1. Complete Design Review Nathan Arrowsmith, Samantha Reinhart, Rachel Short, Yelena Tuzikova

2. “What Good Looks Like” Visual Information: 1.Front of each bin is labeled with the correct part number or description (for tools and supplies). 2.Main stock part locations are labeled with the cell numbers they supply. 3.If a location is not main stock, it is labeled with the main stock cell number. 4.Part locations that supply other cells are labeled. 5.Behind each bin, the location is labeled with the part number of the corresponding bin. 6.All bins have either kanban card, a purple hold card or a VMI or overstock label. 7.If there is overstock, label the back of the bin with “check overstock” label. 8.If the part is a VMI part, label the back of the bin with “VMI rack” label.

3. “What Good Looks Like” Part Retrieval: 1.Parts are not overflowing from bins. 2.Parts are easy to retrieve and replenish. 3.Tools are kept inside the bin or in dedicated tool storage. 4.No part locations over 5 feet in height.

4. “What Good Looks Like” Storage: 1.If there is not enough room at POU to hold 2 x kanban, overstock area is clearly defined. Dedicated space at the end of the cell is preferred. 2.Overstock items are in alphanumeric order. 3.Parts are in one of four yellow bin sizes. Electronics in black bins. 4.Vertical storage is utilized where available. 5.Visibility of bins is not blocked. No bins stored in front of other bins. 6.Enough room to store one days worth of corrugated supplies. 7.Parts stored in corrugated are only there for protection.

6. Auditing Trials ● Audited 8 cells in total ● Each team member audited all 8 cells independently o 32 audits in total This allowed us to test: 1.Rule clarity 2.Interpretation consistency (audit scale) 3.Result suitability

7. Audit Findings 1. Issues with clarity: Some rules tended to be vague and difficult to answer -“Shared components have owner cell labeled on inside back wall of bin” -How do we know if some parts are shared but simply don’t have appropriate sticker? 2. Cells with good material presentation: -Audits of cells 924C and 922G were successful as well as cell 924H 3. Limited reach of rules to other cells -Need to create more rules to account for wire storage, etc. 4. Rewording of rules or changing audit scale to make easy and simple for those conducting audits.

8. Auditing Instructions & Summer Ask We wrote a set of Audit Instructions. We listed Jim N. as the final destination for the forms. We would like audits to be performed over the summer if possible. ● Ideally two or more audits of each cell by different people independently. ● Availability of those people to talk with us when we return for feedback. ● Auditors should be the same people who would perform audits after implementation.

9. Goals of Summer Audits 1.Verify/validate clarity of rules. 2.Provide information with which to improve and expand rules. 3.Provide more information on material presentation at present.

10. Preliminary Plan for Fall (Iterative Process) ●Review Audit Data from Summer ○ Revisit cells ○ Ensure rating scale is appropriate & easily understood ○ Validate clarity of rules ●Audit Additional Cells ○ Use findings from audits / summer to design for exceptions ●Expand Rules ○ Identify “top” material presentation deficiencies (Pareto’s Law) ○ Reduce significance of failures ○ Design rules / methods to “counter” top deficiencies ●Develop unique storage solutions to improve already kaizened cells ○ Storage for oddly shaped parts: rods, spools of wire, tools ○ Kanban card placement ●Identify other areas where material presentation rules could apply ○ Raw materials in fabrication? ○ Shipping / Receiving areas?