Presentation on theme: "1. 2 Do you think the present situation is satisfactory?"— Presentation transcript:
2 Do you think the present situation is satisfactory?
5 In search of Opportunity A C P D Problem Kaizen (Make it Better) Problem Solving Problem Definition
6 MURI : Irrationality สิ่งที่ ผิดธรรมชาติ.. MURA : Inconsistency ความไม่สม่ำเสมอ MUDA : Waste ความสูญ เปล่า Problem = Actual - Expected (Planned) Problem Awareness Problem Discovery Techniques Status Quo
7 Manpower Technique Method Time Facilities Jigs & Tools Materials Production Volume Inventory Place Way of Thinking
8 Over Production Excess Inventory Transportation Defect / Rework Ineffective Process Delay / Idle Unnecessary Motion
9 Selecting the Theme Establishing Goals Determining a Time Frame Defining Roles Responsibility Data oriented (Performance / Behavior) Observable Measurable Describe the gap
10 0. Define the problem 1. Collect data 2. Analyze the data 3. Generate alternatives 4. Evaluate the alternatives 5. Develop an action plan 6. Implement 7. Follow up
11 Brain Storming 5W + 1H Questions 7 QC Tools 7 New QC Tools Other Thinking Methods (Kepner-Tregoe method, Six hats,…) Creativity
12 Never criticize any opinion State your own opinion freely Expand other’s ideas & Capitalize on it Evaluate ideas quantitatively (DARE method, Rank method, etc.) Don’t take more than 1 hr. Gossip with the “Discipline”
13 To determine the degree of importance for each factors Procedure: 1. Compare each pair of factors in overlapping fashion 2. At every pairs, assign points to each factor for differences in degree of its importance 3. Calculate the coefficient of importance for each factor
14 Evaluation of Importance of factors: DARE Method
15 What is done? Who does the work? Where is the work done? When is the work done? How is the work done? ? Why does she do it ? Why should it be done ? Why should it be done here ? Why is it be done this way Why should it be done this time ?
16 Pareto and 80/20 rules Causes and effect diagram Histogram Check-sheet techniques Control Charts Graphic presentation of data: Pie, Bar, Line, Radar, etc. Correlation analysis: Scatter plot QC Circle Small Group Activities TPM Group
17 Most are Numeric data, except … Developed in 1950s Relatively simple and well established Analytic approach Verbal data, Unstructured Developed in 1980s Design approach
18 Affinity Diagram Relations Diagram Tree Diagram Matrix Diagram Arrow Diagram Process Decision Program Chart Matrix Data Analysis
19 R&D (new product, new technology) Claim Analysis Productivity Improvement Improvement of Analytical and diagnostic skills Production Scheduling Policy Deployment Introduction of Automation Analysis of Market Information Sales Management etc...
20 The Elimination Approach eliminate the basic causes Systematic Logic New knowledge / Innovation Intrinsic knowledge
21 my own work people oriented low costs shared information an Accumulation of Small Changes Continuous Improvement management-drive few champions investment technology oriented closed information non-incremental dramatic outcome Big Changes
22 May be not only one correct answer Consider future difficulties Actually could be performed? -- try out, lab test, pilot project Capital concerns Politics..?? 80/20 Deming
23 Standardization Get Approval Presentation Report Write Up Top-Down Authorized Group Specialists Bottom-Up RINGI Approach Participative Empowered / Autonomous Group (Individual)
24 D P C A PDCA Cycle Shewhart Cycle Deming Wheel Record & Share Learning QC Presentation Company Database Remaining Rooms for Improvement Set (new) standard Verify the results Implementation Develop an action plan Select problem & Analysis
25 P A D C Improvement
26 Objectives / Values Fact / Problem Understanding Tools / Techniques Degree of Difficulty Prof. Takeshi KAWASE Keio University, Japan
27 This is a story about 4 people: Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody. There was an important job to be done and Everybody was asked to do it. Everybody was sure Somebody would do it. Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did it. Somebody got angry about that because it’s was Everybody’s job. Everybody thought Anybody could do it. But Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn’t do it. It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when actually Nobody asked Anybody.