Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

APICS is not responsible for statements or opinions expressed by individuals in its publications or at its meetings. The views expressed are solely those.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "APICS is not responsible for statements or opinions expressed by individuals in its publications or at its meetings. The views expressed are solely those."— Presentation transcript:

1 APICS is not responsible for statements or opinions expressed by individuals in its publications or at its meetings. The views expressed are solely those of the individual and are not necessarily endorsed by APICS. The Great Cookie Crisis – 2006 Utilizing the Tools of Quality in PIM Performance Improvement Brian Koenig CPIM The Elmore Institute LLC Doug Brandt CPIM, CIRM Armstrong Air Conditioning

2 Engaged in Improvement??? “How many agree that the vast majority of the workforce in your organization possess far more talent, intelligence, capability and creativity than their present jobs require or even allow?” Stephen Covey The 8 th Habit – From Effectiveness to Greatness

3 The Great Cookie Crisis Problem Solving Methodology  Process Control – Predictability & Stability  Scientific Method – Hoshin Planning / Policy Deployment Tools of Quality Which tool, when, how and why?  Long Term – Process Improvement  Medium Term - Problem Solving  Short term - Daily Manufacturing Process Control Ottawa Baking  Toledo - 400,000 per week  Atlanta - 250,000 per week

4 Cookie Defects

5 What issues hinder our success?? Corrective Action & Help!!! Continuous Improvement from optimizing Effectiveness and Efficiencies?

6 5 Step – Methodology 1. Define current process / problem. 2. Define future process / goal. 3. Analysis of data and alternate solutions. 4. Selection and implementation of solutions. 5. Verification of results / future condition.

7 Kaoru Ishikawa Tools  Support the processes  How and when  Methods = Results  Simple = Effective Lean / ISO objectives  Employee Involvement  Continuous Improvement

8 Basic Tools 1. Gantt Chart 2. Tally Sheets 3. Run Chart Scatter Diagram 5-Why’s Control Charts 4. Pareto Analysis 5. Flow Charts 6. Fishbone Analysis Corrective Action Matrix Failure Mode & Effects (FMEA) Poka-Yokes

9 The Meeting April ‘05 Veronica’s office – Rainy Tuesday morning Quality Issues  Lost 3 of 10 largest customers in since last fall. (quality?)  Quality Mgr and Maintenance Supt – New ovens $1/2 mil.  11 of 36 cookies with “not enough” chips at party. It’s up to us to solve the “problem”!

10 1. Initial Activities Member Selection Problem Definition Objectives Project Timeline

11 Assembling the Team Core Members Support Members Initiator  Problem definition  Goal  Closure Beware!

12 What is the Problem with Inventory??? 1. Reduce average total number of cookies the inventory is off. (Average week +/- 20,000 of 1,000,000 in stock) 2. Reduce average number of items off by +/- 1,000. (Average week 8 types out of 100 types) 3. Increase number of cookie types that are 100% accurate. (Average week 82%) * * Examples * * of different Definitions

13 Objective Ottawa Baking Our objective is to reduce the number of defective cookies based off scrap, audits and customer credits / complaints for the Toledo and Atlanta facilities. Developed by core members during 2 nd meeting.  Goal to be developed after base data collected. Is this too Broad? - Veronica’s mandate

14 Gantt Chart Nice Recruiting Tool !!!

15 Communications and buy-in Project Management Methods, documentation & records  Up to individual organizations  What? Who? How? Results? Training & Competencies

16 2. Current Condition Data Collection – What do we collect?  Data aligned with future problem / solution needs?  User friendly and understood?  How much do you need to collect?  Sorting, ranking, presenting? Tools  Tally Sheet – Initial collection  Run Chart – Defects by Quantity  Pareto Chart – Defects by Type  Flow Chart – Sequence of activities

17 Tally Sheet User Friendly!!! Defects – ‘000 Defect Wk 1Wk 2Wk 3Wk 4 1. Burned IIIII IIII 2. Broken IIII II 3. Packaging II I 4. Size I I 5. Stuck II 6. Chips I Total 15 8

18 Run Chart

19 “Secondary Sorts” Stratification – Six Sigma Breaking data apart into different categories to assist future analysis. Could be by: shift, plant, department, cookie type, etc. Total Total Shift Shift – Shift –

20 Pareto Chart Rule of 80/20

21 Flow Chart Current

22 3.Future Process / Goal Where are we going? “SMART” Goals S pecific M easurable A ggressive R ealistic T ime bound Goals impact the activities and resources allocated to the project.

23 Ottawa Baking Project Goal Reduce the 6-Week moving average of Defective Cookies by 30% in 180 days. 12,000 or less per week - Toledo 7,000 or less per week - Atlanta

24 4. Root Cause Analysis Identify lowest level of cause 5M’s + E / Fishbone / 5 Why’s  Scatter Diagram / ANOVA  A single “problem” can have multiple Issues / Root Causes attached to it.

25 5M’s + E Sources of Variation 1. M an Left in oven too long 2. M aterial Dry dough 3. M achines Hot spots in ovens 4. M ethods Tray versus belt 5. M easurement Inconsistent scale E nvironment Ambient humidity

26 Fishbone

27 Start counting last pack of M&M’s.

28 5 – Why’s Possible multiple analysis 1. Why burned cookies? Hot spots 2. Why hot spots? Thermocouple calibration 3. Why calibration? Not on PM checklist 4. Why not on checklist? Issues with updating 5. Why not updated? Staffing shortages / Priorities ** Possible to have multiple 5-Why analysis within a project.

29 5. Corrective Action Plan Designing and executing the “Action” Plan  Multiple activities per project – Coordinate  Tools - DOE / FMEA / APQP / Poka Yokes / Standardize Best way to organize  Who’s available / interested  Vertical vs. Horizontal ex. Training (all groups responsible for their own or one groups trains all?) Corrective Action Matrix  Issue, C/A, Leader, Target Date, Results

30 Corrective Action Matrix IssueActivity Leader Date Status 1. DoughReviewEng7-31Closed Temp 2. Oven Calibration &DB/BK9/30Closed TempsLocationMaint 3. TrayVerify andDB/BK9/30 Closed TypeStandardize 4. Set-upBaking andDB/BK9/30 Open PackagingMaint

31 6. Sustaining the Gains Standardization and Work Guidance Future Monitoring and Verification  What, Who, When, “How”  SPC – Control Charts  Departmental audits

32 Standards (Specs - What) Clear image of desired conditions Make abnormalities obvious Simple and Visual Work Guidance (How) Robust - wide Dynamic - changing Input from users

33 Standards & Guidance

34 Items Standardized Burned Cookies 1. Tray types used by cookies 2. PM on thermocouples 3. Reference scales for cookie inspection 4. Competencies and training in baking and packaging 5. Min/ Max dough temps, prior to baking. 6. Operator, Supervisor and Quality inspection methods and responsibilities.

35 7. Revised Condition Are we there yet?

36 8. Review and Record Keeping Evaluation of activities, findings, methods, tools and results. Story of the Team - summary  Each organization, own requirements

37 Team Review Problem Description Goal Team & Input Current Process Current Condition Root Cause Analysis Counter Measures Future Condition Standardization Verification Documentation Results

38 Story of the Team

39 Reactive ??? Or Proactive???

40 Hoshin Planning Attaining Strategic Objectives 3 -Tier Policy Deployment – PDCA Cycles 1. Top Management 2. Middle Management 3. Departmental  Quality HoshinSafety Hoshin  Productivity HoshinTPM Hoshin  Sales Hoshin  Management can/should walk into the departments to verify how well departmental activities are aligned with and meeting higher level Hoshins.

41 Internal Objectives – Ottawa Baking 1. Employee Involvement 2. Visual Tools 3. Continuous Improvement Internal Tools – Ottawa Baking 1. Daily / Weekly Meetings 2. Department Scoreboard!!!

42 Departmental Scoreboard Know the objective Assess the situation Adjust and attack

43 Departmental Scoreboard Ottawa Baking QualityProductivityInventory Customer A1 Defects Schedule AttainmentOn-Hand On-Time Run Chart Run Chart A2 Defects DowntimeAccuracy Complaints Pareto ParetoPareto Pareto A3 Root CauseRoot Cause Root Cause Root Cause AnalysisAnalysis Analysis Analysis A4 Action LogAction LogAction Log Action Log B1 Accidents &Efficiency Run Chart 5S Audit Safety AuditRun Chart B2 Safety Efficiency5S Action Log Action Log Action Log

44

45

46 Summary Tools identified and sequenced to help Ottawa Baking improve performance. Departmental “scoreboard” to improve day- to-day operations.

47 Thanks!!! Hope you enjoyed the presentation... Brian

48 Appendix Scatter Diagram Control Charts FMEA Additional Reading

49 Scatter Diagram

50 Control Chart Processing Capabilities  Control LimitsVoice of Process  Customer Specs Voice of Customer Common Cause vs. Special Cause Variation  Reducing Common Cause Variation = Continuous Improvement Accuracy vs Precision

51

52 FMEA Failure Mode & Effects Severity Occurrence Detection RPN Number (SxOxD)

53 Additional Sources Lean Production Simplified Pascal Dennis Standards, Job Element Sheets, Hoshin Planning Productivity Press Understanding Statistical Process Control Donald J. Wheeler / David S. Chamberlain Control Charts & Interpretation SPC Press

54 Special Thanks AIC – Rita, Kathy, Sue, Margaret & Mike EMU – Dr Tucker, Veronica, Jim & Brian Owens CC – Students from QCT 110 / 231

55 We hope you enjoyed! Brian Koenig CPIM aol.com Doug Brandt CPIM / CIRM aac-inc.com Session #: E – 09 Title: The Great Cookie Crisis Please return your completed session survey to the room monitor or the collection boxes near the exit APICS programs are noncommercial forums. Speakers have agreed to refrain from the use of brand names and specific product endorsement whenever possible. Speakers understand that the association’s podium cannot be used as a place for direct promotion of the presenter’s product, services, or for monetary self interest.


Download ppt "APICS is not responsible for statements or opinions expressed by individuals in its publications or at its meetings. The views expressed are solely those."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google