Lean manufacturing has been praised as the saving grace that can bring a business to world-class status. But the truth is that it does not come easy. As a consultant, I try to guide my clients along the path of least resistance, but resistance comes at every level. Operators and production supervisors enjoy their established routines and don’t want to change them.
We all tend to resist change. For example, commuters establish certain driving patterns to and from work, and typically they follow the same route every day unless they have errands. Drivers often choose a highway as their regular route because of its higher speed limit. If there is an accident and traffic begins to back up, drivers realize that it will take longer than usual to get to their destination. Perhaps the police will redirect traffic toward a detour route that is longer and has a lower speed limit. The delay causes drivers to become unhappy because they are experiencing something different from the norm. They are resistant to the change in their established routines.
In another example, let’s say you have been driving the same route for years, and, over time, the road has deteriorated, with scattered potholes and faded, worn-out road signs. Your commute has become increasingly complicated and you begin to complain about it. You may think, “Why doesn’t the city fix this road?” And then, suddenly the road is approved for an upgrade and repair. Now you are confronted with traffic workers signaling you to slow down or stop. Road workers and equipment are spread out all along the road. During this time of improvement, there will be many obstacles in the road and challenges to your schedule. Although you realize that the repairs are badly needed, it still makes you unhappy.
A few weeks later, as you drive home from work, you notice that all the workers are gone, and the road work is completed. You are delighted with the improvements, and you can see that they will make your daily commute much more productive and enjoyable. Suddenly, you are no longer unhappy and no longer complaining. You recognize the value in having to go through the pain to get to the gain.
Welcome to your lean journey! The behaviors outlined in these examples, and the changes the drivers undergo, are very similar to the kinds of behaviors that people experience during a transition to lean manufacturing. It’s normal for human beings to be resistant to change, especially when the change first occurs and they cannot see the benefit.
One of the fundamental principles of lean manufacturing is the concept of standard work. Standard work is the best, most reliable, and safest way of performing work, and it drives the protocol in a reduced-waste environment. Standard work calls for clearly defined roles and responsibilities for every worker, supervisor, workstation, and piece of equipment.
Before you can implement standard work, you must eliminate or reduce waste and inefficiencies, such as overproduction, overprocessing, and wasted motion, transportation, inventory, and waiting. Standard work can then be set in place and used to monitor and control a lean process. Of course, you will always continue to identify ways to improve standard work as part of your ongoing lean journey.
For the lean process to be successful, operators and production supervisors must follow the standard work that has been set in place. The transition process is as follows: identify waste, remove it, create standard work, and follow standard work. Standard work defines all the work that must be performed in a process and the rules that govern that work. Here some examples of standard work:
Established quality checks in a station
Build sequence (the order of work to build a product)
Materials handling routines
Equipment start-up tasks
Machine setup steps
End-of-day cleanup
Forklift routes
Work instructions
Equipment use instructions
Testing and inspection requirements
Standard work should be created for every job and task needed to run a specific process, with each job clearly defined and supported by data and documentation. Operators will find working within standard work to be very rewarding. It is easier to learn operations when everything is perfectly outlined. There is no confusion about which work is performed in which workstation, which route the materials handler takes, or how to start a piece of machinery. All tasks are clearly specified from the beginning. Clear direction allows the operator to move easily between stations and perform the work as needed. When all the work is clearly defined, operators can catch errors and problems in the process because any deviations from standard work are noticeable. Standard work allows the operator to identify and suggest needed improvements. It is a simple approach to work.
The company also benefits from standard work. Standard work reduces variability in the process, lowers costs, reduces waste, improves quality, and helps establish shorter, more efficient lead times for customers. Problems are quickly visible and the company can adjust as needed to bring the process back into control.
The best part about standard work is that it is result driven and measurable. Removing waste and creating standard work allow a company to design and implement efficient manufacturing processes, and that, in turn, allows for more predictable lead times, clearer staffing requirements, increased quality, and reduced cost. When standard work is implemented in a work area, the area can operate effectively with minimal effort.
Standard work environments lend themselves to improved performance and control if operators work within the standard work rules. Reverting to older ways of working in a new environment will only create problems. It is understandable that workers will initially resist the change, but at some point they must adhere to the new standards. When assembly lines or other manufacturing processes contain a great deal of waste, there is a lessened sense of urgency; people simply work at their own pace, which can be too fast or too slow. Operators can build up excessive WIP (work in process) and then take extra breaks. Workers can return from breaks individually rather than as a team. Also, they may leave their workstations to find tools and parts because the line was not set up correctly.
Production supervisors must accept the responsibility to keep people accountable if they fail to follow the standard work. This is a difficult role, because it is all about dealing with people. Operators tend to resist change at first, but supervisors resist change the longest. Before the improvements, they could work at whatever pace felt comfortable. Now they are required to work at a quicker pace while following the rules of the process. Production supervisors may try to revert to old ways of supervising, but it is impossible to lead in the same way as before. It just won’t work. That is why the relationship between operators and supervisors must be strong.
Following are elements of standard work that must be followed, and what is expected of the supervisor and operators in a lean process:
During a lean journey, manufacturing lines are designed around takt time. Takt time represents pulse or rhythm and is established by dividing the amount of time available to work by the number of units required from a given process. Takt time is used to design a manufacturing line so that a certain number of products can be built at a given interval. It represents the completion time of an interval. For example, if takt time is 5.5 minutes in a given assembly process, then a product must be completed every 5.5 minutes. Engineers and kaizen teams then balance the work content so that every workstation is as close to 5.5 minutes as possible.
Following this set work content is critical, especially when single piece flow has also been implemented. Units in the line must move every takt time to ensure that the required output is obtained. Operators must follow the work outlined in the work instructions, and production supervisors must enforce this practice.
Deviations from the work in the workstations is highly noticeable. Possible bottlenecks may appear. Buildup of WIP or excessive waiting are clear indications that operators are not performing the required work. Unless there is a problem with parts or there is a quality issue, operators must follow the standard work in their stations.
In the beginning of a lean journey and as lines are improved, failing to follow standard work will be one of the initial attempts at resistance. Production supervisors must show confidence and strength and must react to any imbalances quickly and firmly, something that is harder than it appears. Operators tend to migrate to the type of work they are comfortable with, and there is a good chance that work will be distributed differently after waste reduction and line balancing.
The standard work content in each workstation is established for good reasons. There is also an established time standard for this work. During time and motion studies, time standards were captured to help with the design of the lean process. Operators must be trained to this standard, and then they must be monitored by the production supervisor to ensure compliance. It is also important to instill a sense of urgency in the operators. Manufacturing lines should be designed to work at an efficient pace.
The concept of operator loading comes into play here. Never load people to a 100 percent pace, because they will get tend to become stressed and frustrated. In addition, 100 percent loading of people is not conducive to good quality and safety. Thus, you should be sure to add a small percentage of personnel, fatigue, and delay to the line’s design volume, time standards, or workstation cycle times. Even with this buffer, the pace of the line should be productive. Maintaining this pace is critical to the success of the line. Waste within a process allows people to slow down as they see fit and perhaps work at a pace that is not optimum for the manufacturing environment.
I once discussed pace with a manufacturing plant manager, and he agreed that people should not be overloaded. He also commented, “They are not knitting, either.” His point—and I agree—is that the factory floor should be moving at a productive pace that promotes efficiency, quality, and safety.
Operators and supervisors also need to understand how to work in an environment with reduced WIP. This can be very difficult. Single piece flow is a lean concept: working on one unit at a time, with either no units (or at most one unit) between workstations. If operators and supervisors are not familiar with this type of environment and it has recently replaced a different kind of process, there will be an adjustment phase. Single piece flow is usually associated with takt-time-driven processes. The combination of the two concepts creates an even higher level of urgency. Units are now flowing through the process very quickly, because piles of WIP no longer provide a buffer.
During this transition, as operators and supervisors adjust to the change, the line is not likely to achieve its desired volume. Single piece flow processes also require operators to work as a team, a concept that most likely is new for them. The assembly line will not be perfectly balanced, especially at first, and will require some adjustments. It is difficult to set workstations to exactly the same cycle time, but you can get fairly close. Optimum balance is challenging, and teamwork is the key.
Operators tend to become personally connected to their workstations and to the work they have performed for several years. In a non-single-piece-flow environment, operators typically perform only their own work. Piles of WIP create a sense of isolation between stations and processes. When single piece flow is implemented, you cannot expect the operators to transition instantly from individual workers to team players. This is not necessarily negative; it is only human nature. However, the old culture will have to be remolded into a new culture of lean workers who perform as a team to help keep product flowing.
The imbalances I’ve referred to may be approximately 5 to 15 seconds between workstations. An old solution would be for the operator to start working on another unit and place the completed unit near the next worker or on the floor. This is overproduction. The operator may be attempting to stay busy, but this action does not add value to overall flow.
Supervisors must react to this potential bottleneck. Operators must flex back and forth between stations, helping out as needed. Here is a simple rule: Never take work with you to another workstation. The work content in each station is for that particular station only. If production workers are to move, they must help do the work defined in that workstation. This practice allows the product to move smoothly and efficiently throughout the process without major stops or slowdowns.
Single piece flow is established in order to reduce overproduction and surplus inventory. As you can see, there is a different method of working in this type of process, and managers and supervisors must be skilled in dealing with the newly transformed work culture.
Be aware, however, that single piece flow is not 100 percent applicable to all companies and processes. For example, you cannot apply the concept to a job shop environment, such as machine shops, or to organizations with fabrication-style equipment. I would not expect a brake press operator to set the brake press for a run of only one unit. In this case, a different methodology must be established that meets the needs of the production line.
Controlled batches is another form of flow control. In a controlled batch, the products (or parts) are fabricated or assembled to a set quantity. Once that occurs, the operator is required to stop, check the work, and then move to another product in need of processing. As with single piece flow, a learning curve exists when this process is implemented. Although controlled batches allow the operators to work on more than a single piece, they must learn to stop at the set quantity and move to the next item required.
Controlled batches are often used in subassembly work cells, where there are a number of operators building a variety of assemblies for other consuming processes. They must work as a team and move to and from subassemblies, building to the established quantity. Management must properly cross-train employees to be able to perform all the types of work. Having an operator who works only on the subassembly process helps the overall process. The idea is to build as needed, at the right time, and in the right quantities. Production supervisors must learn how to respond when the build quantities are not being completed properly.
The best approach is to have the build quantities displayed visually on signs in the workstations that specify the item and the required quantity. The production supervisor is required to walk by and observe the finished goods area of the work cell. Using this method, the supervisor can quickly see whether the process is under control. When subassemblies are not being built as required or are not in the correct quantities, it is very noticeable and indicates a potential problem.
This is a matter of common sense, right? Easy to control? Guess again. Operators are value-added employees. Over the years, some managers have grown tired of this definition, but it is still a fact. Employees who manufacture and assemble products are creating revenue for the business. Sometimes referred to as direct labor, operators build product, and that allows everyone to be paid.
That being said, it is important that operators build as much product as optimal for the company. For this to happen, manufacturing processes should be designed to keep operators in their workstations. Work areas must have everything operators need so that they do not need to leave their stations.
I want to emphasize, as I have before, that operators should not leave workstations for unrelated work activities or personal reasons. Taking extra breaks, leaving to talk on cell phones, going to other lines to talk, or using any other reason to leave a workstation (except for official work breaks, lunch breaks, required meetings, and the like) must be prohibited.
For most organizations, this practice requires a culture change. Production workers, as well as supervisors, tend to do as they please while working. What’s more, relationships often develop between supervisors and operators over time; after all, most supervisors are former line operators who’ve been promoted. Managers want to encourage internal advancement because it is healthy for the company, but the buddy relationships that may exist between former and current line operators may be a stumbling block to enforcing the rule.
I am not suggesting that you create a labor camp at your factory, but the lean process requires a specific method of working, and initially that may be difficult for managers. Everything is about performance and following the rules of the process. We want production workers to stay devoted to their workstations to ensure output, quality, and a sense of teamwork. Production supervisors cannot simply let operators leave workstations whenever they want to, so supervisors must be committed to the new process, providing a good model for the workers.
Lack of communication—from the top of the enterprise all the way down to the factory floor—can bring a lean journey to its knees. Establishing and maintaining an effective communication system between operators and production supervisors will help ensure that the process operates correctly.
The key factor in communication is to make sure that operators can find a production supervisor whenever they need one. The process should be designed to allow operators to continue working after signaling for help. As just mentioned, the goal is to keep operators in their workstations while they contact their supervisors. From my experience, I know that production supervisors are very busy people, and they may not always be readily available. One solution is to install communication lights.
Communication lights, often called tower lights, are installed in a workstation to act as communication signals from operators and supervisors. Communication lights come in a variety of styles and colors. I have found that the best type are those that have red, yellow, and green lights, similar to traffic signals. Having these three colors supports optimal communication. You can define the meaning of each color based on your needs; however, here are my recommendations:
Red means that there is a major problem. It indicates that immediate assistance is required; the problem is large, out of control, and must be addressed. Typically, the red light is lit when a tool breaks down unexpectedly, a machine has stopped, there is a severe quality problem with a part or unit, or an injury has occurred to a worker.
Yellow means that a problem is coming but is not a major one. You want to instill proactive thinking in your employees. Potential problems should be caught before they become major issues, and the yellow light should be used to communicate the potential problem to the production supervisor. It is a warning. For example, a yellow light might be used when material is running low, a tool appears to be working improperly, a machine is making an odd sound, or an operator needs a bathroom break. In the case of the latter, the supervisor must fill that position until the operator returns. The line should not be halted for a bathroom break.
Green means that there are no problems. If the process is in control, product is flowing, there are no quality issues, and material is being replenished, all communication lights should be green. A production supervisor can walk out to the factory floor and very quickly see that the lines are performing as expected.
This communication system presents a learning curve. Operators must learn to use the lights properly to ensure that communication is open and honest regarding problems occurring in the work area. The lights should never be used in error or with disregard for their meaning, because false signals cause unnecessary confusion, attention, and distraction and negatively affect the work process.
Effective communication must also take place with regard to the lean journey. Supervisors need to alert their operators to upcoming kaizen events and let them know when the engineer or kaizen champion will be conducting an analysis. Data collection is an absolute requirement for lean manufacturing, as discussed in Chapter 4. Time studies and other analysis or data collection activities can be stressful for production workers.
I have watched many companies as they begin their continuous improvement initiatives. Often, engineers and technicians hit the factory floor with stopwatches, cameras, and clipboards without any prior warning. That is not recommended. The company must involve the production supervisors from the beginning, informing them about the team of data collectors coming their way.
Adequate time should be allotted to allow the supervisors and engineers to talk with operators about the analysis that will take place. Operators will be asked questions during the analysis, so they should know about it ahead of time to lessen anxiety and to encourage a positive attitude and input. If you have bought in to the company kaizen program, as outlined in Chapter 3, then you know that these operators will play an active role in the kaizen events and in contributing input to the changes. You want to ensure that effective communication takes place early in the process so that you get everyone in the loop, and on board, in a positive and supportive way.
One of the highest costs in a factory is labor, and focus is often placed on the operators and their performance within an eight-hour period. If operators are being paid to work eight hours a day, the thinking goes, we should measure their performance for eight hours. Unfortunately, this is not an effective approach.
Instead, companies that are seeking to implement lean manufacturing should understand the concept of effective hours (EH), which reflects the amount of time that operators are actually working with product. Operators do not build product all eight hours of their shift. Although they may be in the building for eight hours, they do not spend the total eight hours touching the product. I called the time touching the product touch time. Here is an example of how a typical eight-hour shift is spent:
Time in the building | 480 minutes |
Morning meeting | 15 minutes |
Morning break | 10 minutes |
Lunch (paid or unpaid) | 30 minutes |
Afternoon break | 10 minutes |
End-of-day cleanup | 15 minutes |
Of the total 480 minutes that the operators are in the factory, 80 minutes is spent in activities not related to working on product. That leaves 400 minutes (approximately 6.67 hours) as effective work time. The calculation for effective hours will vary. Some organizations operate under four 10-hour days, so the final effective hours will be different. In any case, you need to establish the time associated with building products and fabricating parts.
From a management perspective, the operators are getting paid for 8 hours of work, but, based on the example, only 400 minutes, or approximately 6 hours and 40 minutes, is actually work time. This time must be used productively and not spent leaving the workstation, looking for parts and tools, performing long setups, and searching for production supervisors. If 20 percent of the time is spent in wasted movements and communication, the effective hours, or touch time, will be only 5 hours and 20 minutes. Do you see my point? Organizations cannot afford to have operators deviate from the standards and rules of the lean process. It is up to the company to make continuous improvement a major focus in regard to effective hours. As a rule, to get consensus you need only provide a sound explanation of the importance of continuous improvement so that the company can use workers’ touch time effectively.
Operators and production supervisors need to understand the concept of effective hours and then learn how to work within the desired time frame. It is critical that operators work as team at all times and leave and return from breaks together. Production supervisors must manage their people accordingly to ensure that they are maximizing their time. Conformance won’t be instantaneous but will take time and practice as well as supervised monitoring.
Not working within the established effective hours can result in the need to work overtime, which is usually viewed as a negative effect. The thought of working late or over the weekend will quickly convince the operators of the importance of making effective use of their time. Of course, it is up to the company as a whole to create an efficient work environment and continually drive waste out of the manufacturing processes. Once that is accomplished, operators and production supervisors need to follow what is in place for the process to run smoothly. It is a total team effort.
So far in this chapter I have discussed the importance of the relationship between operators and their production supervisors, and I’ve explained how effective interaction between them will ensure a successful lean process. How do you get them involved and following the rules of a lean process? In other words, how do you change the floor culture? Mistakes are made in this area again and again, and there is no perfect guideline to follow. However, I’ll provide a few ideas to help reduce the resistance—reduce being the key word.
Chapter 3 is dedicated to establishing the company kaizen program. There is a tremendous amount of detail in establishing that program, and I would like to tie some of the elements to this chapter.
The kaizen program, as a whole, is a great way to develop a sense of continuous improvement and involvement. One of the items discussed in Chapter 3 is the employee suggestion box. The key to a successful lean journey is buy in, and it starts with communication. The suggestion box is for use only by the production workers. As a proponent of a lean organization, you want the suggestions for improvement to come from the factory floor. Operators can submit ideas for improvements to their own areas or to other processes.
As simple as it may appear, it works beautifully. In my experience, there has never been an empty box. Operators appreciate the fact that their ideas mean something to the company. Of course, you want to encourage suggestions face-to-face, but some people prefer a less personal approach. The suggestion box gives them that alternative.
After the kaizen champion and the kaizen steering committee review the suggestions, they will decide which ideas will be used during the next kaizen event. Ideally, the operator who made the suggestion will be placed on the kaizen team so that the employee can help turn her ideas into reality. Again, this is ongoing involvement, and the beauty is that it works. As you conduct more kaizen events, more operators and supervisors will become involved in the implementations.
To gain buy in from operators and supervisors, it is important to involve them in kaizen events. It is good for the culture to see everyone contributing to improvements. After the kaizen event, the operators and supervisors can help change the culture in the new lean process. Because their ideas were encouraged and implemented, the resistance on the line should be reduced. They can help train and mold the other line workers into positive change agents.
Over the years, I have taught companies the importance of establishing a kaizen steering committee. As you can recall from Chapter 3, I discussed the key managers who should sit on this committee. These included the upper and middle managers, who manage various departments in the company. Basically, they are the key decision makers for the organization and should help to plan all kaizen event related activities. One way to get involvement and “buy in” from the operators and supervisors is to appoint a representative from the production floor as a committee member. I did not mention this option in Chapter 3, as I felt it pertained more to this current chapter.
Having a floor representative on the kaizen steering committee will help reduce resistance on the floor. With a worker from their area on the committee, the production workers and supervisors feel confident that someone is representing their specific needs at the monthly kaizen meeting. The input of the floor personnel is just as important as the input of the other committee members. When the committee discusses which areas of the factory will be scheduled for a kaizen event, the floor representative can give input from his perspective and can help decide which floor workers should be part of the kaizen team. In a union environment, the best candidate for floor representative is the shop or union steward.
As I’ve mentioned, lean manufacturing is data driven, and you need to collect a significant amount of information in order to make effective improvements to the floor. I discuss some of the waste analysis tools in Chapter 4 and mention the importance of involving the operators. The kaizen champion will consistently analyze the processes and gather valuable data on the current state. He will conduct time studies, waste analysis, possible process mapping, and other exercises. This data collection is ongoing, in preparation for future kaizen events. Although the kaizen champion is dedicated to the majority of the lean initiatives, he must involve the operators and production supervisors during data collection.
The kaizen champion uses this information to come up with improvement ideas and possible changes in the line. Operators and production supervisors should be consulted, on an ongoing basis, to provide assistance to the kaizen champion. It is wise to schedule time after data analysis for the key operators and supervisors to meet with the kaizen champion and give their feedback. They might identify a line balancing error, work content mistakes, or missing information. Perhaps the kaizen champion has evaluated an area and misidentified the root cause of the problem. In this way, operators and production supervisors can help reduce mistakes early in data collection and analysis, allowing the kaizen champion to continue with correct information. This arrangement also allows operators and supervisors to become involved at the very beginning of the lean journey.
Training is key to a successful lean journey. Generally, an organization sends engineers and managers to some form of lean manufacturing training. Engineers and managers are typically the individuals who will drive the improvements and plan the events, and therefore they need the training. However, production workers and their direct supervisors also need training. To ensure consistency in learned methodologies, all employees should go through the same lean training.
I realize it is difficult to schedule a full day, or even a half day, of training for production workers, because they are performing value-added work. Nevertheless, some form of lean manufacturing training is critical. In one situation, I was hired to train a start-up manufacturing company in Burlington, Washington. It had hired me through Skagit Valley College in Mount Vernon. My charter was to train every employee on the concepts of lean manufacturing. I was contracted about three months before the expected date of start-up.
Three groups of employees required training—the line leads, the operators, and the support staff—and the training was spread out over a couple of months. The company had decided to train its employees in additional skills as well. Although in start-up mode, the company felt that all production workers would benefit from an intensive week-long series of courses. Company managers realized that some information would be forgotten, but they saw a window of opportunity to provide sufficient training and decided to take it. I was impressed by their foresight, because it demonstrated the dedication they felt to their employees.
The line leads were trained first, followed by the line operators. I liked the fact that the leads and operators received the intensive training before the managers did. This approach was smart, because the floor personnel were already anticipating whether and how lean manufacturing would affect them. It was a positive approach even though there is a limit to how much implementation can be done during start-up. All the employees attended the same courses, so everyone was on the same page. Management training was done after all the leads and operators had gone through the courses.
Involving the operators and production supervisors early in your lean journey will help reduce the confusion, as well as the initial resistance, that generally accompanies a move to lean manufacturing. Companies fail when they attempt to push lean manufacturing on to the floor culture. Although there is no perfect moment to introduce the concept of continuous improvement, how you involve floor personnel is critical to your success. Managers, too, need to undergo a change in cultural attitude so that they can be good role models for the effort. The companies that do not involve floor personnel as recommended often meet with failure. If you tend to impose changes from the top down, it’s time to change your mind-set.
I hope this chapter has provided some insight about the importance of involving operators and production supervisors in your lean journey. As I have stated, often there is no perfect template for reducing resistance, easing culture change, and encouraging buy in. This is why kaizen is called continuous improvement; the process never ends. Remember, the relationship between operators and production supervisors is critical to effective implementation. As a team, they must be strong and committed to the lean process and its success. It is up to management to put the right kind of infrastructure in place to provide adequate training, which ensures that operators and supervisors achieve success as a team and as an organization.