your people.
    Do either of these and you are not running lean. You are simply scamming to produce dollars. It won't work long term.
    Bob

  2. Likes Bobw, Jashley73 liked this post
  3. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Abingdon, VA
    Posts
    3,009
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3835
    Likes (Received)
    2330

    Default

    The automotive industry and their just-in-time operating model is basically a way to push all inventory down to the vendor level. The American version of the Japanese Toyota Production System was influenced by the bean counters (as is most everything in America), and they love not having any inventory, but forcing all the vendors to keep it - at the threat of huge fines and lawsuits.

    Actually the entire automotive industry's claim of "lean" is just that, a claim. Have you looked on the dealer's lots lately? They're all jammed full of brand-new vehicles, with more on trucks being delivered, and every available spot outside of every factory stuffed full of finished, new cars.

    How in the hell is that lean??

    Sure, having a few days or weeks of machined or stamped parts on the shelf somewhere ties up some money, but good grief, what about 60 to 90 days or more of the finished automobiles?

    The auto companies have a good scam going. Force the vendors to hold all the inventory of parts needed to build the vehicles, then finance finished vehicles to the dealers - and jam their lots full of them.

    So ultimately the customer is the boss. You have to have finished product available for them to buy...if not your competition will get the sale.

    95% of all vehicles sold are purchased off the dealer lots, not ordered.

    No stock = no sale.

  4. Likes Bobw, Oldwrench, Jashley73, Mr.Bronze, Spinit and 1 others liked this post
  5. #43
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Arizona
    Posts
    4,388
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    17679
    Likes (Received)
    4095

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cnctoolcat View Post
    The automotive industry and their just-in-time operating model is basically a way to push all inventory down to the vendor level. The American version of the Japanese Toyota Production System was influenced by the bean counters (as is most everything in America), and they love not having any inventory, but forcing all the vendors to keep it - at the threat of huge fines and lawsuits.
    The enormous missing piece of the Toyota system is Toyota owns their suppliers. This system falls on it's face regularly in the USA because big corp did not get the memo. They still treat their suppliers like shit with slow payments so the big corp's balance sheet looks better for this quarter's earnings.

  6. Likes Bobw, cnctoolcat, Jashley73, Oldwrench liked this post
  7. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Flushing/Flint, Michigan
    Posts
    6,120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    241
    Likes (Received)
    4937

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cnctoolcat View Post
    The automotive industry and their just-in-time operating model is basically a way to push all inventory down to the vendor level. The American version of the Japanese Toyota Production System was influenced by the bean counters (as is most everything in America), and they love not having any inventory, but forcing all the vendors to keep it - at the threat of huge fines and lawsuits.
    How can this save money?
    Sure you push the inventory down one level where maybe it costs a bit less to hold.
    But this guy has to make money to survive so he has to charge for it somehow or go broke.
    The big place can probably source money at a lower cost, the little guys ships more often paying UPS or the truckers.
    The supplier now holds the inventory and has pay it somewhere in the P&L.... no gains that I see.
    The end user pays more so the small shops can pay the inventory bills for him. There is still inventory and somebody antes up the cash flow for it.
    This is a good concept? Seems like lose-lose.
    Bob

  8. Likes Jashley73 liked this post
  9. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    621
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    123
    Likes (Received)
    225

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CarbideBob View Post
    That is long overdue in my opinion.
    Lean, perhaps a good idea but "it can be improved on". (lean nuts will get the reference)
    But of note is that this took a track on 5S not lean or others.
    Is this because of the large use of 5S as it is simple to implement?
    5S is sort of duh, type stuff. I see no one took on SPC and that is interesting in itself.
    Lean is different and makes no sense to many. Flow, single part pulls, cells that your reconfigure fast., no inventories on the floor or on the shelf. Fancy value added charts.
    The name itself is bad and scary.
    Lean does not mean cutting to the bone. It does not mean cutting staff. It does not mean paying less to your people.
    Do either of these and you are not running lean. You are simply scamming to produce dollars. It won't work long term.
    Bob
    I agree with everything you say including and starting with the name. It does sound scary (as in less staff). When I consulted I started out training sessions saying that the only justification to use lean as a staff cutting tool is that if it was the only option to save the company but also stating that it was usually too late at that point. Very bad to do both at the same time (lean and cut staff).

    I also agree on the point of 5S. Just as a taste of what I see as a new version of lean is that you don't just do "5S". You have a tool to organize and standardize the work (done at the same time). I could never figure out why "lean" taught these as two different tools. You can't organize unless you standardize and you can't standardize unless you organize. Actually, the first thing you really have to do is define the work. Then, and only then, can you both organize and standardize. And all of this is part of other simplified tools that aim to achieve the results typically associated with lean.

    I don't have a ton of experience with SPC but I do understand it's application and what it's supposed to achieve. I believe the actually number of processes it can be applied to in it's entirety (i.e. to ensure a process is churning out good parts) to be more limited than it is actually applied to. When I was at a larger corporation making wire harnesses, we applied SPC to the "core crimp height" (where a press crimped an electrical terminal around the wire and insulation). While SPC may have shown trends/problems in the press process, that was all that it showed yet you could have many more defects that we human caused (not shoving the wire all the way in, holding it at an angle, etc.). If there's too much human influence, I don't think SPC does much good (except to impress a customer which, IMO, makes it expensive advertising).

    Thanks,
    The Dude

  10. Likes Jashley73 liked this post
  11. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Country
    CANADA
    State/Province
    Ontario
    Posts
    197
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    120
    Likes (Received)
    122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CarbideBob View Post
    How can this save money?
    Sure you push the inventory down one level where maybe it costs a bit less to hold.
    But this guy has to make money to survive so he has to charge for it somehow or go broke.
    The big place can probably source money at a lower cost, the little guys ships more often paying UPS or the truckers.
    The supplier now holds the inventory and has pay it somewhere in the P&L.... no gains that I see.
    The end user pays more so the small shops can pay the inventory bills for him. There is still inventory and somebody antes up the cash flow for it.
    This is a good concept? Seems like lose-lose.
    Bob
    I think the vendor level is the correct level to hold most of the inventory, since that quantity of inventory is driven by the vendor's abilities. From what I've seen in automotive supply chains is that there is safety stock located throughout the chain. The quantity held is based on the ability of each chain link to deliver on time, in full. If you are a vendor that has his stuff locked down and your OTIF is really good, you don't need to carry much inventory. If you are a vendor that generally sucks, and you're lucky if your machines run the whole day without a failure, and you've given up on creating production schedules because they go up in smoke by 10 am as hot rush orders crop up where you are super late on a delivery, or critical equipment regularly fails, etc, then you need a lot of inventory. The customer doesn't have direct control of the operations of the vendor, so the costs should be borne by the group with the most control. Better control of your operations = better financial performance, and the goals are aligned. Better vendor performance benefits both the vendor and the customer win-win. If the customer is eating the cost of maintaining huge inventories to cover for a vendor that can't get it together, what is the vendor's incentive to do better?

    Having said all that, safety stock is still held at the assembly plants. I don't know how Toyota handles it, but at a Honda plant that I'm familiar with, there is a warehouse across the road that carries the "insurance spares". The inventory in the warehouse is not normally used, and the JIT parts are only handled from the trucks direct to the assembly line over at the assembly plant. If a JIT delivery doesn't show up on time, they get the parts from across the road. When the wayward truck shows up, the now excess inventory goes to the warehouse. A large part of the benefit of JIT is the reduction in handling. Less labour, less fork trucks, less risk of a fork truck spearing the goods and wrecking them, less floor space to allow all this extra handling and storage.

  12. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    7,359
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    327
    Likes (Received)
    4004

    Default

    This thread started with the notion of manufacturing "fads" -- and here's maybe a sympathetic view of them.

    Years ago leaders like Jack Welch realized that big manufacturing companies have a lot of inertia. They can only absorb one or two lessons in a year. So, a best practice is to figure out the one thing the company most needed next -- and make it a corporate priority. At GE, this variously included being a leader in market share, having a "work out" process for management and labor to work together, get serious about quality, and so on. Think of this as a learning process -- one lesson at a time.

    Obviously the "lessons" have to make sense. But there's some wisdom in aiming to -- and then mastering -- something important to the company. The trick is, of course, knowing what's important rather than what's the flavor of the day. Just because GE needs a "work out" or "TQM" process doesn't mean a every small needs one.

    Translating that to small shops, this would mean trying to figure out some important new skill or practice every year -- and gradually building greater competence. In my own business I made it a practice to do a sort of research project each year -- aimed at increasing my value to clients.

    Just scanning past PM posts -- there's lots of things folks would like to get better at: developing a product line, prospecting for new business, getting customers to pay on time, making parts customers don't reject, organizing for greater throughput, learning solid modeling, organizing their tools, getting better at hiring and training, etc. Nothing wrong with consciously trying to get better at something important to our businesses, one "fad" at a time.

  13. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Country
    CANADA
    State/Province
    Ontario
    Posts
    220
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    106
    Likes (Received)
    91

    Default

    I liked how adamm framed JIT, perfect sense of how it works well. Just trying to push the concepts of lean on to a 1-10 machine shop is hard, Maybe if they are doing straight production work but who makes all it all on just making bread. You gotta make some bagels too. People wanna frame the small shop environment in that you can be just like Honda too.
    It won't work that way. They have teams of guys doing time studies on how long shit takes or how long a cutter will work. No I cannot order exactly enough endmills for the job. Shit can happen. Most likely your paying me for my agility to switch gears and get on with your hot job.

    They are prompting the internet of things as the savior to manufacturing. I don't need my Mill to receive a cutting data update and screw up all the things I have set. I would however like to not hand code any more boring bars in Mastercam.

  14. #49
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    312
    Likes (Received)
    415

    Default

    I went through a lot of the BS when I first started at a previous place 15 years ago.
    The main customer (Goodrich) was all over the place when I started, telling us how to run it.
    The first thing I remember was the big clear out which was ridiculous - if you haven't used it in 6 months it's going out in the skip.
    A couple of HCT lathes went out and I remember grabbing back in the 4jaw and faceplate of a clausing lathe.
    Then it was onto single piece flow and we were doing 2axis lathe work on 4axis millturns, because it was the same material so reduced set times...
    Meanwhile, the 3 and 4ax work was then bottlenecking and having to be turned (2ax) and then milled on a mill. Price and lead-time through the roof.
    Within 6 months the placed went pop.

    The bottom line is common sense should prevail and keep your customer out of your business.

  15. #50
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Kentucky
    Posts
    220
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    31
    Likes (Received)
    71

    Default

    anymore (imo)' the JIT thing is an excuse for PPP (piss poor planning).
    actually made that statement at one of the bigger places i worked at during one
    their many dumb ass meetings, in front of their higher ups.
    they just looked at me, it got real quiet, couple of them thought it was funny.
    getting into the holidays, alot of these automotive places around here will have shut downs
    around Christmas for maintenance.
    bunch of stuff we quoted back in august, they won't order til 2-3 weeks before they want it.
    then it will require over time, maybe even working the holiday, but they want it at the straight time price.

  16. #51
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Minnesota
    Posts
    292
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    159
    Likes (Received)
    219

    Default

    I have entertained the idea of pursuing a few of these systems, but I always end on the opinion that my shop is too small to have a dedicated push towards any of the previously mentioned management constructs.
    What I settled on as the "umbrella policy" for my situation is the Theory of Constraints; and just like the fancy names for the other management tools, the immediate application and the idea is more important than the paperwork for certification.

    ToC doesn't preclude me from implementing the other management tools, and it keeps my head focused on the most important things - bottlenecks in production, wherever they pop up.
    I have a bad habit of building Rube Goldberg machines, ending up spending tons of time and attention to things that won't appreciably improve the performance. I have found that the Theory of Constraints provides a simple algorithm for deciding what to try to improve on a short/medium scale - it helps me keep in mind the criteria that I should be using for evaluating the urgency of improvements, and takes virtually no overhead paperwork until I see a spot that needs to be looked at with numbers.

    Many of the big management tools are really focused on reducing waste and costs - but there is only a finite amount of money on the table available for cost savings. Reducing costs has a much bigger impact on the bottom line when there are high volumes of parts with low margins. 2% of $100M is some serious walkin' around money.

    But for the SME manufacturer/job shop, the ups and downs of a business cycle are much more threatening, and a lot of the stuff that would be up on the block for cost reduction for a big company, is not worth enough to make or break the company if things go south for a while.
    The only real way to ensure survival is to increase output to a healthy level, then you can start looking at the more intricate efficiency things after all the bills are paid and you have a good throughput of product. ToC actually works against JIT and Lean manufacturing, but using buffers and other tools to improve output, rather than cut costs.

  17. #52
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    HarCo Md.
    Posts
    28
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    I'm surprised to see TPM not mentioned on here . This seems to be the latest and greatest fad in the Md. area . Lots and lots of $$ spent on this with many managers in all day meetings . Of the biggest I've witnessed , Unilever HPC/Sun Products packed it up and left town for cheaper labor among other things . In fact , Unilever has shut down every plant in Md. Holabird , Southwest Blvd and the ice cream plant also . The big spice maker in town spends many dollars and hrs on TPM along with daily meetings which keeps lots of people employed . I can only wonder what changes will come when Fuchs spices opens up in Hamstead . I myself along with many other skilled "value added employees" have our own meaning of TPM one of which would be "total plant meltdown" . JMO

  18. #53
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Central Texas, West and North of Austin
    Posts
    1,620
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    176
    Likes (Received)
    522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CarbideBob View Post
    So this seems like a good place to pick a fight.
    Is any of this useful in small shops?
    Not just make your customer feel good or maybe opens a door.
    Does it make money in your checkbook?

    The books you read are full of worked great, saved the world examples.
    They never talk about made things worse, killed productivity, cost too much. I guess that would not sell books.
    Single part flow, JIT , What? Outsource to somewhere that a boat moves the parts and then claim to love daily pull JIT deliveries?
    SPC in a shop that makes ones and twos or even twenties? Why? Valued added vs time and money spent is what?
    Don't most lie and hold inventories to provide pull shipments.
    Don't most just cheat the spc shipping data?
    Do we do paperwork just for the sake of numbers? Isn't this a huge waste of time and money?
    Somebody, somewhere has to buy that time and effort.
    Bob
    The only one of the acronyms being floated around these days that I can see making a small shop any money are the ones that start with ISO, as in ISO 9000 an such, and then only IF you have a profitable part that some customer wants where the customer WILL NOT deal with you if you are not ISO certified, compliant, all worshipful or whatever. And even then, the customer has t be willing and able to send you enough work to more than pay for all the audits and certification processes you have to go through. We had a customer, several of them actually, mostly in the Middle East oil front, that had beauceau work to let out, but the shop HAD to be ISO certified. We checked nto it, and the AUDIT, just the AUDIT, with no guarantee that we would pass it, was at the time in the late 90s a flat $10k. Likely much higher today. In a small shop, the ability to eat a $10k bite out of profit isn't an everyday thing. Today, it's likely twice that, and the cert isn't forever. You have to re-certify ever so often. That's a pretty good bite, right off the top, and they still want the parts priced competitively.
    And from what I could tell, it was going to take a full time position for somebody to chase and coordinate all of the "Documentation", which was in effect, ALL that ISO 9000 really was, documentation. Write down how you do something, and then document that you have done it in ALL cases. You had to document ALL your materials, certify and document ALL your measuring tools, I'm sure document what cutting tools you did a process with. It didn't say HOW you had to do anything, but whatever you DID document as to how you did something, you had to constantly keep documents to prove that EVERY person did things the same way. Bean counter's utopia, and anybody trying to get stuff done's hell. Got to where we were making jokes as to how we were supposed to document our bathroom breaks, how many sheets of TP we used, input vs. output.
    We declined to pursue the process after about three months of trying. We were so damned busy with stuff for non ISO customers that we didn't see the profit in it. Pencil pushers probably had their head spin completely 360 degrees when the boss told em this, but tough tooties.

  19. Likes Jashley73, Hodge, Oldwrench liked this post
  20. #54
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Central Texas, West and North of Austin
    Posts
    1,620
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    176
    Likes (Received)
    522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chineshop_guy View Post
    anymore (imo)' the JIT thing is an excuse for PPP (piss poor planning).
    actually made that statement at one of the bigger places i worked at during one
    their many dumb ass meetings, in front of their higher ups.
    they just looked at me, it got real quiet, couple of them thought it was funny.
    getting into the holidays, alot of these automotive places around here will have shut downs
    around Christmas for maintenance
    bunch of stuff we quoted back in august, they won't order til 2-3 weeks before they want it.
    then it will require over time, maybe even working the holiday, but they want it at the straight time price.
    I agree with you , JIT is just an acronym for failure to plan ahead by somebody in purchasing. They want me to either read their pea brains and keep parts on hand, waiting for them to order, or be ready to drop what I'm doing to tend to these primadonnas. "Failure to plan, on your part, does not mean emergency, on my part."

  21. Likes Philabuster, KFALCON954 liked this post
  22. #55
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Near Seattle
    Posts
    4,270
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2231
    Likes (Received)
    1005

    Default

    Some XKCD frames that are likely appropriate to this conversation:
    https://xkcd.com/951/
    https://xkcd.com/1205/

  23. Likes Atomkinder, Bobw liked this post
  24. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Geneva Illinois USA
    Posts
    4,506
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1745
    Likes (Received)
    1664

    Default

    I haven't read all the comments in detail so I apologize if what I have to say has already been said.

    The most important part of any of these programs is that they apply to high volume. They are statistical in nature. Statistics don't work on onesy twosy's.

    The whole concept of 6 sigma and other types of programs, such as X-bar, R and such. based on two items. One, the process chosen to make the part is capable of consistently making the make to tolerances tighter than the maximum allowed. The second part is that the engineer must tolerance the part such that the part can consistently be made within the allowed specs. Not just once or twice, but millions of parts.

    In order to determine the process capability, a design of experiments is usually done. What this is, is to vary all the perimeters of the machine and determine the effect on the part. This includes not just the machine, but also operators and setup people. Material and tooling would be subject to similar studies. The most sensitive factors are the one that determine the capability and the ones that most be controlled. On a lathe or a mill, the cutting tool probably has the greatest effect and therefore would be most carefully monitored with X-bar R charts. A study might show that after x-number of operations that the tool must be serviced or replaced. Doing so minimizes the chance of questionable parts getting into system.

    This may seem simple for a single part, but remember that given a batch of parts produced over a significant time frame and from different machines, that there is a statistical variation from nominal. This distribution must be tighter than the allowed tolerance to allow for similar variations of other parts that go into an assembly.

    At each stage of the assembly, the tolerance distributions of each part taken together produces an increasing large statistical variation. The end result is that at the final assembly, the cumulative distributions do not vary outside the maximum allowance.

    This is 6 sigma, or 3.4 maximum defects per million parts or assemblies.

    There is a lot more to do with this, but this a brief description.

    Tom

  25. #57
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Arizona
    Posts
    4,388
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    17679
    Likes (Received)
    4095

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gorrilla View Post
    "Failure to plan, on your part, does not mean emergency, on my part."
    It does if they pay me a ridiculous expedite fee.

  26. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Flushing/Flint, Michigan
    Posts
    6,120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    241
    Likes (Received)
    4937

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gorrilla View Post
    . "Failure to plan, on your part, does not mean emergency, on my part."
    A nice saying, makes you feel warm like peeing down your leg.
    I sure know the feeling and meaning. Unfortunately in the real world it does become an emergency on your part.
    Worse yet often you get no more money but saving someone's ass is a card you get to hold for later use in the game
    Bob

  27. Likes Spinit liked this post
  28. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    4,452
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    5126
    Likes (Received)
    5502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Philabuster View Post
    It does if they pay me a ridiculous expedite fee.
    Whats funny is: when you tell them that (word for word). Then they call you back and ask if you will waive the expedite if they triple the order. And, you physically laugh at them. And then, you never hear from them again! True story.

  29. Likes Philabuster, Jashley73 liked this post
  30. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    4,452
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    5126
    Likes (Received)
    5502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CarbideBob View Post
    A nice saying, makes you feel warm like peeing down your leg.
    Unfortunately in the real world it does become an emergency on your part.
    Worse yet often you get no more money but saving someones ass is a card you get to hold for later use in the game
    Bob
    In my experience that card is useless. And, your efforts just become expected.
    The best change I made in 2015 was quit letting people walk on me, or dictate my schedule/prices.
    It cost me a few customers. Oh-well.

    Sorry, off-topic. But, maybe that was my way of going "lean". Smooth out the work-flow.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •